Riho TERRAS

Policy topics Riho TERRAS is active on

What Riho TERRAS has said (13)

• 2026-03-24 “P-001214/2026 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Séjourné on behalf of the European Commission The scope of the Commission’s proposal to restrict lead shot under the Regulation on the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) 1 is limited to outdoor shooting. The placing on the market and use of lead gunshot for indoor shooting is not covered by the proposed measures. This is clarified both in the Annex (paragraph 38) and in the Act (recital 37) of the Commission proposal 2 . The proposed restriction does not apply to the placing on the market and use of lead gunshot for indoor use and would allow continued sale of lead shot intended for use in indoor shooting ranges. Therefore, no derogation for this use is necessary. Following the usual REACH procedure, the Commission’s proposal is currently being discussed with the REACH Committee and will subsequently be subject to the scrutiny of the European Parliament and the Council. 1 Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) (OJ L 396, 30.12.2006, p. 1, http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2006/1907/oj). 2 https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/comitology-register/screen/documents/105447/5.”
  Mercury · Chemicals regulation
• 2025-10-08 “E-003959/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Séjourné on behalf of the European Commission The Commission bases its proposals for restrictions under the Regulation on the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) 1 on the evidence and recommendations provided by the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) and its scientific committees, the Committee for Risks assessment (RAC) and the Committee for SocioEconomic Analysis (SEAC). In its restriction report 2 , ECHA proposed to restrict the use of lead rimfire bullets for hunting after 5 years, which is a longer transitional period than for other bullet types, due to the limited availability of alternatives. In its Opinion 3 , SEAC agrees with ECHA that a longer transition period is required for rimfire cartridges as alternatives exist but need to be further developed. In line with Article 68(1) of REACH, the Commission has taken into account the current limited availability of alternatives for lead rimfire bullets and therefore is proposing to double the transitional time recommended by ECHA and SEAC before the restriction starts applying to those bullets. This is intended to provide sufficient time for the development of new and scaling-up of existing non-lead alternatives. The draft proposal is currently being discussed with the Member States and must receive a positive vote in comitology and subsequently pass the scrutiny of both the European Parliament and the Council in order to be adopted. A committee vote is not expected before 2026. 1 http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2006/1907/2025-09-01. 2 https://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/da9bf395-e6c3-b48e-396f-afc8dcef0b21 ; https://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/1a42c9e1-e36a-65b0-da45-bc1ca093b632. 3 https://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/2c82ef18-ce5d-4b4f-8ff0-002932154acc.”
  Chemicals regulation
• 2025-09-15 “P-003539/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Séjourné on behalf of the European Commission The estimated number of shotgun shooting ranges in the EU in the scope of the proposed restriction on lead in ammunition and in fishing tackle is approximately 4,000. These numbers are based on a survey from 2020 covering all Member States and on data provided by industry associations 1 . The European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) opinions 2 duly considered these estimates, including those of the cost of water collection and treatment, as best available information for the assessment of the related socio-economic impacts as explained in the reply P-002809/2025 3 . Therefore, the restriction proposal fulfils the requirements of Article 73 of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) 4 and its process complies with the relevant Better Regulation elements and principles. 1 Annex B.9.1.3. of the Background Document to the Opinion on the Annex XV dossier proposing restrictions on Lead in outdoor shooting and fishing - Committee for Risk Assessment (RAC) and Committee for Socioeconomic Analysis (SEAC) ANNEX to the ECHA/RAC/RES-O-0000007115-80-01/F and ECHA/SEAC/RESO-0000007178-68-01/F. 2 https://echa.europa.eu/registry-of-restriction-intentions/-/dislist/details/0b0236e1840159e6. 3 https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/P-10-2025-002809-ASW_EN.html. 4 Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), establishing a European Chemicals Agency, amending Directive 1999/45/EC and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 as well as Council Directive 76/769/EEC and Commission Directives 91/155/EEC, 93/67/EEC, 93/105/EC and 2000/21/EC, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2006/1907/2025-06-23.”
  Water pollution · Chemicals regulation
• 2025-07-16 “E-002940/2025 Answer given by Ms Kos on behalf of the European Commission The Council has been actively involved since the EU imposed measures on Kosovo* in June 2023. In its December 2024 conclusions 1 , it stated that these measures would be lifted gradually as Kosovo takes steps to reduce tensions in the north. The Council plays a key role in offering political guidance and must stay updated on developments and progress related to lifting the measures. As part of the measures, the work of the Stabilisation and Association Agreement (SAA) bodies has been put on hold, the programming of funds under the Instrument for pre-Accession Assistance and Western Balkans Investment Fund projects suspended, as well as procurement procedures and the signing of new contracts 2 . The measures do not affect payments under the Reform and Growth Facility (RGF), EU funding for civil society the participation of Kosovo in EU and cross-border cooperation programmes. The Commission has also applied a constructive approach for projects in support of the EU-facilitated Dialogue 3 . The suspended EU assistance amounts to EUR 400 million, with EUR 8.7 million lost due to expired contracting deadlines; however, compensatory measures can be considered, subject to Kosovo addressing the EU’s de-escalation requirements in the north. Some steps towards de-escalation were taken since the December 2024 Council conclusions leading to the start of the gradual lifting, namely the resumption of SAA Sub-Committees as well as the unlocking of projects in support of the RGF. Kosovo is aware that the lifting of the measures remains dependant on its effort to de-escalate the situation in the north. * This designation is without prejudice to positions on status and is in line with UNSCR 1244/1999 and the ICJ Opinion on the Kosovo declaration of independence. 1 https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-16983-2024-INIT/en/pdf. 2 https://enlargement.ec.europa.eu/kosovo-report-2024_en. 3 https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/belgrade-pristina-dialogue-agreement-path-normalisation-between-kosovoand-serbia_en.”
  EU-Kosovo relations · EU relations with Western Balkans
• 2025-07-09 “P-002809/2025 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission The restriction proposal referred to by the Honourable Member has not yet been adopted. It was discussed in the relevant regulatory committee in February 1 , April 2 and June 3 2025 and further discussions will take place later in 2025. The draft proposal, like that for other restrictions, is based on publicly available opinions of the European Chemical Agency’s Risk Assessment Committee and Social and Economic Assessment Committee and related background documents 4 , which include information on cost/benefit calculations and possible risk management measures. The current draft proposal refers to water treatment ‘where necessary’. As explained in the background documents, the type of water management implemented and, if necessary, the type of treatment would depend on several factors including the ground permeability in the shooting range. It is not possible to say how many outdoor shooting ranges in the Union would require treatment of their drainage water to be installed. For similar reasons it is difficult to indicate a uniform cost, but the background provides some estimates of the cost of water collection and treatment measures 5,6 . The Water Framework Directive 7 (WFD) obliges Member States to ensure, inter alia, that surface water bodies achieve good chemical status. The reference to the environmental quality standard (EQS) for lead aims to ensure that the measures taken to contain and, where necessary, treat drainage water are sufficient for that EQS to be met in the receiving surface water body. Good chemical status is achieved by a surface water body if it complies with all the EQS in Annex I to the Environmental Quality Standards Directive 8 including the EQS for lead. 1 https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/comitology-register/screen/documents/105447/1/consult?lang=en. 2 https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/comitology-register/screen/documents/107638/1/consult?lang=en. 3 https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/comitology-register/screen/documents/108757/1/consult?lang=en. 4 https://echa.europa.eu/registry-of-restriction-intentions/-/dislist/details/0b0236e1840159e6. 5 https://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/14c4fceb-31b4-aea2-a9b5-75cdccf8013f. 6 https://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/8009dd7e-07e7-462b-941f-1d8884d43f85. 7 Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy, OJ L 327, 22.12.2000, p. 1. 8 Directive 2008/105/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on environmental quality standards in the field of water policy, OJ L 348, 24.12.2008, p. 84.”
  Water pollution · Chemicals regulation
• 2025-02-14 “P-000698/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Séjourné on behalf of the European Commission The Union’s security and defence capabilities are top priorities of this Commission. For this reason, military and security uses of lead ammunition are outside of the scope of this restriction dossier. In addition, the Commission has ensured that the proposed restriction will not affect (i) the ability of the European industry to produce ammunition at the required scale for military purposes, (ii) the economic viability of shooting ranges and (iii) military preparedness and national security training. This was done by proposing a permanent derogation that does not require the installation of additional risk management measures for the use of lead bullets in civilian shooting ranges. According to the European Chemicals Agency, the market for lead ammunition is mostly driven by bullets for sport shooting (42 000 tonnes of lead bullets are used annually for sports shooting, compared with only 134 tonnes for hunting). The proposed derogation for the use of lead bullets in sports shooting ranges will ensure that the demand, and therefore the production of lead bullets, will remain at pre-restriction levels. Consequently, civilian production lines for lead bullets are expected to remain economically viable and available should there be a need to scale up production for military uses. Since the derogation for the use of lead bullets in civilian shooting ranges does not require the installation of new risks management measures, the economic viability of those ranges and their continued availability for the voluntary military training of reservists is guaranteed.”
  Disarmament and non-proliferation of weapons
• “Mr. Vice President, dear colleagues, our priorities have changed since the breakout of the full scale war in Europe, especially when it comes to the increase of defence spending. This is why we create the possibility of the Member States to use the money from the Cohesion Funds, European Regional Development Fund and the Just Transition Fund for defence purposes. To be clear, we are not taking money away from cohesion. We are simply creating the possibilities for the Member States to strengthen their defence. As the rapporteur for the opinion for this report, I urge you to confirm the trilogue outcome tomorrow. This is urgent since members who wish to reprogram some of their funds need to do so before the end of this year. Thank you very much.”
  Defence spending
• “Thank you, Madam Vice President. Commissioner. Dear colleagues, it is almost four years of Russian full scale war against Ukraine. I see no end of this soon. Global developments around us place increasing responsibilities on European countries for ensuring their own security and defence. Europe must primarily focus on increasing its defence budgets and developing its industry to such an extent that we can build up defence capabilities ready to deal with the threat facing us. If the European, NATO, European allies would reach 5% commitment today, we have. We will have more than €1.2 trillion defence spending all together. We have to spend this money wisely. Today, there are no signs of NATO disintegration. The majority of us decision makers I met last week consider NATO and security cooperation with Europe to be vital to EU interests. But we must prove that we take our part of the deal seriously. Our primary task is to invest to our defense and increase European military readiness. Thank you.”
  Defence spending
• “Building partnerships with the private partners. In times of crisis, our military and security services will be our burden overburdened. But at point, at the point and that point, we must also dare to look to our private sector to provide support in the logistic chain. This is already happening today in exercises with private companies helping from, for example, with unloading and further processing of NATO training exercises. We must build on this good example. And third, fast and flexible intra-eu movements, troop movements and the transport of equipment are currently still subject to a complex web of different laws and competent authorities. We need to streamline this at the European level in line with NATO standards. I therefore also welcome the proposal to add a clear roadmap to a military Schengen in the in this report, avoiding improper use of resources when larger sums of money are made available for infrastructure works. There will always be member states that seek to give their dream projects a military dimension, despite their limited usefulness in the light. We must prevent this by having the Commission draw up clear list of priorities in consultation with the Member States, and overlook by the overlooked by Parliament to ensure a proper use of the funds. So I am looking forward to continue the work in line with our first shadows meeting for last week, and hope that we will be able to come with a firm recommendation towards the Commission in the light of the upcoming military mobility package. Sorry, but I didn't write it myself.”
  EU competences on defence
• “02:21 – 16:03:18): Alright, thank you Madam Kai Kallas. I read your interview in Financial Times this weekend and I was struck by your message you just said and you repeated my confusion. You are not responsible on the messages from the President of the Commission. I mean as a former ambassador I know that the Minister of Foreign Affairs is responsible to his government. What is Commission doing? I mean who is speaking? Do you have a one voice? Who is dividing this Commission? You, your politics? Who is sending message to United States of America in our negotiations on the trade on security guarantees for Ukraine? Can you just give me a clear answer who is running the show in Brussels and please who is your interlocutor in Washington on these crucial issues? Thank you, thank you.”
  EU competences on foreign affairs
• “Thank you, Mr. Vice President. Commissioner. Dear colleagues. Once again, we need to discuss the situation concerning Russian oil and gas. It is no secret that the blue eyed hope that Russia can be contained and somehow integrated through the economic ties was, and still is a complete delusion. Russia used its oil and gas to plant the seed of the complacency, a false sense of security to many of European countries. Those who did not see through it corrupt and perverted plan are obviously in self denial mode. Finding excuses. The profits from Russian oil and gas are used to kill Ukrainian people every day. The profits from Russian oil and gas are used to build a military power that will be used against the European Union and NATO. One day. This is no place for Russian energy sources in Europe. There is no place for Nord Stream. Thank you.”
  EU-Russia relations (from March 2022)
• “Thank you, Madam Vice President. Commissioner. Dear colleagues, the European Union is European Union's ability to contribute to the defence and security of its member states depends on how we are able to prioritise, prioritise, to use our funds from the common purse. Russia's full scale war in Ukraine shows very clearly that technological development on the battlefield is no longer a matter of years or even months. New technological technological solutions are being introduced in weeks and days. It is absolutely necessary to tackle the slow innovation cycle in the European Union by closely linking research and development with production, and we also need a close cooperation with Ukraine. Drone warfare, which has become the new standard of the battlefield, requires rapid and innovative solutions. I am convinced that the Drone Defense Initiative is most appropriate to implement through the pilot projects, especially in the member States bordering aggressor Russia and Belarus. I would also like to emphasise the role of SMEs in this context. They are often the ones that drive the innovation with their mobility and flexibility. They should definitely be kept in the loop. Thank you very much.”
  Defence spending
• “Thank you, Mr. Vice President. It is no secret that Russia finances its war of aggression against Ukraine by selling fossil fuels. Dependence on Russian gas and oil is a chronic disease for many European countries. Many third countries see this as an opportunity to buy blood gas and oil to at the below market price. We all remember the consequences of the recent energy crisis that was very much based on dependency for from Russian sources. The European Union, together with the United States, must take stronger actions to encourage third countries to stop financing the Russian war machine. Needless to say, there is no place for Russian gas and oil in Europe. We must not tolerate the fact that the EU member states pay Russia to kill innocent Ukrainian people. Thank you.”
  EU-Russia relations (from March 2022)