Christophe GRUDLER

Policy topics Christophe GRUDLER is active on

What Christophe GRUDLER has said (74)

• 2026-07-15 “(16:37:58 - 16:39:38): Thank you, chair. First of all, let me congratulate the EDIP for launching the European defense projects of common interest. This is an important initiative to strengthen European defense cooperation, improve industrial cooperation, industrial integration, and enhance our collective security. I would like to ask 4 questions. First, what criteria will the commission use to designate the project as a European defense project of common interest? And how will you ensure that this designation does not primarily benefit large-scale programs led by only a few member states? Second question, how does EDIP intend to ensure that small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and mid-sized companies can genuinely participate in EDPCIs rather than leaving these projects largely in the hands of major prime contractors? Third, today, the European Union has several defense cooperation instruments such as the European Defense Fund, PESCO, SAFE, and the EDPCIs. In your view, what remains the biggest obstacle to building a truly integrated European defense technological and industrial base? Is it primarily a question of funding, governance, or political will? And fourth question, how will the commission ensure that the EDPCI framework delivers faster capability development without adding unnecessary administrative complexity? Thank you. Please.”
  EU competences on defence
• 2026-07-14 “Thank you very much, chair. I'll be speaking French. Madam executive vice president, the war in the Middle East has reminded us of a simple reality. Europe is dependent on imported fossil fuels, and this means it remains vulnerable to geopolitical crisis and price spikes. We cannot be there to always offset those. We need to be able to produce this technology in Europe, the renewable energy, the battery, the infrastructure, the hydrogen, all of this related to clean technology. So we need a real industrial policy. The Industrial Accelerator Act is moving in the right direction. The aim is to create European demand and develop our strategic markets. But we can't create this market with slow procedures and a lack of predictability. China, The US, Canada are massively supporting their production, whereas Europe is still asking member states and industrialists to fill out complex files to wait for months, sometimes even years, trying to tackle this deficit in financing while waiting to get a green light from the commission. We will not be globally competitive if we don't have up to date tools. A number of European industrialists have been asking for simple aid, things that are predictable, simple, directly related to production producing in Europe needs to be an advantage. So are you willing to help evolve the framework for state aid so that we can have a real tool for European industrial policy to go together with the Industrial Accelerator Act, and in this way, our companies to be really competitive with The US and China. Thank you.”
  State Aid
• 2026-07-14 “Thank you very much. And just a quick follow up question. You're presenting the action plan for electrification, and you've added a heating and cooling plan as well, which is fairly new. Could you clearly tell us if this strategy will be technologically neutral nuclear technology and the possibility of cogeneration for decarbonised heating. Will that be included?”
  Nuclear energy
• 2026-07-14 “President. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Madam Director General, congratulations, first of all, on your nomination. I wish you all the success for the future. Now, sometimes we might be a little bit critical, but we are certainly supporting you when it comes to transitioning away for fossil fuels as long as technological neutrality is respected by the commission. I want to sound the alarm when it comes to hydrogen, as other colleagues have said. I think we made a mistake with our July 2020 hydrogen strategy and then with repower e u. So we had millions of tonnes of green hydrogen, but there was simply no place for it. And then going to sign agreements around the world for import importing it. We don't have anything today. It was a total failure. We see China selling to Saudi Arabia or Israel or other other areas because we couldn't promote our own technology. So what do you expect now when it comes to the revision of the delegated act on green hydrogen? We are awaiting the consultation to look at the Methodology, including hydrogen produced from nuclear. So that is set out in the delegated act, but the methodology isn't there. And then we also want to see a European strategy on hydrogen that might be published by the end of the year. We've been waiting for a year. So quickly decarbonisation of industry. It's important to support demand. We need to promote European electrolysers. And then finally we need to have a real, uh, category for, uh, native or hydrogen that comes from the EU as there are natural sources here. Thank you.”
  Low-carbon hydrogen
• 2026-07-08 “The bioeconomy means specific innovations, plastics made from agricultural waste, sustainable fuel, or medicine. We have researchers working on this and innovative businesses too. But too often, these innovations are created here and are industrialized elsewhere because our companies are still facing the same hurdles in Europe, long processes, insufficient access to markets, and, an overly fragmented European marketplace. We need to scale up. We need more investment to do so with the support of the European Investment Bank. We also need rules that can create real outlets for our bio based materials and, where we can build new, industrial plants. So a bioeconomy strategy is an industrial strategy, an industrial and an innovation strategy, and, an increase in our, strategic autonomy. We need to turn this innovation into jobs and Europe based production.”
  EU support for bioeconomic applications
• 2026-06-24 “Yes. Thank you very much. So thank you to all of you. We know what the DNA is. And there are two committees which are going to be giving an opinion. Imco and Liebe. There are no rapporteurs or speakers on behalf of them today, so perhaps we can now hand the floor very briefly to Mrs. Camilla from the Commission Director General of the. Of Communications Networks, Codan and Energy Technology. If you are here. Two minutes, sir.”
  Artificial Intelligence
• 2026-06-24 “Thank you. Thank you to all our presenters for the quality of those presentations. Now we'll hear from the rapporteur and the shadow rapporteur. And after that it will be it'll be your turn to make your comments. So first of all, we're going to hear from the rapporteurs and the shadow rapporteurs. But first of all, we have our chief rapporteur from the Digital Network Act, from the renew Group.”
  Digital platforms liability for harmful and illegal content
• 2026-06-24 “First of all, I would like to welcome all of you to this public hearing. We're going to be focusing on an important text of our legislature, and that is the Digital Networks Act building Europe's connected future. We have a group of seven local count sellers from France and elsewhere. So welcome. And then of course, we have a number of guests. We have Mr. Michael Mishmash, the president, Chair of Berec 2026 and director of the agency for Communication Networks and Services of the Republic of Slovenia. We have Mr.. We have Alexandre de Streel, the academic director of CRE and professor of European law at the University of Namur. We then have Ana. Renata Pisarkiewicz. Assistant professor expert in digital Markets, competition and telecommunications regulation at the center for a Digital Society, European University Institute. And we also have Peter Alexiadis, expert in competition and telecoms regulation. He's a research fellow at Sare and a visiting professor at King's College London. We have 1.5 hours for this hearing and it will. Take place on the basis of a speaking list that we have. We will have a catch the eye procedure. So anybody who wishes to speak. If you could put your name plate vertically in the little holder and then we will note that you wish to take the floor. And I would like to remind you that it would be very good for you if all of you could respect your speaking time. Without further ado, I'd now like to hand the floor to Mr. Michael Mish Mash for six minutes.”
  EU digital & tech sovereignty
• 2026-06-15 “(17:40:13 – 17:41:30): President, vice president of the commission. From defense to payment systems, from energy to the digital, Europe is becoming ever more dependent. And every time there's a crisis, we pay the price for that. The most obvious being our energy dependence, €380,000,000,000 every year to buy gas, to buy oil, to buy coal, and they're leaving our economy. That's more than the GDP of The Czech Republic or indeed Portugal. So that money is not being invested into our jobs, into our companies. Therefore, economic independence would be energy independence 1st and foremost. Let's speed up the electrification of our economy that is produced here in Europe, the strategic technologies that we need. That would also require, you might say, a little bit of a naive approach, but European money should be used to support jobs in the European Union and companies in the European Union. That's the whole point of European preference. And finally, the European Union needs to have proper own resources in order to make those investments into our future without making making the citizens carry the brunt of that burden.”
  EU approach to energy security (home-made vs import sources)
• 2024-12-16 “E-002958/2024 Answer given by Mr Jørgensen on behalf of the European Commission As announced in the Clean Industrial Deal and by the Commissioner of energy and housing during his structured dialogue in the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy on 20 February 2025, the Commission is committed to present an EU fusion strategy this mandate. The need for an EU fusion strategy is also advocated in the Draghi report 1 , and called for by EU’s fusion community. Such a strategy should leverage Europe’s leadership in the ITER 2 project and in fusion technology, in consultation with stakeholders. The Commission has already started such consultations and in 2024 set up a dedicated Expert Group with representatives from interested Member States to advise on steps towards the development of a specific regulatory framework and options for fostering industrial innovation through fusion research and development. The Commission is engaging with European fusion industry and research organisations to explore ways for the involvement of private industry, including the possibility to reinforce cooperation and sharing of knowledge with ITER, and to create a European Technology and Innovation Platform. In this framework, the Commission is preparing to launch a public-private partnership and is working with the European Innovation Council to support commercial fusion start-ups. Since 2014, under the Euratom Research and Training Programme, the EUROfusion 3 partnership has played a pivotal role in advancing and coordinating Europe’s fusion research efforts. Its Research and Development roadmap, 4 which focuses on ITER programme, the demonstration power plant (DEMO), and materials testing facility IFMIF-DONES 5 , serves as the foundation for fusion research in Europe, leveraging Europe’s expertise in magnetic confinement fusion. 1 https://commission.europa.eu/topics/strengthening-european-competitiveness/eu-competitiveness-lookingahead_en 2 ITER is an international collaboration project developing frontier science in energy technology that aims to demonstrate the technical and scientific feasibility of fusion as a future source of carbon-free energy. 3 https://euro-fusion.org/ 4 https://euro-fusion.org/eurofusion/roadmap/ 5 International Fusion Materials Irradiation Facility - Demo Oriented NEutron Source.”
  Energy (green transition)
• 2024-09-06 “P-001652/2024 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Vestager on behalf of the European Commission The European Organisation for the Exploitation of Meteorological Satellites (EUMETSAT) is a major partner of the Commission in support of several space- and environment-related activities. Under the 2021-2027 EU budget, EUMETSAT is currently receiving EU funding for Copernicus and Destination Earth. For Copernicus, EUMETSAT operates several Sentinel satellites and provides satellite data, products and support services, with a focus on the oceans, the atmosphere and more generally the climate. These activities are covered by a contribution agreement for a total amount of EUR 735 million 1 , covering the period 2021 to 2027. For Destination Earth, EUMETSAT is one of the three implementing organisations and is responsible for the end-to-end design, implementation, testing, operation, and the overall coordination of Destination Earth’s Data Lake and Data Warehouse activities. These activities are covered by a contribution agreement for EUR 35 million covering the period December 2021 – June 2024 (Phase I 2 ) and a contribution agreement for EUR 43.4 million covering the period June 2024 – June 2026 (Phase II 3 ). 1 https://www.copernicus.eu/sites/default/files/2021-06/Financing_Decision_C_2021_4316_finalAnnex_2_Copernicus_Work_Programme.pdf 2 https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/destination-earth#1717586635820-4 3 https://destination-earth.eu/news/statement-confirmation-phase-two-destination-earth/”
  EU research funding · EU industrial funding
• “Thank you very much. I want to go back to the PRS issue. Mr. DaCosta talked about important aspects, but the initial PRS services that are active, you talked about that, but you didn't talk about the entire capability Paris represents. So I really would like a date for the complete service. On the system. After the next area and launch. Would that be there? And I have a question as well about the system hub. I think you didn't understand. I think you didn't answer that for me. The Satcom hub is vital. I'm the rapporteur on iris squared, and we've worked with the commission for the programme to be moved forward, because the comm hub has to be ready for 2026. You have worked very hard on this DG. Dfi has also worked very hard on this for us to move forward as much as possible. The aim was to have this ready by June. Well, it's the 26th of June now, so I have a straightforward question really. Will it be possible today or next week to say that asset come? Sorry, the hub is operational or will it be July or August so that we can have an idea about the timetable. Can I recall that the gov said com hub is the first stage of iris squared. We're going to pull European capabilities that will make it possible to, uh, respond to certain defense and security needs for a number of member states. Thank you.”
  EU competences on space policy
• “The plan for affordable energy has to urgently reduce the energy bills for our businesses and for our citizens. We need to have stable and competitive energy, otherwise we won't have industry or prosperity. If we look at energy costs, that can be around 40% of production. For the most energy intensive industries, companies are paying 2 to 3 times more for their electricity than their competitors in China or the US. How can you be competitive under those conditions? We need to act on three points. First of all, electrification 32% of electrification by 2030. That is a good target. But we need modernized networks, accelerated procedures, storage flexibility, otherwise this target will not be achievable. Then there is a financing 144 billion necessary by 2030. Simply to maintain our electricity networks, we need to use all the leverages we have, public and private, without increasing bills for businesses and consumers. And finally, stability. Here it is clear that long term contracts provide more stable contracts and flexibility for industry Commissioner. We need to look at all types of clean energy, whether they're renewable or nuclear. Affordable energy means energy that we're not importing. So let me end on a question. Where is the roadmap to phase out Russian energy? Thank you.”
  EU approach to electricity market and prices
• “(17:27:54 – 17:29:38): you, chair. Commissioner, First of all, allow me to thank you on behalf of the citizens I represent. For a number of years, they've been worrying about our digital dependency. We have now seen a change, a shift. Europe is making it clear that Europe can no longer rely on others. The commission will play a key role in France. We have, those moving from Lenox and looking at alternatives, saving billions, and ensuring direct control of data, no outside interference. We are focusing today on AI and cloud supporting European solutions, but I don't get the impression that you were encouraging administrations public administrations to use tools under European control. Could you list specific measures that could convince public administrations to behave in that way. And 1 final point on open source, measures forget 1 key point. We cannot forget the European contribution to open source. Well, a lot of the contributions to open source come from China and The US, so we need European contributions to open source tech. Are you taking steps along those lines under Digital Europe? Thank you.”
  EU digital & tech sovereignty
• “Commissioner colleagues, we are seeing a major dearth of sustainable fuels. The ambition is significant, but we're not achieving it. We want to 20 million tonnes of SAF in 2050. Right now we are just producing 1 million or not even 1 million in, in Europe. And and it's 2 or 3 times more expensive than fossil fuels. This plan is very welcome, but it's coming quite late and it's not as large as as was announced. The significant part of the billions are already been allocated as part of the Innovation Fund. We need to move beyond these headlines and go to real support to states as well. Also need to invest. There's too many plans which are just at demonstration stage without actually being moved into an industrial implementation stage. We need to accelerate. We need to secure investments, we need to de-risk investments, and we need to make our technology take off. This is not just a climate issue. This is an industrial issue as well, an issue for sovereignty. Producing European fuel, our own fuel is protecting our jobs and our dependence independence. Thank you.”
  Decarbonisation of aviation sector
• “Thank you, chair. Stefan, vice president, thank you very much for your presentation. As you said, we're going through a major industrial crisis, an economic crisis, and also a sovereignty crisis. For too long now, Europe has allowed itself to become dependent, and this is holding back our industry. Technology is produced elsewhere, and we're no longer in charge of value chains. World competition is intensifying. Exports from China to Europe have increased by 30% since the beginning of the year. We're seeing sites close. Factories are disappearing. Some French coal companies that were, working on, solar projects have moved into liquidation. So without strong policy, we're not going to have a successful climate policy, no European strategy, and no employment for Europeans. And that's why this text is so important. For this first time, Europe is accepting a simple principle. When public money is mobilized, it also has to be used for our industrial activity. And so I welcome, this. The industrial accelerator covers essential sectors. You refer to intensive energy, automotive, batteries, heat pumps, wind energy, solar, and nuclear. These sectors represent millions of jobs in Europe and our capacity to produce and innovate. I also welcome the, progress that's been made on speeding up, permits and an end of naivety in our trade policy. Parliamentary work will begin now, and I think there are 3 major topics to strengthen. First of all, European preference, the made in Europe has to be meaningful. Today, the commission scope covers 80 countries on top of the 27. So that's not made in the EU. That's made everywhere, made anywhere, made without Europe even. We have to be more consistent in our logic. Europe has to come first with possible openness if there is genuine reciprocity, and we also need to ensure geographical, consistency. I'm a fan of, made in New Zealand, but it's not the same as made in Europe. The main objective of the text should be to enhance European investment or non European investment in Europe. The more you increase the number of countries that can benefit, then the less investment will come to Europe because some will prefer to invest at the other side of the world rather than invest here. Then, the second area is ambition. The goal of the text is to create a market for technology produced in Europe. But sometime, the, thresholds and the number of components is limited, and there are too many interrogations. If we want to attract investment, we have to ensure visibility and ensure that demand is secure in the mid to long term. Finally, applicability. We need a simple principle, but we need to have traceability of origin, and lots of SMEs can't ensure this. The accelerator should not become an obstacle for our SMEs. The text is designed to support European industry, and so we can't exclude the very backbone of that. Our method will be our approach will be simple. Not many amendments, but those that we do table will be very targeted. Thank you very much for this initial debate, and this is a historical opportunity to debate a European industrial policy with a clearly legible, a simple text, and this will be good for our businesses and our citizens.”
  "Buy European" provisions
• “And then critical primary materials just to say 47 strategic projects you've chosen commission. Well done. They cover the whole value chain, um extraction to recycling. Um SME help. Great. Uh, the EU b all of this positive signals. But how can we implement all this rapidly? Can we give guarantees when it comes to deploying finance, administrative simplification which allow us to work this year? We are we're up against the clock here. Thank you. The 47 new projects.”
  Sourcing of critical raw materials
• “Thank you very much indeed, chair. Thank you, Commissioner. Thank you. Thanks for always coming to the committee. Thank you also for the initiatives we've heard about the past few weeks. I think the most important is developing this common market. This is key. We see the arrogance of Trump's politics and some of his biggest fans in here. Um, some are discreet, some aren't. A more integrated internal single market that is a guarantee for growth for all companies. And that's why we need rules and standards. Obviously simplifying, but we still do need, um, rules so that goods produced in one country can be easily sold in the other 26. That's something we need to remind ourselves of. The small mid caps, this new status. This is important. This can contribute to doing away with some of the burdens on companies. Still though, maintaining the rules proportionate rules. And then these are threshold effects in some companies. Mid caps are small mid caps more than 800. And in other countries mid cap is up to 5000 workers. So maybe you'll be having competition between mid-caps within the EU. So you've increased the threshold to go to 50 and 150 million turnover. That's going in the right direction. But could you explain why you increase the threshold. Is it to work against these different difficulties of scale? And also you talked about an exemption for these small mid-caps when it comes to data protection, GDPR. You said that 38,000 companies could fall into this category, but the GDPR exemption, as I've read it, isn't conditioned by a turnover threshold. So that might cover a lot more than 38,000 companies. Do you have an idea, an estimate as to the number of actual companies? Can you guarantee that this won't weaken fundamental rights in Europe nor limit the efficacy of the GDPR.”
  EU Single Market harmonisation
• “Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Rapporteur. A few words on behalf of renew. Firstly, I'd like to thank you for your work. We have a resolution which is along the right track. The clean industry deal is vital if we're going to speed up the green transition of our industry, while also defending industry in Europe and jobs in Europe. The first draft of the resolution focuses a lot on the price of energy and the competitiveness of our industry, and I'm pleased about that. But at the same time, it is important that the resolution should touch on other aspects which are not sufficiently covered at present. I'm thinking in particular of the response to unfair foreign competition. This is something affecting our industry. Also, the need to systematically make use of our defence tools for trade. That's not the case sufficiently and we regret that too. It's also important that we should strengthen demand for clean products made in Europe. So public procurement and obligations to include own materials are really important for our future. The clean industrial deal should also accelerate decarbonisation as well as ensuring that our industries are less polluting. That is vital to preserve Europeans health and also to safeguard the environment. A couple of points of detail. On tech neutrality that's included in the text and that's welcome. But supporting tech neutrality means all clean technologies. So nuclear but also renewables. So often I say renewables, but don't forget nuclear. Here we have nuclear, but we shouldn't neglect renewables either. And I didn't see the word renewable in the text. And I think we talk a lot about fossil gas. But this shouldn't really be a solution for the future. It's expensive for our industry. So, rapporteur, we're counting on you to ensure that this resolution sends a strong message from the parliament. Of course, it's all well and good to welcome what the Commission has proposed, but we should also propose some of our own ambitious ideas. I think that could also be very useful. Thank you.”
  Energy (green transition)
• “Thank you very much, chair. Well, I'm speaking in two capacities. Um, I'm a renew coordinator in this committee. But also, I'll be speaking on behalf of our shadow rapporteur, who unfortunately couldn't be here. First of all, I'd like to express a vote of thanks to the rapporteur for the excellent job of work he's done. He's obviously going in the right direction and is indeed reflecting the strategic priorities of the EU. We've seen in just recent days, if evidence were needed, that Europe has to take its fate into its own hands, and that goes via a coordinated, ambitious budget which is aligned with our strategic priorities. We cannot set out our store without having a commensurate budget. The strategic approach has to be a priority. As Christian said, if it be the space industry in general, the defence industry in particular. But that can't be done on the back of territorial cohesion and common agricultural policy. We need to support our territories and our farmers. That always has to be part and parcel of our priorities. However, there are some points in the report that may be worthwhile underscoring to help the report in its entirety. First of all, I'm pleased that there is a mention of nuclear energy here and also the support once again for Iter, which is a massive European project and is important at international level. We need to define the difference between fusion and fission. The current form of words I think is a bit fuzzy. The problem of research, and Euratom isn't linked to fission. Um, the fact that we need to cover fission and fusion and safety and radio protection, I think maybe we should be mentioning all of that. And obviously, we need to bolster the budget for that part of covering nuclear power. Finally, in space, an independent space programme that's better financed is absolutely essential to make sure we have that strategic autonomy. We're talking about €50 billion, at least, given the current geopolitical context. And we will be tabling an amendment along those lines to add and to enrich this excellent report. Thank you.”
  Defence spending · Size of EU budget
• “Now, for the sake of it they might be shamed into passing on some of the money. Um, and they'll say, there you go. There's the European added value. But basically the national member states, the chancellors of the Exchequer will have used the surpluses from Europe to stick back in their piggy banks. That's one of the problems I see. The second is that that centralisation will put the commission in a position where they have to channel money to where the spotlight of topical events happens to be pointing. And then it will help the president of the commission in getting good headlines. But whether that's going to help research in the way that we've been discussing the whole afternoon, I question that. Are we going to manage to use the European line of reasoning to convince people in the member states that we need to improve the income situation for the EU? I have a proposal. I always try and say that when we're looking at European legislation, if we're generating a stream of income like Cbam, then that has to be considered European own resources, at least to a great extent, because I think that a European. Finance ministers in the member states can give up money most easily if he or she never sees it in the first place. So I think that's really up to the budget committee, but I wanted to say it here because the Standing Committee has put the same claims here and elsewhere in their committees, and yet their parties at home are saying it's wrong for national member states to pass on their money to Brussels. And we have the same situation with the debt brake in Germany, for example.”
  Own EU resources
• “Dear colleagues, Europe is currently losing the global tech race in batteries. Semiconductors. Smart. Smes innovation happens in Grenoble. Patents are filed in Eindhoven, but manufacturing happens in Taiwan and everything is assembled in Texas. It's not a problem of talent. It's a problem of financing, of order books and political will. What we need is a European venture capital initiative to ensure that our European citizens are savings, are actually going to serve our European technologies. The member states, the local authorities have to buy European. And ultimately, what we need is a common technology strategy rather than 27 policies that are in competition. Because otherwise we're going to be training generations of engineers for everybody else. You can rest assured that our group, Renew Europe, is going to continue to mobilize to turn Europe into the technological heart of the free world.”
  EU digital & tech sovereignty
• “Please. Thank you very much. And congratulations for your election, dear chair. We have we have a lot of work to do together during this mandate. Um, we, in the name of the renew group, will support the ask for an electronic secret ballot, as Mr. Nick has already said. Thank you very much. Okay. **Ville Niinistö: hank you. Chair. On behalf of the Greens, we would also like to support that. We have a secret ballot on this one because of the criticism related to the candidate's political history and statements related to equality and lack of equality.”
  Transparency requirements of EU institutions
• “So you need to have low carbon that is credible. You need to have made in Europe criteria to make sure that we have strategic production in Europe. And finally, we need to have European preference when it comes to procurement, which will help leverage demand in the most direct fashion. There's some unresolved issues. So this pilot project, what's the form that this will take? Are we going to have compulsory quotas for low carbon products in certain sectors, or are we talking about green procurement, which will be coordinated at European level. But that will depend on budgetary capacity of the member states, more specifically on low carbon steel, to to to conclude, looking at scaling this up and yet keeping the emissions low. Of course, this is something that affects the sector considerably. I think there are worries there, especially a sector where they're using electric arc furnaces, which is underpinning some of the Some of the decarbonisation approaches, how can we, the Commission, assure us that the low carbon market will be benefited by these low carbon products? And to conclude, we should make sure that only European companies that are decarbonising generally should be benefited and encouraged. Thank you.”
  "Buy European" provisions
• “Commissioner. Honourable members. Each and every day, dozens of planes are jammed by the Russians. Finland. France. Bulgaria. What we're seeing is war targeting Waves invisible, but no less real. It is an attempt to intimidate us, leave us blinded in our own skies. Not only us GPS is targeted. European GPS Galileo is being jammed, but Europe will not yield. Just as it did not yield to the intimidation of Russian drones in Poland this morning, we know what the solution is. The Galileo designed to be resistant to jamming. Commissioner, we regret the fact that this more resistant form of satellite has not yet been deployed. The technology has been in place since 2016. I'm counting on you to speed up rollout. We need that to ensure that we're truly independent and sovereign on waves and in the air.”
  EU competences on space policy
• “Um, competitive edge advantage. Now we know the idea is to have, um, zero interest loans. Some of these other aspects are very positive. But then of course, the we have to ask ourselves how these instruments are going to be, um, perpetuated beyond 2026, in order to be able to guarantee industrial investment and, I'm just looking at the supply side is not enough. There's a crisis when it comes to demand. We have to stimulate demand so that we don't make the same mistakes as the past. We have to. Yes. Well, if you support investment in industry without, um, stimulating demand, that's a recipe for disaster. So we have to ensure that public support is actually reflected in the order books for the European car manufacturers. We have to develop a value, make our own territory, um, attractive. Um. We're a bit too naive, perhaps, when it comes to, um, going for a European preference. Uh, and people tend to buy American or Chinese. We know that the Commission is trying to broaden the principle of European preference, but it's limited to the small E cars. And that's it. Thank you.”
  "Buy European" provisions
• “Thank you. Chair. Europe is an industrial machine, but it seems that we're losing ground. We're losing the battle in 2024. Industrial production fell by 3% in the eurozone, and the proportion of industrial production in GDP is falling as well now, uh. Uh, still works. Uh, automotive industry. These are falling, but, uh, the importance of batteries, for example, is increasing. We are not looking at increasing competition. We are seeing a reduction in our productive industries. But without industry, there can be no true innovation. Europe is producing more than 30% of, uh. Of, uh, of industry, but only, uh, a low level of, uh, technological development we are producing in factories, but not in laboratories. And without this, there can be, uh, no independence, no sovereignty. We believe this could be a key driver for a competition industrial competition. This will be even better for GDP. We need to invest in semiconductors, in in batteries and in advanced materials. Robotics can lead to increasing value chains in Europe. But if we don't have a strategy, a clear strategy, this could not be the case. China is already taking the lead when it comes to robotics and advanced technology. So the question is simple is the commission planning as of this year to develop an ambitious European strategy on robotics to support Reindustrialisation? And how do you plan to stop this industrial haemorrhage to protect European industry? Thank you.”
  EU digital & tech sovereignty
• “Thank you. Chairman. Thank you, Madam Deputy Director, for your presentation. The publication of this new list of, uh, pieces, which happens every two years, is an important step with 235 cross-border projects covering electricity, uh, hydrogen and digitalisation of the grids. That's a list which reflects the development of our energy systems. We are focusing more on clean energy technology, electrification and flexibility with a doubling of the storage projects. So these projects are essential to guarantee stability, resilience and economic viability of the European energy system. But at the same time, in order to offer new opportunities to decarbonise industry and usage. So that's good news to. But for us, our ambition means that we have to be vigilant. There are many hydrogen linked projects that are very relevant. They're good on condition that they are used exclusively for transporting decarbonized hydrogen. And we should not become a gateway to prolonging the use of fossil hydrogen or gas. So can you confirm that these projects are fully aligned with the decarbonisation goals of the EU? And finally, on more controversial projects, the Malta and Cyprus gas pipelines. This comes back every year. We give derogations to these projects, which seem to get stuck. But these derogations are limited in time and they depend on a conversion to hydrogen based projects by 2036, with constant monitoring by the Commission, with access to European funding until 2027. Can you confirm that this is the very last time that these projects will be able to get European funding? And within that context.”
  EU energy infrastructure integration
• “You don't forget me. Okay. Merci. Madam. Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be speaking French. And thank you. Commissioner. Yes. First of all, thank you for this. Proposed Space Act as European Space Act is unprecedented, and it marks a turning point in our space policy. It sets up the foundations of real European space sovereignty. And I welcome your commitment to this field. You were speaking about a a road map, a highway code for space. It seems comprehensive, structured and very interesting, but I have to admit that I wasn't able to go through each article with a fine tooth comb. I only had 24 hours to read 150 pages, but I'm sure I've got some good reading ahead of me this weekend. Thank you Commissioner. This text is a clear progress for our companies. Instead of having to obtain 27 national permits to launch a satellite soon, they will only need one permit for start ups. This is a huge simplification and it's a way of really boosting competitiveness. Of course, as co-legislators we will look at this text and you can count on Renew Europe to work alongside you in order to accelerate the creation of a single market for space, which we do not have to date, but which is absolutely essential for our economy and competitiveness. I have the following question for you. Implementing such an act will take time and will take resources and a lot of coordination. Do you have any support measures in mind? Specific support measures to support the sector, particularly when it comes to the upcoming MFA. Thank you.”
  EU competences on space policy
• “And the last tranche has not arrived yet. The European Union has obviously made funds available. So that's one aspect that we would have to look at. Eater was in the vanguard on this particular mission because ten days after we were there, Commissioner Sigourney also made a trip to the same area. So we opened the dance as it were, opened the ball up when we were in, and I think it was extreme. And that's an important element to bear in mind. Then there was, um, a space industry at Kiruna is very important when it comes to iron and steel manufacture, but it's also a space launch site, and we were the first to discover the temis. Ree temis um, the rocket, uh, which is the first reusable rocket? Uh, it's a rocket which measures 20m And it's going to be launched. Go up to come back down. So was the test launch. So this is going to be a a first trial in Europe of a reusable rocket, as it were. And this is important for the future. And this project is being financed by the European Union, the European Space Energy, i.e. the project of having a reusable rocket. Anitra has been is obviously very involved in everything to do with the space. And we've done this beyond the trade team as well with other political groups. So it is an excellent mission, very motivated colleagues. And I think all of us came back with having learnt a lot as to what's going on there.”
  EU competences on space policy
• “Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I'll speak French, Commissioner. I wanted to ask about the agile report that you mentioned during your speech. I think that agile is something important because indeed, it's important to support innovation. And there are lots of small businesses which struggle to scale up and being able to give them something, even if it's only €5 million per project, which is not a lot, it's still significant. And also to act swiftly for 2027, I think that's something we appreciate. However, there is something which concerns me in this report and this is the financial setup, because the funding will come out of Egypt where we're already having difficulties getting enough funding. It will come out of Iris two, where we are already again, very concerned about the ability to move fast on Iris two. And then there's the space program, the European Defence Fund. These are funds which are already earmarked. And we in the European Parliament, as the budget authority are looking at redeployments of budgets. And so our concern is really that we should have separate funding. We're willing to work fast with you on this, but on condition that we have a different financial proposal. Thank you.”
  EU competences on space policy
• “Just very quickly. So the battery booster is production of batteries. That's access to raw materials. And I think that it really would be a complete circle if Europe was a key player when it comes to recycling the batteries. So what does the Commission do when it comes to looking at the recycling of these batteries? What about the EU reuse regulation? How can we have a circular economy with the batteries.”
  Sustainability of batteries regulation
• “Well, just to underscore a point, technologies promoted by your text, renewables essentially already have a lot of European finance, but nuclear has systematically been excluded, like low carbon hydrogen that has been excluded as well. And on state aid, you have further obstacles on budgets that are fully national budgets. It's something that I struggle to understand. You have the climate plans from the member states. We have 89GW. In nuclear. And the goal is to get to 150. And the Commission has support to support the member States. How will you assist them then, if the state aid is difficult to obtain?”
  Energy transition (state support)
• “Commissioner, dear colleagues, I welcome the presentation of this grids package. We called for it in our own initiative report drafted by our rapporteur. We said it was urgent to take action in some member States. More than 6000 projects are waiting to be connected to the grid. Renewable energy projects stalled, investments frozen because of lack of infrastructure. Speeding up. Permitting is vital, but that alone is not enough. We need to roll out on a massive scale storage facilities, batteries, clean hydrogen and also solutions to cater for flexibility. We need to adopt a systemic vision, genuine coordination, um, between uh, TSOs rather than, um, a vision imposed from on high without taking into account the situation on the ground. We need to stabilise the network, reduce congestion and manage costs. But let's be clear without massively speeding up electrification of energy consumption, all of this will. All of these efforts will have been in vain. We need an electrification plan now.”
  EU energy infrastructure integration
• “President. Commissioner, it's time to speed up the what we're doing to save the European automotive sector. We need to fight this competition, which is receiving subsidies, uh, elsewhere in the world. We need to be clear. The future of the automobile, the future of cars will be electric. Not only in Europe. All over the world, the majority of manufacturers have understood this. Billions being invested, that won't be lost. We need clear lines about, uh, um, this duration to to support investments. We also need to allow all zero emissions technology to exist. The real debate isn't whether it's about 2035. It's about how can we support the purchase of European cars. Let's really dare to say by European. Let's support those producers who manufacture here in Europe with a European workers. Let's turn this threat into an opportunity for our businesses, for our regions.”
  "Buy European" provisions
• “Please. Thank you very much. And congratulations for your election, dear chair. We have we have a lot of work to do together during this mandate. Um, we, in the name of the renew group, will support the ask for an electronic secret ballot, as Mr. Nick has already said. Thank you very much. Okay. **Ville Niinistö: hank you. Chair. On behalf of the Greens, we would also like to support that. We have a secret ballot on this one because of the criticism related to the candidate's political history and statements related to equality and lack of equality.”
  Transparency requirements of EU institutions
• “Mr. president. Commissioner. Oil, gas, LNG, nuclear power. Finally, we've set a course. This was long awaited and it is now time to turn the page on our dependence on Russia. Europe has given more money to Putin than it has to Ukraine for the past three years. This is unacceptable, of course. Each euro spent on Russian gas is also a euro less. Towards our renewables, our grids, our nuclear power plants, we will finally be free of our dependence on Russian gas. But letters already work to free ourselves of gas. Full stop. In my view, that requires four priorities one. Speed up on renewables and nuclear power, two. Electrify our usage, three improve consumption and four have more home grown production. I'm happy that the question of Russian nuclear fuel is finally on the table, but we must now support the whole European nuclear chain throughout the stream. Let us not replace dependence on Russian gas with a dependence on American LNG. American LNG must not become a bargaining chip or a tool for blackmail. Europe must remain sovereign in its energy choices. Thank you.”
  EU approach to energy security (home-made vs import sources)
• “Thank you, thank you ISA, Aerospace and Leonardo for your presence today, and many congratulations for your commitment for innovation and ISA in particular for testing your most recent launch in Norway. So this really illustrates the diversity of the European space sector, which rests on dynamic start-ups, new space and historical players, industrial players. This is essential to maintain European leadership in space. For ISA, Aerospace, I have two questions. First of all, I'd like to have your opinion on the European Launcher Challenge, this new European initiative to support the European launchers industry. Do you think that it does meet your industrial needs in concrete terms? And another question, we have seen micro and mini launchers being developed in Europe. Not all of this will survive in the medium term, it's a virtual business case. What do you see for the future? Do you see the different actors coming together in the future to guarantee industrial viability for the sector and avoid fragmentation? And for Leonardo, a more strategic question, you are working on European projects and national projects at the same time, particularly in Italy. Do you share the finding that what happens in Europe will aim higher with more ambitious objectives? I'm asking the question because you asked for a dual-use constellation satellite from the Italian government, but this is already operating at European level. So would it be more relevant or more effective to work on European projects, implementing building satellites covering the whole world and not just working on national projects? We're not talking about the internal market, we're talking about global markets, after all. I don't know what needs your meeting in the Italian scene, but perhaps you could see more broadly and in a more European light.”
  EU competences on space policy
• “Thank you very much, chairman. Thank you, Madam Commissioner. Thank you for being here. But also thank you for cooperating so well with our committee. Uh, I'd like to thank you for the excellence and the intent to reduce fragmentation that affects in a negative way, our researchers in Europe. We have the Choose Europe program to try and attract the best talent in the future, or at least to keep that talent. The budget marathon's already started, the next MFF discussions are afoot. And of course the research budget will be affected directly by that. So wanting to include research in innovation at the heart of competitiveness is something that I would like to support. I hope that that can be pushed through in the next framework programme. We have to make sure that that will be the case. Can you confirm that? And as has been mentioned this morning in the own initiative report that was adopted in our committee, it's urgent that the overall budget for this fp10 be boosted. And the €220 billion that's included in the Draghi report would be a commensurate sum. Moreover, research and development has to react to a strategic approach. Clean deal, the clean industrial deal. How will that work with the initiatives to come in future? And finally, I have a lot of questions in a short period of time, I'm afraid. But what specific measures will you propose for the EU start up and scale up strategy? Will it only concern strategic sectors in the Nzia and the clean industrial deal? Thank you.”
  EU research funding
• “Thank you. Chair. Thank you, director, for your brief but comprehensive presentation. Firstly, I'd like to commend the huge amount of work that was done by the Commission in the negotiations with Switzerland. You mentioned the figure of ten years, director. I think they're you're being kind. We could maybe even say 15 or 20 years, if not 30, because when it comes to negotiations with Switzerland, we see the Uh, consequences of the 1992 vote in Switzerland. The citizens there said no to the EEA. If that had been a yes, then we wouldn't have had these bilateral negotiations, different stages of negotiations. So a lot of work has been done, hundreds of of different agreements have been concluded. And I'm happy to see that last December this package of agreements was concluded. It is ambitious and it really represents a boost to our relations with Switzerland. I'm a standing rapporteur in the Parliament on Switzerland within the committee, and I welcome the fact that we are now opening a new chapter after years of stalemate. I know that this is a package, and that both sides have had to make concessions in order to achieve this result. We're just waiting to receive the text, and that's when our political analysis work can begin to make sure that the essential interests of the union are arm preserved 850 pages and hundreds of other pages in the annex, so we do have a lot of reading ahead of us. Last week in Strasbourg, I hosted electricity operators from Switzerland. The agreement on electricity for them is important. It's also important for European operators. So there is valuable work that was conducted there. The provisional application of certain union programmes, I'd like to remind you, was achieved.”
  EU-Switzerland relations
• “So from January 2025, retroactively, we're allowing Switzerland access to a number of programmes. That's a strong sign and it shows how attractive our programmes are. For example, Horizon Europe. But Switzerland also joined the Euratom research programme. That's hugely important as well, which contributes to Switzerland's prowess and science. We need that here in Europe as well, particularly when we're talking about nuclear fusion. That is vital for strategy. Nuclear fusion in Europe is important. So my first question would be, does Switzerland have access to all of the different assets and facets of Horizon Europe from this year, or are some segments still at this stage excluded? And then on Switzerland's participation in our space programme, how do you explain the fact that this package doesn't involve Switzerland's participation in Copernicus? I remind you that since Brexit, we do have a financial gap in the Copernicus budget, and so perhaps we could get some funding from Switzerland. Might that not be valuable? And finally, I'd like to remind you that the European Parliament will be voting on this package as a whole, including on the Provisional accession to the horizon program that will happen in spring 2026, and that will be on the package as a whole. Personally, I would have preferred that we would be able to vote in Parliament on this temporary provisional implementation to say that we agree with Switzerland participating in these programmes from 2025 and waiting for the final vote of 2026 2027. I think it would be good to show that the Parliament has a voice here, and can see what it thinks about these agreements. Thank you.”
  EU-Switzerland relations
• “As for pillar three, I think that there is a lot of room to really think about innovative, uh, financial instruments. How do we support, uh, the research and innovation in the framework of the European Innovation Council and also what was told already about the innovation ecosystems? Well, uh, widening is, of course, also among our priorities with a separate budget. And in that sense, I think that the Parliament should strongly oppose any attempts to put the widening in the framework of more financial and budget debates in the Council. We should really keep that as an integral part of the framework programme and not putting it somewhere else, because such attempts have been made. And there, of course, the link with the European Research Area should be emphasized because on the one hand, of course, the aim is really to get to a situation where no widening money is needed anymore. But at the same time, let's be frank, not all of the widening programmes have been equally successful, and there is a lot of need for bridging that innovation gap that still exists. And as for the simplification, really? Yes. Optimization of processes. But not just that, but also, I think keeping the lump sum approach would still be in some form, an important element of what we are trying to achieve.”
  EU research funding
• “Europeans. Every European, remembers their energy bills going up in 2022. This was provoked by the crisis in Ukraine and Russias energy blackmail. Already then, Putin was threatening to cut off gas to Europe. We can no longer live with this sword of Damocles hanging over our heads. The safest and cheapest energy is energy that we produce here in Europe. Let us stop feeding the Russian war machine. Let us wean ourselves off Russian oil and gas from 2026. This is a strong message supported by a broad majority of this Parliament, with exception of the extremes, of course, and the Patriots who prefer to defend the Kremlin's interests rather than European interests. Finally, I have a message for you, Commissioner. Let us not replace one dependency with another. Commitments made towards the US are incomprehensible. Us LNG should not become our new Achilles heel. Let us remain masters of our own destiny and be European.”
  EU approach to energy security (home-made vs import sources)
• “Mr.. President. Commissioner. Blaming the ETS for our industrial difficulties is looking away from the real issue, which is our dependence on imported fossil fuels. The ETS is our most powerful industrial and climate tool. If we were to weaken it, we will weaken our economy at a time when it's really a strategic imperative that we use this. Of course, the system needs to involve, but not simply giving out more and more free allowances. We need to be sending out the right message because if we don't, people won't invest in electrification or clean technologies. Our objective needs to be clear. We want to definitively phase out imported fossil fuels, and that means a huge amount of industrial electrification. We need to make sure that each euro from the ETS is destined to that objective, and doesn't simply go into the national budgets of the member states for the future decarbonization Bank. This is something that needs to be truly European, to serve electrification and to help with industrialization. Thank you.”
  Extension of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme
• “Thank you. Well, clearly the industrial accelerator, I'm the Parliament's rapporteur from the committee and that will enable us to accelerate electrification. We are looking forward to the report presented in June in industry today. 30% of processes are electrified. We can get to 80% easily and we need to boost electrification of transport. And at that point, with our massive electric production, we'll have more growth, more autonomy and more decarbonised electricity.”
  Energy (green transition)
• “Thank you. Chair. Thank you to our guests for their presentation and for the study, which is very well documented. I have some. Caution about the OCC given, you know, the limited availability at the moment. So I think this study is very useful to help identify the real potential of these technologies. So my question is, first you refer to various projects being carried out throughout the world. In your view, which technology or combination of. Technology is most mature at the moment and the most promising in terms of cost benefit ratio, cost effectiveness? And where would our member states fit in? In the in the world ecosystem? You know, faced with U.S. and Chinese initiatives. I mean, in the United States, we see there are subsidies of up to 50% of capital expenditure for such studies. Do you think there is a strategic risk for the EU of becoming dependent on non European technologies in the decades to come? And on the regulatory framework, in the light of your recommendations, what are the priority adjustments that should be made to the implementation of the Net Zero Industry Act so that we can realistically deploy these technologies by 2040? How can we afford to avoid startups and SMEs being penalized by excessively complex procedures or excessively competitive calls for tender?”
  Carbon capture storage and utilisation
• “Please. Thank you very much. And congratulations for your election, dear chair. We have we have a lot of work to do together during this mandate. Um, we, in the name of the renew group, will support the ask for an electronic secret ballot, as Mr. Nick has already said. Thank you very much. Okay.”
  Transparency requirements of EU institutions
• “Thank you. Chair. Thank you, Director general. Thank you for all of the information that you presented to us. It's all been very clear. And congratulations for the huge work that USPA has done over the last few years. The agency has really stepped up its efforts, and it has shown that the space industry in Europe can directly benefit our citizens and our political priorities. You concluded an agreement which is excellent, involving innovation, startups, large companies, and if we want to succeed in this field, we need to ensure that the whole ecosystem is involved in order to make this project ambitious. In the Parliament, our role is one of scrutiny as well, to make sure all of this is working on the ground. That's why I have two specific questions for you today. Firstly, the Galileo system. It is strategic for Europe's security. But why is it not yet operational When we're seeing that European armies need safe and specific positioning on the ground. What is the real timeline here when it comes to rolling out this system, to allow European armies to have a direct, safe and operational access to that service. And then the second question, when it comes to the upcoming space legislation at the European level that is set to be presented today. It should, in theory assign new responsibilities to USPA. And I welcome this, but today, do you have the personnel and the organizational resources to safeguard and deliver on this new mission? And then another question you spoke about Satcom. That's really important for us. But where are we when it comes to the Satcom hub? Is that already operational. Now in June, that's what was hoped for. Thank you for your commitment. Once again, congratulations for your renewal at the head of the agency.”
  EU competences on space policy
• “Thank you very much, Madam Executive Vice president. Thank you for being here. First and foremost, in 2024, we adopted the Net Zero Industry Act regulation. It is an ambitious text, negotiated and adopted by both co-legislators to come up with a clear list of all strategic technology that we need for net zero. 40% of our clean technology in Europe by facilitating deployment and financing along these same lines, the communications on the Clean Industrial Deal proposes a pragmatic approach that is based on the NZ need to support our industrial strategy. So this is what we have. This Cssf state aid new framework is a busting this all up. The text that you put forth to us for consolation excludes nuclear limits, highly limits hydrogen, low carbon hydrogen, even whilst fossil gas natural gas is included. Gigafactory of Electrolysers are being produced. But then we have hydrogen hydrogen via nuclear. So we have to move away from Russian gas. But we're moving. We're opening up more to LNG and gas from elsewhere. How can you support this? You're not supporting the Clean Industrial Act, but you're weakening it. There's a logic that has not been decided by the co-legislators, but that has been come up with in the DG Comp's offices. We need to put an end to this biased approach. All clean technologies must have the same and equitable Treatment. It is a question of sovereignty and political consistency. My question would therefore be simple. Can you guarantee that the final version of this text will respect fully the enzyme spirit and maintain technological neutrality, including nuclear energy? Thank you.”
  Energy transition (state support)
• “Colleagues, €15 billion. That is what we have paid collectively this year to Putin by buying his gas. €15 billion is three times the annual budget for Erasmus+. It's two years of horizon Europe. 15 billion is a huge amount. And let's be clear, every euro spent on Russian gas is one more euro to pay for a murderous war in Ukraine. This has got to stop. Parliament fought for this and we have achieved a complete and fast phase out from Russian gas by 2027. This shows what can be achieved when European institutions work together. We are now turning a historic page. We are putting an end to our dependence on Russia. But let's learn our lesson. Commissioner. Let's not replace one dependency by another. American LNG ought not to become our new Achilles heel. Let's remain masters of our own energy destiny.”
  EU approach to energy security (home-made vs import sources)
• “Monsieur le President. Commissioner. Five years ago, Europe had a trade surplus of €200 million on heat pumps. Today we've got a deficit of 400 million in just five years. We went from dominance to dependence 60% of the time. China as a supplier. During this time, some here, especially in the extreme right, are going against the green transition and are attacking clean technologies. If we don't want to invest, our energy of the future will be produced abroad. This is industrial submission. Commissioner, enough with this naive approach. We need to have a preference for European. We need to buy European act for clean tech. We need to produce here. We need to create jobs here. Europe should choose strategic industrial strength over dependence.”
  "Buy European" provisions
• “In the Middle East, a war that we didn't choose is today dictating our energy prices. Bills are spiraling, and it's the lowest earners and SMEs and farmers who are paying the price for that every day. The commission wants to accelerate the EU according to their plan. That's fine. But in order to accelerate, we're going to need fuel. And that fuel is the massive funding that we still don't have. The response is not to run into Moscow's arms or to give in to the blackmail issued by Washington. Diversifying is fine, but it's not a strategy. The real answer is to produce our own energy at home. To do that, we need to turn the announced decarbonization blunk into an electrification bank. It should be a huge lever to help with our independence. We should massively electrify. Now, this is the only way out. It's a. Our sovereignty is at stake.”
  EU approach to energy security (home-made vs import sources)
• “Thank you, Commissioner, for your very valuable insight. And that comforts us. And we want to keep working on space within the Parliament. It's a key field, a strategic question. You published a vision document for the space economy, and it's very clear headed. It shows our critical dependency when it comes particularly to space surveillance. We'd like to know what's happening above our heads and satellites and missiles. All of that's clear. Will you be stepping up investment at an EU level in this area in order to monitor space, and particularly when it comes to early detection overflight systems? Thank you.”
  EU competences on space policy
• “The electricity networks are the Achilles. Achilles heel of our transition. If they don't work, everything falls apart. So by 2030, we need to mobilise billions of euros to modernise and develop them. Yes. The least amount of renewable energy that we have makes network connections more complex. But it also means that our energy production is relocated to rural areas or outermost regions. And that's an opportunity, not a burden. The report, which was led by renew, is clear invest more and invest better to a more to ensure a more robust network which can resist cyber attacks and climate shocks. These interconnections need to achieve the 15% target by 2030. The EU is showing us the path with its 1.6 billion loan to link France and Spain via the Gulf of Gascony, and I welcome that because it's exactly what we're proposing. So let's continue by having an energy component to the sea, and let's adopt a European preference in our public tenders so that we can consolidate the entire value chain for networks. We need solid networks for strategic independence and a successful transition.”
  EU energy infrastructure integration
• “you Mister Chair. Earlier you referred to flexibility. Clear that the flexibility of demand is a key tool. Flexibility reduces costs, it facilitates the integration of renewables, it avoids congestion, and it accelerates decarbonization of our industry. Every day, moments of high production don't coincide at all with the moments in which we consume the most. The result is that we waste clean energy and we pay more for electricity. This potential should not be underused. A European strategy for flexibility is extremely necessary with a focus on active participation of demand and storage. At the European Parliament, we have already called a number of times to use this potential. We have the initiative report on networks, we have security of energy supply, or our resolution about the clean industrial deal. I have two questions for the presenters. The grid package, will it include such a flexibility strategy? And does the Commission intend to set European objectives in terms of flexibility or at the very least does it plan to have encouragement of flexibility? Thank you. **Giorgio GORI @Chair (Italy, S&D): Thank you. I don't see any other request, so okay, please, and Christian Eder.”
  EU energy infrastructure integration
• “Just very briefly, I have the feeling that I wasn't answered when it comes to my question on Copernicus. Why does it seem that Copernicus isn't Involved in the space program and the agreement that we have with Switzerland.”
  EU competences on space policy
• “And also the dual use we should actually should start thinking about the precise definition of what it actually means and how to deal with that, but that should be a part of our our work. To my mind, taking into account all the geopolitical and security realities. And now I would like to proceed to the notes and this will be brief of my call. Shadow, who is, uh, the essential thing to highlight regarding Horizon Europe and its specific program is a criteria of excellence and impact. These factors are central to the quality and internationalisation of European research, innovation and competitiveness of our business, renewal of our industry and the union's ability to respond to global challenges and close the innovation gap with competitors. I support the idea of tightening the connection between programs, supporting competitiveness, so that the Competitiveness Fund and Horizon Europe forms the most effective, clear and functional entity possible from a competitiveness perspective. Funding continuity should be ensured between the programmes and their instruments. The last years showed how crucial defense spending is for our security. That is why I believe that the importance of funding allocated to defence and dual use purposes should be widely emphasized in competitiveness funding. The role of the ERC is a key priority for excellence research and it is very important. The autonomy and independence of the ERC, as well as European Innovation Council are key principles to be maintained. Thank you. On behalf of Catherine. Thank you.”
  Defence spending
• “Merci, madame. Thank you. Chair. The automotive sector in Europe is going through the worst crisis of its recent history. The number of vehicles produced in Europe is falling. Companies are are shutting down factories and this is affecting families and entire areas are threatened by this. We're also facing up to 35% of higher costs vis a vis China or the United States. And the result is that we have 350,000 jobs which are threatened. We have a clear political choice to make. We can allow this industry to die, or we can make it the engine of the European energy transition. The debate is not 2035. The real debate is will Europe still be making cars tomorrow? Now electric vehicles are are a technological advantage, and by 2035, there'll be 30% of the world market and 10% of the industrial of the European market. Europe cannot be the largest car producer in the world without investment. It can't simply be an assembly plant or a selling point for others. We need to keep 2035 in mind, but adapt our way to get there. We need more enzymes to produce here and to have a socially just transition with a fund for the transition of the automobile sector, which will allow different areas to reconvert their factories. We need to support the automotive industry. Let's find a way to. Help those who are producing and creating jobs here in Europe. So I have a clear question beyond electric cars, what technology is the Commission thinking to use to attain zero emissions? And my second and final question how can we give a value to those who wish to produce European electric vehicles locally? Could you confirm that you will integrate this in the impact assessment? Thank you.”
  EU industrial funding · Powertrain choice: EV-only pathway vs. equal support for hybrids, e-fuels, H2
• “Thank you. Chairman. On behalf of our new group, I wanted to put forward the candidacy of Mr. Ivan Verhofstadt, a newly elected member from Belgium, a businessman who's very familiar, therefore, with the world of industry and business, and who will inject his energy into our Itre committee. And I hope I can count on your support. Mr. Hoogstraat has transport difficulties today and cannot join us, but he has given his consent to stand as fourth vice chair of this committee and of course, has completed and duly sent in on time all the relevant declarations.”
  Recruitment policies in the EU
• “Dear colleagues, let us be clear. The future of cars is electric, not just in Europe, but all around the world. Manufacturers have understood this, have invested billions of euros revisiting the 2035 target. Today is an extremely risky gamble. Let's stop believing in Father Christmas. Flexibility is not going to save the European automotive industry. So let's stop the populist rhetoric. The problem is not electric vehicles. The problem is that Europe does not yet have a real industrial policy, either on the supply or demand side. It is time to build one and to strengthen four pillars: decarbonisation, a solid European industrial base, affordable prices for consumers. And for all of that, we need the industrial accelerator now. We can't wait any longer. We must dare to show a real preference for Europe rewarding those who produce here with European content. Let's turn this threat into an industrial opportunity for our jobs and for our regions.”
  Powertrain choice: EV-only pathway vs. equal support for hybrids, e-fuels, H2 · EU industrial funding
• “Thank you, chair. And thank you, Mr. Grassy, for providing some explanation about this. Our group is quite happy with a number of the ideas that are part of this compass, which of course follows on from the letter and Draghi reports. We are delighted indeed about this approach to our economy in Europe. So this compass focuses on reducing our dependency as a key focus. We need to consider the fact that we're very much dependent on imports. We import for instance, over 60% of our energy. And to echo Mr. Aylor, it's clear that energy sovereignty and not being dependent on others when it comes to energy is absolutely a component of competitiveness. So there's a strong link there. Semiconductors have been talked about batteries as well, active pharmaceutical ingredients as well. So beyond the initiatives we already have IPC, the Chips act, what new measures are being foreseen by the Commission to bring about the Relocalization, the relocation of certain strategic parts of the supply chain? This is something we talked about during the Covid crisis. And Europe is going to have to face a number of shortages when it comes to drugs. This means we are vulnerable to geopolitical tensions. Friends, this is a real strategic issue. We need to take it into account to make sure that our citizens aren't left in quite difficult conditions. If we have future pandemics, we need to have a real single market. So we welcome this principle of the 28th legal regime. But what are you going to do to make sure that this is actually used on a broad basis and isn't just another tool that's available? Thank you.”
  EU digital & tech sovereignty
• “I will try. I will speak French for Barry Andrew. It works. Okay. Hello, everyone. I would like once again to thank Camilla Ojane as well as their teams for their work on the draft proposal and the compromise and the amendments. I was pleased with the first I'm I'm looking forward to the first Shadow Rappel to a meeting in a few weeks. Barry Andrew wrote that he's trying to focus on 5 main points. First, the added value of the MIE and of their CEF, has always, relied on transborder, infrastructure. These infrastructures which the countries can't finance by themselves and which markets don't invest in to, spontaneously. We need a sort of Christmas tree approach which multiplies priorities. Well, actually, if we if we do that, then it would dilute the increased, budget, especially because other EU instruments already cover, certain parts of this infrastructure. My amendments aim to, decrease the this sort of double spending problem, and we want to make sure there is a reliable, decarbonized, and affordable, electric, system. This needs to be an explicit goal and not an implicit 1, this sort of sustainable system. The CEF shouldn't just accelerate investments, but should also focus more on the concrete implementation of infrastructure. The, commission's text speaks about investment, and I want us to talk about results. My amendments also remove the term indicative when it comes to the budget, envelope. The €81,000,000,000 are a, political engagement, and it'd be treated as such, spreading it amongst, military mobility, transport, and others should be mentioned explicitly in the text and not just left up to the commission's discretion. So a delegated act would be better there, rather than an implementation act. The outermost regions, the ultra, outermost regions and similar need to be paid special attention to due to their geographic, locations. Ireland and Cyprus have a 0% engagement, energy engagement, with the EU, and the outermost regions are also not connected enough. The third countries and projects of mutual interest are essential to meet our the EU's energetic needs and to create a sustainable energetic infrastructure. So this can't just stop at our borders, and we need to engage with neighboring countries and candidate countries. I'm pleased to work with the carapaturs as well as with my colleagues, and I'm sure that we can create a third CEF, which will, be even more successful than past editions of it. This is all what, this is all Barry Andrew. Thank you.”
  EU funding for transportation · EU cohesion/structural-fund architecture: consolidation vs ring-fenced separate funds
• “(16:08:55 – 16:10:53): you very much, chair. Thank you, commissioner Jorgensen, for being here in Etray with us today. There are 2 issues I'm a bit concerned about. The first of all, the electrification plan. In May, this was announced, meant to be ready in June, and now suddenly it's gonna be in July. So what should we say about the revision about the framework for supply, which seems to have disappeared from the commission's programming horizon? And this is during a an energy crisis that this is happening. Looking at our own technologies and our own solar panel factories are closing in France, which makes us reliant on imported fuel subject to prices we have no control over. The market isn't turning towards electrification. The this, I think, is being being made clear that there's gonna have to be massive investment in in the transition. Is this a plan that will indeed be published in July? And will you have figures and ambitious goals for electrification? Secondly, the delegated act on the sustainability of data centers. I welcome the fact that the commission has heard the many calls to delay this introduction and to rework it. And I think that's a good idea, but I'd like to know where we are in discussions now. How does the commission intend to integrate nuclear energy, nuclear elect electricity under this label without any discrimination. The data center supplied to a major part by nuclear power is 1 of the least carbon heavy in Europe. It should not be penalized by being labeled, something that's not sustainable.”
  Nuclear energy
• “Thank you very much. President. Madam Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the clean industrial deal is major progress in terms of our industrial sovereignty. So thank you, Commissioner, for your commitment to defend our industry and our jobs in Europe. I think it's very clear what we need to impose here is to buy European. Dear colleagues, in recent days we have seen our citizens, our Companies who are committed to buying more. That is European. And it's the same when it comes to clean technology. Clean technology. It's a real opportunity for our industry and we need to live up to these expectations. We have a market of 450 million consumers. That's a huge economic leverage. We should not be modest about this. This deal brings into the start of a preference for buying European. But we need to go further. We live in an unstable world. Mr. Commissioner, I hope you will continue in this direction. Europe must choose to defend its industry or to lose it altogether. Thank you.”
  "Buy European" provisions
• “(16:11:28 – 16:12:01): I'm always pleased that new technology is neutral in what the commission's saying. Now, will the commission establish European goals when it comes to flexibility, or at least are you going to set out some incentives for flexibility? I have a question on low carbon hydrogen. The consultation on the way to calculate nuclear energy has to be started before the end of June. Can you confirm that date, or will this be postponed?”
  Low-carbon hydrogen
• “Yes. Uh, thank you very much, chair. Uh, I'll also briefly, uh, read the notes of my Co shadow on the specific program. Uh, but first of all, I think that we all understand that this is really an opportunity for all of us to create a really robust program with significantly bigger budget. And of course, the protection of the budget for the next framework program is and should be one of our main priorities. And of course, regarding specific issues to keeping the balance between continuity and necessary changes and adjustments is the most important thing when dealing with this program among our priorities. Well, uh, many of them have been already mentioned, but I just wanted to mention the issue of the brain drain, uh, which in research and innovation is really a huge problem for many of us. And I think that in that sense, also our approach to the next framework programme should take this into account. As for more specific issues in their new position, uh, pillar one autonomy of excellent research should be and must be. And among our priorities in the framework of the European Research Council. As for pillar two, which is going to be probably the most hot topic for debates, I completely agree that At horizon. Europe should keep some and significant amount of autonomy even when integrated with the European Competitiveness Fund. And in that sense, I think emphasizing the part called societal challenges, which is mainly dealing with, uh, humanities and social sciences, should be really kept as a robust part with a robust funding for humanities and social sciences for reasons already mentioned.”
  EU research funding
• “I don't understand why this nuclear plan pink should be an exception on consultation on the renewables objective for 2040. The target Their parliament was a bit angry at the commission because this target of renewables by 2040 wasn't included in what you said during a hearing. And once the hearing had come and gone and you'd been installed in office, that target had been added to the commission's documents. Why are you so hidebound by excluding nuclear? 2040 is a decarbonisation target. We have to guarantee the Green Deal, and in order to do that by 2040, we have to have a decarbonisation target that takes all the energies into the mix. On the delegated act on hydrogen. I've seen the text. I think it's very good, but without financial support it's just going to be some an intention. Will you make sure that hydrogen will involve other forms of auctioning for hydrogen? And maybe I can just conclude with nuclear fusion. Fusion, a fusion strategy. Nuclear fusion strategy that we asked for back in December. We don't understand why you haven't moved on that. Why we haven't heard anything. Last year we saw a record, a world record in Cadarache, in maintaining plasma. We need a strategy for nuclear fusion if we want to continue to be competing at world level. Thank you.”
  Nuclear energy
• “Thank you, Chairman, and thank you to our guest speakers for their very interesting and clear presentations. Our committee has the task of supervising the EU space policy, and as you've said, Ms. Fogani, it's essential to keep a democratic eye on the ways and means of these policies. So two questions. If we had a greater institutional rapprochement, would that be possible within the Union, but also between the EU and ESA, which is intergovernmental rather than a union body? And could that make European space action more coherent and more effective? And you've also talked about the European Parliament playing a greater role. Of course I agree with that, but if we have heightened parliamentary scrutiny, how could that be exercised vis-à-vis ESA? And what policy or legal levers could be applied so that members could be associated with the big decisions? Mr. Warren, you talked about the need for greater strategic autonomy of Europe in space, and this is one of the rare areas where Europe has really first-class skills and capabilities. But there are some critical capabilities missing, such as exploration. And what do you think are the main curbs on this? Is it a matter of the budget or fragmented governance of space as far as Europe is concerned? And what would you recommend to fill the gaps and boost our European independence? Thank you.”
  EU competences on space policy
• “Madam president, madam Commissioner, at the end of March, we were already warning about the situation in the U.S.. Huge budget cuts. Academic freedom being curtailed, layoffs. And now these academics are looking for a safe haven. Europe has a unique opportunity to become the new El Dorado for free science. So I welcome the Choose Europe for science and the €500 million up to 2027. But the money allocated to the pilot project through the Marie Curie Initiative won't be enough. This pilot project should pave the way, but it needs to do so quickly. We need applications to be approved quickly. We need a future for those who want to rebuild their scientific future here. And of course, this isn't incompatible with the strategic agenda of the EU. On the contrary, the projects under this umbrella can also contribute to the EU's priorities climate, health critical technologies Is and so on. I appeal to all universities and research centers. Joined the movement. Open your doors.”
  Research priorities within the EU
• “I am not here to arbitrate between the. Spanish political groups, but we know that 54 million Europeans all of a sudden found themselves in the dark during ten hours. And that is of interest to Europe to make sure that this never happens again. The blackout, I think just recalls of a simple truth I electricity cannot be stored. Supply must always equal demand. And in order to guarantee that balance, then we need a diversified energy mix with renewable energies, but also with hydroelectric power, but also with nuclear power. We can't stop the sun from shining or the wind from blowing, but we can modulate a nuclear reactor or a hydroelectric dam in France. If you take a look at the grid protection mechanism, this allowed the blackout from spreading to the rest of Europe. And I would like to acknowledge the work done by the French and Spanish grid operators. When it comes to the causes of the blackout, there are many. But I think in order to prevent this, we need more interconnections so that this doesn't happen again.”
  EU energy infrastructure integration
• “Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I'll be speaking French. Mr. Aagaard and Mr. Rushkoff, thank you very much for your presentations. I'm speaking on behalf of the Renew Europe Group. Your presidency is starting at a crucial time for the European Union when the next MFF is being planned. I'd like to wish you all of the best for that. And also, we need the best of luck in dealing with that. Europe is facing key challenges and we hope that Denmark will be committed to defending an ambitious European budget. This will need to involve massive investments to strengthen our strategic sovereignty in our cross-border energy networks, and also when it comes to space. Now, Mr. Hoggard, on energy, the Danish presidency is stressing independence from Russian gas. And you recall you called this and I'm very happy about that. But what about the EU package? Will you make this negotiation a key priority for the Danish presidency? Will you ensure that we conclude finally, energy tax directive negotiations? We need clean energy and we need to lower energy costs as well. And to conclude a comment on nuclear but now on fusion And because we have seen alarming proposals on nuclear fusion from the Council, and this is really important for the future.”
  EU energy infrastructure integration
• “Thank you very much, chairman. Thank you. Commissioner. Well, you're pleased that there were some pleasant words during your hearing. I think there may have been a criticism that we weren't harsh enough, so maybe I'd be a little harsher. We need to look at what's not working. But I would agree with you. We need to have a massive acceleration of electrification, adopt new measures to divest ourselves from Russian fossil fuels, have better interoperability on the electricity market, and act as soon as possible because high bills cost our industry a lot of money and our households as well. To get there, though, we need to be consistent, we need to be ambitious. And maybe I can just underscore a couple of points that I think constitute problems today. The nuclear indicative program. Pink, as we call it in French, is set out in Euratom and in the work programme for 2025 was included there, but is completely absent from the annexes. Is this really going to be published this year, this nuclear programme? And when it comes to financing needs, how can you understand that before you've talked to people working on the ground with this? Because maybe I can just underscore that in your own directive for better regulation. It underscores the obligation of the Commission to carry out consultations with stakeholders to ensure consistent and transparent action.”
  Nuclear energy
• “Please. Thank you very much. And congratulations for your election, dear chair. We have we have a lot of work to do together during this mandate. Um, we, in the name of the renew group, will support the ask for an electronic secret ballot, as Mr. Nick has already said. Thank you very much. Okay. **Ville Niinistö: hank you. Chair. On behalf of the Greens, we would also like to support that. We have a secret ballot on this one because of the criticism related to the candidate's political history and statements related to equality and lack of equality.”
  Transparency requirements of EU institutions
• “Merci, Monsieur le président. Thank you very much. Chairman. I'm going to be speaking in French. Madam Commissioner, thank you very much for your presentation. And thank you for coming to this committee very regularly. I know that the Europe for science is a success and I'm happy about that. €50 million is perhaps not enough, however, to reach the target. And I do want to commend what is being done for Horizon Europe in the future. Research and innovation is a good news for all of us, but I do have some questions about the integration of horizon in the future. Competitivity fund for Europe. It's an industrial strategy which has to be strong, and so we have to know the priorities, uh, academic freedom, fundamental research excellence. And we have to be Independent and very much faithful to the European spirit. If there is too much of a top down approach with very inflexible criteria, there is a risk of, if you like, stifling the big discoveries that we need. We have to let the researchers research. And Madam Commissioner, therefore, how can we guarantee that the breakdown between ten and the competitiveness fund does not restrict scientific, scientific spontaneity? Is it a question of governance? How can we break down the responsibilities between DG and DG grow in the future programme in five seconds? Just a final point. The moonshot in the framework program. This is a rather specific and special uh, and its research and development and industry, but we haven't got any specifics from the commission about exactly what a moonshot is. Thank you.”
  Research priorities within the EU