Sakis ARNAOUTOGLOU

Policy topics Sakis ARNAOUTOGLOU is active on

What Sakis ARNAOUTOGLOU has said (80)

• 2026-07-16 “(11:07:07 - 11:07:52): I will speak in Greek. I will ask the question in Greek. I have a question for mister Schroeder. You mentioned Ferropolis as an example of a new identity that was created without a strict original plan. And also, you said that each project has to be economically viable. How can the European Union allow space for creative experimentation without creating projects that cannot stand alone? And what model similar to the Ferropolis project could be imitated in Greek regions as such as Western Macedonia? Thank you.”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• 2026-07-16 “(10:05:32 - 10:06:39): Good morning. I have a question for Mr. Croffi. 1st of all, thank you very much for this very interesting presentation. We also have similar problems in Greece, mainly in areas where lignite mining was the main economic activity. And many people were employed and lived out of these facilities, but now they have to leave because there is no alternative for them. I would like to ask you, from your experience, which was the most difficult part of the transition? Was it securing the funds? Was it mobilizing the local communities and businesses or the creation of permanent jobs? And what part of the Irish model you believe could be implemented in lignite areas in Greece such as West Macedonia and Megalopolis. There are a lot of things in common, but you have achieved a lot of things that the Greek government is still dreaming of. Thank you.”
  Energy transition (state support)
• 2026-07-15 “(11:01:03 - 11:03:07): I will speak in Greek. Mister Minister, I was really interested to listen to your priorities, but I have to admit that both myself and my Maltese colleague, Nectomy, felt that this was an agenda looking more to the Northeast Atlantic. You made references to The UK, Norway, Baltic, the North Sea. But the Mediterranean, it has very specific features and is under a lot of pressure, and small scale fisheries, which is a reality for thousands of fishes, allow me to say, has been left on the side sidelines almost completely. And I hope that in practice, the Irish presidency will, really take a fair approach to all of the areas, not only the North, because there's no time to lose anymore. The EU has to effectively protect our, resources and our seas from, against 3rd countries. We face that in Greece from Turkiye. It's not possible for, European fishers to respect strict legislation whereas 3rd countries don't. So I think that there has to be clear support for small scale and coastal fisheries, particularly those in distant regions where fisheries is a central pillar of the economy and indeed of social cohesion. So, it's clearly, we're seeing other, problems as well, for example, with the invasion of the puffer fish. Now, we are you planning to do something to support fishes in that, with funds? It's not only a threat to fishes, but also to swimmers, and it's giving rise to huge losses. So, the Greek government has only supported 2 regions so far, where the, the problem has become particularly serious. Thank you.”
  Funding for fisheries and aquaculture
• 2026-07-15 “(16:29:37 - 16:34:22): you. Just some comments after my colleagues. I would extend this to all invasive species in the fishes committee. We are all we often talk about this, not only the puffer fish. You talked about the blue crab, Mediterranean blue crab as well. You said there are European funds that support combating invasive species. There there there are horizon programs on this. And you also spoke about the MFAV, which has compensation measures and payment for catches. You've referred to that. So we have funding, and we have an inventory of them today. But what will happen tomorrow? As you know, we're working on the future MFF and the MFAV. In its current state will be disappearing. Fons will be targeted towards member states. And for invasive species, This is something that affects entire basins with several member states in under threat. So what will happen in the future to combat such phenomena? You also, in your initial comments, spoke about the oceans pact. What is the relationship between the oceans pact and measures against invasive species? I didn't quite understand where in the oceans pacts we would be working on this. And as you've seen from what my colleagues have said, this is really something of great import to many member states. So in the future, how will we continue to jointly devote funds to this phenomenon of invasive species? Thank you. Thank you very much. Well, clearly, it's very difficult for the commission to say today what the financial situation will be in the future. However, we take good note of all the proposals and comments so that we can have this sort of transnational action and guarantee in future funding ways that we can deal with phenomenon this phenomenon. And of course, especially with regard to research in Horizon Europe, there are relatively large sums to overcome all the lacunae we have in knowledge on these areas. And so this will be used and usable. And, also, MFAV, that is something that exists, and these possibilities exist in this context. But it is member states who determine the modalities for the use of this fund for to address this type of problem. In the case of Greece, we looked at that in detail. And there is a methodology developed to, compensate fishers. And this is something designed and implemented by the Greek authorities in the management committees. You know that we take part in this, the commission, but we only have an advisory role. The decisions are incumbent upon the Greek authorities. It's in their purview. And the same is true with regards to the rates of payment that is dealt with at the national level. On the oceans fact, I refer to it because last year, the commission's text provided for a political initiative to get to grips with this issue of invasive species. So, therefore, we have a number of ideas of as how we can make this concrete as we indicated it last year in the oceans pact. Thank you.”
  Funding for fisheries and aquaculture
• 2026-07-15 “(16:26:55 - 16:29:31): Thank you very much indeed, Madam Chair. Colleagues, the Mediterranean is very, very quickly changing, faster than any other European sea basin. Climate change and the spread of invasive species is not only a climate challenge, but it's also threatening the safety of its populations as well. We've heard about the puffer fish. We've heard it's invading Greece and Cyprus and spreading throughout the Mediterranean. It's not just a localized thing. We have heard and seen in the press that it's even reached as far as Gibraltar, also the Atlantic. On a daily basis, our fisher folk are seeing their nets and gear being destroyed. In Crete, a scientific study said that there were over €6,000 of damage to every vessel every single year. Thank Thank you. In Crete, a scientific study showed average economic data of above €6,300 per fishing vessel every single year, which is about 1 3rd of the annual income of a coastal fisher. At the same time, this is a particularly toxic species which has a very strong bite, which therefore means that we have to inform fisher folk, but also the population and visitors, tourists to avoid particularly eating these species where there can be problems. Cyprus has started implementing economic programs for the collection of these fish, and Greece has made a similar positive step quite recently. However, the Greek program is limited only to the Southern Aegean and Cyprus. And the puffer fish, however, doesn't recognize limits. It's creating this huge damage, and it's spreading to other regions. So there are 4 very specific initiatives I would call for. 1st and foremost, these programs need to be expanded and targeting all regions where the presence of puffer fish has been detected. Secondly, there has to be compensation for the destroyed fishing gear and the loss of income on the part of fisherfolk. Thirdly, the creation of a European resilience fund for fisheries, which will immediately be used to compensate for invasive species. And also then we have to fund European research into the use of puffer fish for pharmaceutical and other innovative ends. So we need to invest so that where scientifically possible, this threat can be used for growth and development. The challenge and the risks are the same across the whole Mediterranean, as you've heard, and therefore, we need a common response. And I wanted to ask the commission also about this new Greek program. You mentioned 1,500,000. What criteria will its performance be, established or evaluated on? And whether if it proves positive, it can be scaled up? Thank you.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries · Funding for fisheries and aquaculture
• 2026-07-14 “First of all, I would like to thank you, Minister, for your presence here and to wish you good luck. Good luck to the Irish Presidency. I would like to underline three points. First of all, the new cap has to support those that really produce, not the areas. And the renewal of generation needs to give real chances. And Europe has to give not only the right to stay in the farm, but to return to the farm without any age exclusions. And third, with the climate management of water should be the highest priority in Europe. Now, coming to my question. I think a colleague from Ireland started that concerning Mercosur last January, Ireland was didn't agree so much with the decision to sign the agreement between European Union, Mercosur and the Irish Prime Minister stated officially that the additional guarantees were not sufficient to allay the fears of the farmers and the consumers. Minister, do you remain in that position? If yes, what initiative are you going to promote as a presidency to, to, to protect producers and consumers and producers that have exactly the same misgivings? Thank you very much.”
  Trade relations with Mercosur
• 2026-07-09 “We welcome you. Last week, on Sunday, I met representatives of fishermen in Attica, near Athens, and they wanted me to transmit to the Commission and to you personally, the voice and their fears and their agonies. You know about that. You know quite well. They talked about the high cost of fuels, the age, the fleet, the bureaucracy, how youth has problems to come into the sector and unfair competition, illegal fisheries from third countries and especially from Turkey. Turkey does not implement the same rules. The the the assessment shows that we have made progress in common fisheries policy concerning the stocks. But the success cannot be judged only with the environmental numbers. We should judge it and see whether a fisherman can live with dignity as a professional. And if the coastal communities have a future Commissioner. The fishermen don't ask for privileges they need just rules, less bureaucracy support and fair competition. I know, Commissioner, the very important work you have done, and I would like to stand next to the people of the sea with substantial initiatives. Thank you very much.”
  Funding for fisheries and aquaculture
• 2026-07-08 “President, the Europe economy can be a tool for the green transition, innovation, competitiveness, and the strategic autonomy of Europe. However, we have to be very clear on the fact that the bio economy can't become a new lever to exploit, the earth, forests, water, and biodiversity in generally. We can't replace fossil fuels with biofuels if that leads to an overexploitation of ecosystems and competing with the prod production of food. We need a circular bioeconomy that is fair and genuinely, sustainability with high added value. Farmers, foresters, and local communities can't just be suppliers of these, materials. They have to be genuinely, stewards of the land and water. And it has to be connected with resilience, the protection of natural resources, and social justice. So bioeconomy, yes, but within the bounds of nature. Thank you.”
  Biofuels (RED II)
• 2026-07-07 “Madam president. Commissioner, this strategic agreement between the EU and Mexico is an important step in creating a stronger, more democratic level of cooperation in a time of strong Change and challenges at the geopolitical level, and this goes far beyond trade. Trade needs to go hand in hand with guarantees on human rights, protection of the environment, as well as workers rights, as well as considering tackling corruption in Greece and in Europe in general. This agreement will create new opportunities to export high quality agri food products. This will be a great opportunity for SMEs. However, it's important to make sure that we can see European geographical indications properly protected, as well as competition rules to make sure that Europeans aren't subject to unfair competition. Europe needs strong partners and this is a real progress in our trade policy. Thank you.”
  Free trade agreements (FTAs)
• 2026-06-17 “(16:13:08 – 16:14:24): you very much, madam chair. The renewable forms of energy and decarbonization of our economy needs a resilient and modern, networks, electrical network. In many areas of Europe today, the networks remain old, antiquated, inefficient. And in Greece, particularly during the heat waves and strong winds, the networks of electricity are often connected with the with creating forest fires. So we need to to invest in, the networks to to for civil protection, for protection from the climate and security of the citizens. We have a 2nd dimension, justice. The local authority, local population that have, wind parks, cannot have all the weight of the energy transition without enjoying the benefits from alternative energy. In Greece, there are areas for decades of producing energy for the whole country, and they still, do not have the compensation from the legislation. The government cons does not, repair this injustice against local communities who supported the transition of the country. The green transition should be just not only in words, but in practice. Thank you very much, mister Maran. Thank you, president.”
  Energy (green transition)
• 2026-03-25 “E-001254/2026 Answer given by Mr Tzitzikostas on behalf of the European Commission 1. Directive 2004/54/EC on minimum safety requirements for tunnels in the Trans-European Road Network 1 does not prevent the reduction of the number of lanes on motorways in tunnels to a single lane, if the safety requirements are met. Similarly, neither Regulation (EU) 2024/1679 on Union guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network 2 , nor Directive 2008/96/EC on road infrastructure safety management 3 , forbid the reduction to one of the number of lanes of a road. 2. The Commission did not assess and does not plan to challenge these measures which have been put in place to check and improve the safety along the motorway. Traffic organisation measures fall within the remit of the national competent authorities. 3. Directive 1999/62/EC on the charging of vehicles for the use of road infrastructures 4 requires that the level of the infrastructure charge element of a toll levied upon heavy-duty vehicles is equal to, or less than, the level necessary to recover the cost of the infrastructure. There are no specific conditions in competition law on the level of the toll fees in relation to traffic restrictions. 1 OJ L 167, 30.4.2004, p. 39, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2004/54/oj. 2 OJ L 2024/1679, 28.6.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1679/oj. 3 OJ L 319 29.11.2008, p. 59, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2008/96/oj. 4 OJ L 187 20.7.1999, p. 42, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/1999/62/oj.”
  EU transport infrastructure integration · EU Competition policy
• 2026-03-24 “Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the European Commission 22.5.2026 Written question The Commission agrees that the proper functioning of crossing points at the EU’s external borders is of crucial importance. While the organisation of customs controls and the overall performance of the border crossing points are a responsibility of EU Member States, the Commission is open to considering leveraging existing monitoring tools (such as diagnostic studies carried out by its operational customs expert teams) to collect further information. Cooperation at all levels within the EU is very important and the Commission is in regular contact with all EU Customs Administrations, including Greek Customs, to ensure a strong and performing Customs Union. The recently agreed reform of the EU Customs Union should also contribute to this goal. There are several EU programmes under the current Multiannual Financial Framework offering funding opportunities to Member States seeking to reinforce their capabilities at border crossing points. These include the Integrated Border Management Fund, which is made of two components, i.e. i) the Border Management and Visa Instrument [1] (within its specific scope of border management and visa policy), and ii) the Customs Control Equipment Instrument [2] providing financial support for purchasing and upgrading customs tools; as well as the Customs Programme [3] supporting the development and operation of the central digital systems for customs, and the cooperation between customs authorities. Additional support is provided by the Internal Security Fund [4] , the Technical Support Instrument [5] , the Union Anti-Fraud Programme [6] and the Connecting Europe Facility [7] . Potential beneficiaries are regularly informed of upcoming funding opportunities. [1] Regulation (EU) 2021/1148 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 July 2021 establishing, as part of the Integrated Border Management Fund, the Instrument for Financial Support for Border Management and Visa Policy, OJ L 251, 15.7.2021, p. 48. [2] Regulation (EU) 2021/1077 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2021 establishing, as part of the Integrated Border Management Fund, the instrument for financial support for customs control equipment, OJ L 234, 2.7.2021, p. 1. [3] Regulation (EU) 2021/444 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2021 establishing the Customs programme for cooperation in the field of customs and repealing Regulation (EU) No 1294/2013, OJ L 87, 15.3.2021, p. 1. [4] Regulation (EU) 2021/1149 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 July 2021 establishing the Internal Security Fund, OJ L 251, 15.7.2021, p. 94. [5] Regulation (EU) 2021/240 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 February 2021 establishing a Technical Support Instrument, OJ L 57, 18.2.2021, p. 1. [6] Regulation (EU) 2021/785 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2021 establishing the Union Anti-Fraud Programme and repealing Regulation (EU) No 250/2014, OJ L 172, 17.5.2021, p. 110. [7] Regulation (EU) 2021/1153 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 July 2021 establishing the Connecting Europe Facility and repealing Regulations (EU) No 1316/2013 and (EU) No 283/2014 (Text with EEA relevance), OJ L 249, 14.7.2021, pp. 38.”
  EU policy on custom fee on non-EU imports · Asylum & border control
• 2026-03-09 “Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission 11.5.2026 Written question Article 13 of the Water Framework Directive (WFD) [1] requires Member States sharing an international river basin to ensure coordination of their management plans. Such coordination should cover measures to ensure appropriate quantity and dynamics of freshwater flow to allow the achievement of good ecological status. Moreover, as Parties to the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe Water Convention [2] , EU Member States must ensure ‘exchange of information on existing and planned uses of water and related installations that are likely to cause transboundary impact’. Under Article 12 of the WFD, where a Member State identifies an issue which has an impact on the management of its water, but it cannot resolve it on its own, it may report the issue to the Commission and any other Member State concerned and may make recommendations for the resolution of it. The recently amended provision [3] strengthens this cooperation by making it mandatory. Neither Bulgaria nor Greece have made a notification to the Commission under Article 12. The WFD does not specify which form the cooperation between Member States should take. Article 3(4) WFD allows Member States to use existing structures stemming from international agreements. Information on cross-border cooperation should be reported in the River Basin Management Plans. Prior to their adoption, the draft plans are made subject to public consultation. Given their delay in reporting, the Commission is currently still assessing the Third River Basin Management Plans of both Bulgaria and Greece and will consider in this context the state of play in relation to transboundary cooperation. [1] 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. 1-73. [2] Convention on the Protection and use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes. [3] Directive (EU) 2026/805 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 March 2026 amending Directive 2000/60/EC establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy, Directive 2006/118/EC on the protection of groundwater against pollution and deterioration and Directive 2008/105/EC on environmental quality standards in the field of water policy, OJ L, 2026/805, 20.4.2026.”
• 2026-03-09 “E-000970/2026 Answer given by Mr McGrath on behalf of the European Commission Regulation (EU) 2016/1191 1 aims to facilitate the free movement of citizens within the EU by abolishing legalisation or apostille requirements for certain public civil status documents, introducing multilingual standard forms and simplifying translation procedures. The Regulation is an important piece of legislation cutting red tape and costs for citizens, when they need to present in a Member State a public document issued in another Member State. The Commission monitors the correct application of EU legislation by Member States and may decide to take appropriate actions in cases showing a persistent failure by a Member State to apply EU law correctly. In the case of Regulation (EU) 2016/1191, there are no concrete indications of such infringements by Greece to the knowledge of the Commission. If evidence comes to light of a practice of Greek administrative or consular authorities demanding apostilles, certified translations or other additional paperwork in violation of the provisions of Regulation (EU) 2016/1191 on a general and consistent basis, the Commission would, where appropriate, take the necessary steps. Citizens who encounter problems which are allegedly caused by the misapplication of the Regulation by Greece can file a complaint to the Commission providing details of the alleged breach. On this basis the Commission is able to examine the matter and contact Greece if needed. The Commission is not able to examine the alleged breach on the basis of a general statement but would need further details. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/1191/oj/eng.”
  EU political integration
• 2026-02-11 “E-000583/2026 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission 1. Under the Common Fisheries Policy, conservation measures must be based on the best available scientific advice and comply with the principle of proportionality. Where justified by conservation objectives, Member States may apply restrictions, including seasonal bans in marine protected areas (MPAs), even to low-intensity activities such as fishing tourism which may have cumulative impacts, particularly in sensitive areas or periods. Restrictions must be appropriate, non-discriminatory and proportionate, while taking into account relevant scientific evidence and socio-economic considerations. 2. Union law requires that measures with socio-economic implications be prepared in a transparent manner and, where appropriate, involve stakeholder consultation. The Commission supports the use of data collected under the Data Collection Framework and encourages Member States to ensure that decision-making is evidence-based and transparent. 3. Recreational fisheries play an important role from a biological, economic and social perspective. Considering the significant impacts of recreational fisheries on certain fish stocks, Member States shall exercise effective control of recreational fisheries, including an appropriate system of sanctions. EU legislation distinguishes between commercial and recreational fishing. The marketing or sale of catches from recreational fisheries is prohibited. Member States are responsible for ensuring effective control. The revised EU Fisheries Control Regulation 1 further strengthens monitoring through electronic catch reporting, improving transparency, and also supporting enforcement and helping prevent illegal practices. 1 Regulation (EU) 2023/2842.”
  Funding for fisheries and aquaculture · Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2026-02-11 “E-000581/2026 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission The Water Framework Directive 1 leaves Member States broad discretion to find the most suitable institutional framework. As storing water for one sector may potentially affect others, the European Water Resilience Strategy 2 and Guidance Document No. 24 3 recommend a coordinated approach to reservoirs, involving all relevant actors and considering their environmental impacts. A safe and reliable water supply is essential for all sectors, including agriculture 4 . To prevent disruptions, over-abstraction must be reduced across all sectors, by reducing demand, increasing efficiency, improving water retention on land, and promoting, where relevant, treated wastewater reuse. Drought-prone regions should also establish comprehensive Drought Management Plans. There are currently no plans for specific Commission Guidelines on reservoirs. The updated 5 Greek Recovery and Resilience Plan (RRP) 6 provides for the adoption of a National Water Strategy for the protection and sustainable management of water resources. Both RRP and Cohesion Policy 7 fund investments and improvements in public water systems. Horizon Europe 8 supports research and innovation for agricultural water resilience, and previous projects offered solutions to improve current practices 9 . The Common Agricultural Policy 10 can support investments that enhance, among others, water efficiency and circularity. 1 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. 1–73, as amended by Commission Directive 2014/101/EU of 30 October 2014, OJ L 311, 31.10.2014, p. 32–35. 2 https://commission.europa.eu/topics/environment/water-resilience-strategy_en. 3 https://environment.ec.europa.eu/publications/river-basin-management-changing-climate_en. 4 https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/overview-vision-agriculture-food/vision-agriculture-and-food_en. 5 https://greece20.gov.gr/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/CONSIL_ST_15754_2025_ADD_1_EN_TXT.pdf. 6 https://commission.europa.eu/business-economy-euro/economic-recovery/recovery-and-resiliencefacility/country-pages/greeces-recovery-and-resilience-plan_en#repowereu-measures-in-greeces-plan. 7 https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/2021-2027_en. 8 https://commission.europa.eu/funding-tenders/find-funding/eu-funding-programmes/horizon-europe_en 9 Restoring and protecting the water cycle as basis for sustainable water supply (https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/3678416 ), Building a water-smart economy together with citizens and economic actors in a way that supports EU competitiveness, is attractive to investors and supports a thriving EU water industry (https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/4408793 ) and Ensuring clean and affordable water for all (https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/1755237). 10 https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/common-agricultural-policy_en.”
  EU policy on water management
• 2026-02-11 “E-000614/2026 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Fitto on behalf of the European Commission Under the programming periods 2000-2006 and 2007-2013 the Common Provisions Regulations (CPR) for the management of structural funds 1 required that Member States establish management and control systems for their programmes and ensure their functioning in accordance with the principle of sound financial management and compliance with EU eligibility rules, including as regards durability of operations. Cohesion policy funds do not cover operational and infrastructure maintenance costs, which are national competence. The construction of the Ionian Motorway was co-funded and completed under the operational programmes ‘Road Axes, Ports and Urban Development 2000-2006’ 2 and ‘Improving Accessibility 2007-2013’ 3 . Both programmes have been closed and the final payment disbursed by the Commission services on the basis of a list of complete and functioning projects. The construction of the Ionian motorway was carried out through a concession contract, which lays out the terms of the public concession and the responsibilities of the concessionaire in cases of natural disasters causing technical problems. Recognising the critical importance of the sustainability and resilience of infrastructure projects in view of an ever more challenging natural environment, the CPR for the current financing period 20212027 4 foresees that adequate mechanisms for climate proofing of supported investments in infrastructure should be an integral part of programming and implementation of the funds. 1 Article 30(4) of the Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds, applicable to the 2000-2006 financing period ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/1999/1260/oj and Article 57 of the Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 of 11 July 2006 laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999, applicable to the 2007-2013 period, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2006/1083/oj. 2 Decision C (2001) 534 of 19 March 2001: http://www.cc.cec/sg/vista/home?specificDossierSA&SDRef=C/2001/534, as last amended by Decision C (2009) 114 of 20 January 2009: http://www.cc.cec/sg/vista/home?documentDetails&DocRef=C/2009/114&ComCat=SPINE. 3 Decision C (2007) 5436 of 31 October 2007: http://www.cc.cec/sg/vista/home?specificDossierSA&SDRef=C/2007/5436, as last amended by Decision C (2015) 9770 of 21 December 2015: http://www.cc.cec/sg/vista/home?documentDetails&DocRef=C/2015/9770&ComCat=SPINE. 4 Regulation (EU) 2021/1060 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2021 laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund Plus, the Cohesion Fund, the Just Transition Fund and the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund and financial rules for those and for the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund, the Internal Security Fund and the Instrument for Financial Support for Border Management and Visa Policy: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32021R1060.”
  EU funding for transportation
• 2026-02-11 “E-000584/2026 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Fitto on behalf of the European Commission ‘Do no significant harm’ (DNSH) is a horizontal principle as set out in Article 9(4) of Regulation (EU) 2021/1060 1 that shall be taken into account in pursuing the policy objectives of any of the EU-funded programmes referred to in the Regulation, which contribute to the EU cohesion policy. Likewise, Regulation (EU) 2021/241 2 establishing the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) stipulates that the Facility shall only support measures respecting the principle of ‘do no significant harm’. Before submitting the programmes for adoption by the Commission, the Member States have to ascertain that programmes comply with the DNSH principle. This shall be achieved by assessing the types of actions defined in the programme with respect to their potential to do significant harm to the environmental objectives. Member States must therefore: (i) put in place selection procedures that are sufficiently detailed to ensure compatibility of operations or large-scale investments with DNSH compliant types of actions set out in approved programmes and (ii) are compatible with applicable EU environmental law. Under the RRF, the Member States include a detailed DNSH self-assessment of each measure in their Recovery and Resilience Plans. The selection of projects is the responsibility of the Member States, which establish the relevant selection criteria and procedures through the programme authorities in accordance with the applicable EU rules. The Commission approves the programmes but does not select individual projects. It is therefore for the Member States to ensure that territorial specificities, including those related to insularity where relevant, are duly taken into account. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/1060/oj/eng. 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32021R0241&qid=1667997764795.”
  Funding for OCTs and outermost regions · EU strategy for tourism development · Climate efforts
• 2026-02-11 “E-000582/2026 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission The Water Reuse Regulation 1 enables the safe reuse of treated urban wastewater in agriculture through harmonised minimum water quality requirements, while allowing Member States to limit or ban it in certain areas 2 . Progress will be assessed through Member States’ first ever data reports, due by June 2026, also feeding into the Commission’s evaluation of the Regulation by 2028. Water reuse is an important component of the Water Resilience Strategy 3 , and facilitating the implementation of this Regulation is essential to achieving the objectives of the Water Framework Directive 4 and climate adaptation by reducing pressures on surface and groundwater. Under the Common Implementation Strategy 5 of that Directive, a dedicated working group is supporting implementation at national level. Further to its guidelines on minimum requirements for water reuse of 2022 6 and the Delegated Act on risk management 7 , the Commission continues to work with that working group and national experts to identify implementation challenges and further guidance needs. The Commission also facilitates the application of the rules through dialogue with authorities and stakeholders, and the exchange of best practises via workshops, events, publications, and capacity building support 8 . Targeted funding through existing frameworks like the Recovery and Resilience Facility 9 , Horizon Europe 10 , the Common Agricultural Policy 11 and the Cohesion Policy 12 can support 1 Regulation (EU) 2020/741 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 May 2020 on minimum requirements for water reuse, OJ L 177, 5.6.2020, p. 32–55. 2 For reasons linked to geographical and climatic conditions. 3 https://commission.europa.eu/topics/environment/water-resilience-strategy_en. 4 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. 1–73, as amended by Commission Directive 2014/101/EU of 30 October 2014, OJ L 311, 31.10.2014, p. 32–35. 5 Common Implementation Strategy for water policy – Working Group on Water Reuse: https://circabc.europa.eu/ui/group/9ab5926d-bed4-4322-9aa7-9964bbe8312d/library/3eaafe7c-0857-47d4-a8968022df48d3ba. 6 Commission Notice Guidelines to support the application of Regulation 2020/741 on minimum requirements for water reuse 2022/C 298/01, OJ C 298, 5.8.2022, pp. 1–55. 7 Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2024/1765 of 11 March 2024 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2020/741 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to technical specifications of the key elements of risk management, OJ L, 2024/1765, 20.6.2024. 8 EU Water Academy – Water Resilience Strategy (capacity-building): https://knowledge4policy.ec.europa.eu/water-academy_en. 9 https://commission.europa.eu/funding-tenders/find-funding/eu-funding-programmes/recovery-and-resiliencefacility_en. 10 https://commission.europa.eu/funding-tenders/find-funding/eu-funding-programmes/horizon-europe_en. Notably, on tackling barriers to scaling up circular water management in agriculture: https://cordis.europa.eu/programme/id/HORIZON_HORIZON-CL6-2025-02-FARM2FORK-03. 11 https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/common-agricultural-policy_en. 12 Cohesion Policy – particularly the European Regional Development Fund and the Cohesion Fund - supports targeted investment in treated wastewater reuse projects for non-agricultural purposes. https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/policy/what/investment-policy_en.”
  EU policy on water management
• 2026-02-05 “E-000466/2026 Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the European Commission On 17 January 2026, the EU and Mercosur signed the Partnership Agreement 1 and the Interim Trade Agreement 2 , based on the political agreement reached on 6 December 2024. Against a background in which the EU has excluded a much larger number of agricultural products from full liberalisation than Mercosur countries, table olives represented one of the few defensive interests for the Mercosur countries, in particular Argentina, because of the high competitiveness of EU producers. Therefore, similarly to the cases where the EU protected its sensitive products, also Mercosur invoked an exception to the liberalisation of table olives. On the other hand, the Commission focused its offensive interests on olive oil, a product with a very large export potential in South America, and for which the EU obtained an excellent concession from Mercosur countries, namely the full elimination of tariffs, which are currently as high as 31.5% in Argentina. In any event, the Mercosur agreement stipulates the possibility of an amendment of the trade provisions, based on the outcome of a review that takes place three years after the entry into force of the agreement. Such a review would be an opportunity for the Commission to reassess the situation as regards tariffs on table olives. 1 https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-8371-2023-DCL-1/en/pdf. 2 https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-12417-2025-REV-1/en/pdf.”
  Import of agri-food products in the EU · Trade relations with Mercosur
• 2026-01-14 “Answer given by Mr Jørgensen on behalf of the European Commission 12.5.2026 Written question Distribution system operators have the obligation to operate, maintain and develop a secure, reliable and efficient electricity distribution system pursuant to the EU rules for the internal market for electricity [1] . National regulatory authorities are required to ensure compliance by distribution system operators, including monitoring the time taken by distribution system operators to carry out repairs. Additionally, EU Directive 2019/944 requires Member States to take measures to protect customers in remote areas. Since climate change and extreme weather events are already affecting the resilience of EU’s electricity networks, the electricity risk preparedness regulation 2019/941 [2] requires national competent authorities to take into account rare and extreme natural hazards in their national electricity risk scenarios. The Commission intends to include a stronger focus on the impact of climate change and extreme weather events on the security of EU’s electricity system in the proposed revision of the energy security frameworks. As part of the Affordable Energy Action Plan [3] , the Commission has proposed a Citizen Energy Package [4] , which provides concrete actions, which are highly relevant for people living in rural regions, e.g., to enable and empower citizens to produce, store and share their own renewable energy as part of energy communities. Under the next multiannual financial framework 2028-2034, the Commission has proposed that the national and regional partnership plans need to foster ‘the attractiveness of territories to support the right to stay’, including support for ‘territorial services and infrastructure’. [1] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2019/944/oj/eng. [2] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32019R0941. [3] https://energy.ec.europa.eu/publications/action-plan-affordable-energy-unlocking-true-value-our-energy-union-secure-affordable-efficient-and_en. [4] COM/2026/115 final.”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• 2025-11-04 “E-004344/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Ribera on behalf of the European Commission 1. Support that fulfils the conditions of the Fisheries de minimis regulation 1 is deemed not to entail State aid and no prior notification and approval by the Commission is needed. It is therefore up to the Member State to activate the use of the de minimis support. 2. The Commission has enforcement powers to ensure that the State aid rules are respected. However, it is for the Member States to design the State aid policy and decide which situations require State aid support and when to grant this support, provided that the relevant provisions and general principles of EU law are respected 2 . 3. The Greek European Maritime Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF) programme provides key support for the resilience and competitiveness of the fisheries sector and coastal communities. This includes a wide range of activities, such as diversifying activities to support income, fishing tourism, modernising fleets, mitigating impacts from climate change, invasive species, enhancing fishers' skills and income possibilities through training. Moreover, under the EMFAF legal framework projects related to small-scale fishing may be supported at an aid intensity of up to 100%. The Commission works with Greece to ensure its EMFAF programme meets sector-specific needs, with the Greek Managing Authority being responsible for providing EMFAF support for projects aligning with the national priorities. Aid to make good damage caused by exceptional occurrences or for temporary cessation of fishing activities can also be granted under the Guidelines for State aid in the fishery and aquaculture sector 3 . If it were to be concluded that the extensive pollution incident was due to a natural disaster, aid can also be granted under the Fisheries Block Exemption Regulation 4 . 1 Commission Regulation (EU) No 717/2014 of 27 June 2014 on the application of Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to de minimis aid in the fishery and aquaculture sector, as amended (OJ L 190 28.6.2014, p. 45). 2 Judgment of the Court of Justice of 23 January 2019, Fallimento Traghetti del Mediterraneo, C-387/17, EU:C:2019:51, paragraph 66. 3 Communication from the Commission Guidelines for State aid in the fishery and aquaculture sector 2023/C 107/01 (OJ C 107, 23.3.2023, p. 1). 4 Commission Regulation (EU) 2022/2473 of 14 December 2022 declaring certain categories of aid to undertakings active in the production, processing and marketing of fishery and aquaculture products compatible with the internal market in application of Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (OJ L 327, 21.12.2022, p. 82).”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries · Funding for fisheries and aquaculture
• 2025-11-04 “E-004343/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission Exceptional support under Article 219 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 1 may be granted, at the request of the Member State concerned, to address market disturbances. No request to activate such provisions to support olive producers was submitted, to date, by the national authorities. The Commission stands ready to provide technical and administrative support upon request of the Member State. Specific support can be provided under Greece’s Strategic Plan 2023-2027 2 , amongst others for investments in irrigation and investments aiming at the restoration of agricultural potential following catastrophic events. It is up to the Managing Authority to allocate funding to such interventions. 1 Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2013/1308/2024-11-08). 2 https://www.agrotikianaptixi.gr/category/sskap-2023-2027/sskap-egkrisi-tropopoiiseis/.”
  EU policy on water management · Agricultural funding
• 2025-11-04 “E-004342/2025 Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the European Commission The Commission is fully committed to protecting EU industries from unfair competition from imports. At present, the EU has over 220 trade defence measures in place, including – since 2008 – anti-dumping measures on imports of prepared or preserved citrus fruits from China 1 , currently under expiry review. The Commission conducts investigations where evidence is received from any affected EU industry of injury suffered from dumped and/or subsidised imports and that action is warranted. The peach compote industry is invited to contact the Commission’s trade defence services 2 to discuss the issues of concern. The Commission imposes anti-dumping and/or anti-subsidy measures once an investigation has found that injurious dumping or subsidisation is taking place, and it is in the EU interest to do so. Such measures can be subject to review and can be maintained for as long as necessary to ensure the protection of an industry from unfairly traded imports. 1 http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2020/1534/2021-09-07. 2 https://policy.trade.ec.europa.eu/contacts/trade-defence-enquiries_en.”
  Trade relations with China · Import of agri-food products in the EU
• 2025-11-02 “E-004290/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The Commission has not been made aware of specific issues related to the Evros silkworm farmers. The Commission monitors the payments made under the Common Agricultural Policy Strategic Plan (CSP) 1 . Amongst others, the CSP provides for coupled income support (CIS) for silkworms of EUR 321 195.00 per claim year. For claim years 2023 and 2024, the amounts of EUR 169 367.00 2 and EUR 161 862.50 3 were paid respectively as CIS for silkworm farmers. It is the responsibility of the Member States to ensure that payments are disbursed to the beneficiaries in full and within the payment deadlines as laid down by Union law 4 . Payments outside the deadlines lead to proportionate reductions from EU reimbursement to the Member States of up to 100%. The Commission does not have the competence to activate exceptional support measures or controls in areas affected by mismanagement or delays in payments. 1 https://www.agrotikianaptixi.gr/egkrisi-2is-tropopoiisis-ss-kap/. 2 https://www.agrotikianaptixi.gr/4i-synedriasi-epitropis-parakolouthisis-ss-kap-10-dekemvriou-2024-kavala/. 3 https://www.agrotikianaptixi.gr/6i-synedriasi-epitropis-parakolouthisis-ss-kap-11-noemvriou-2025alexandroupoli/. 4 Article 38, Article 44 and Article 59 of Regulation (EU) 2021/2116 - http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/2116/oj.”
  Agricultural funding · Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1)
• 2025-10-30 “E-004276/2025 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission Wild horses are not explicitly listed under the Habitats Directive 1 and currently the Commission does not plan to issue interpretative guidance or amend the relevant regulations. Where negative effects on biodiversity arise from wild horse populations, it is for the national competent authorities to take appropriate actions to mitigate these effects and adopt sustainable management measures, considering animal welfare. To tackle the challenges posed by wild horse populations effectively and support initiatives related to monitoring, sterilisation, feeding, and protecting affected areas, Member States are encouraged to explore available financial tools, like the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development 2 and the EU programme for the environment and climate action 3 . 1 Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora. OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, pp. 7–50. 2 https://commission.europa.eu/funding-tenders/find-funding/eu-funding-programmes/european-agriculturalfund-rural-development-eafrd_en. 3 https://cinea.ec.europa.eu/programmes/life_en.”
  Nature protection and restoration in the EU
• 2025-10-30 “E-004277/2025 Answer given by Mr Jørgensen on behalf of the European Commission The EU has set up a comprehensive framework to scale up renewable hydrogen, with binding consumption targets for industry and transport 1 , support for dedicated infrastructure and a well-functioning hydrogen market 2 . The Commission is working with Member States on implementing this framework. Financial incentives are also in place, including with the Innovation Fund under the European Hydrogen Bank, Horizon Europe 3 , and the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF). Under CEF, the Commission allocated EUR 5.4 million to the Greek Hydrogen Backbone H2DRIA project in 2024 for preliminary studies. Once finalised, the project will be eligible to apply for CEF funding for construction. Other hydrogen projects in Greece, such as receiving terminals, storage facilities and electrolysers, can also apply to be included in the next Union list of Projects of Common Interest (PCIs) and Projects of Mutual Interest (PMIs). PCI status makes the project eligible for CEF funding and supports development through faster permitting. The Commission supports EU’s electrolyser competitiveness and production through various measures. The new Clean Hydrogen Implementation Working Group under the SET Plan is aligning European, national and private clean-energy Research & Innovation (R&I) investments. At European level, R&I is channelled via the Clean Hydrogen Joint Undertaking 4 , which manages an R&I programme with EUR 1 billion support plus EUR 200 million for Hydrogen Valleys such as the Trieres project. Further support is provided through the European Innovation Council 5 . Important Projects of Common European Interest, including EU electrolyser factories, receive state aid for hydrogen. The Net Zero Industry Act supports European content in auctions and public procurement. 1 Directive (EU) 2018/2001. 2 Directive (EU) 2024/1788 and Regulation (EU) 2024/1789. 3 https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-opencalls/horizon-europe_en. 4 https://european-union.europa.eu/institutions-law-budget/institutions-and-bodies/search-all-eu-institutions-andbodies/clean-hydrogen-joint-undertaking_en. 5 https://eic.ec.europa.eu/index_en.”
  EU energy infrastructure integration · Low-carbon hydrogen · EU industrial funding
• 2025-10-30 “E-004275/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Séjourné on behalf of the European Commission The Postal Services Directive 1 requires Member States to ensure that users enjoy the right to a permanent provision of a postal universal service at all points of the territory. However, the Directive does not specify the exact number or location of branches, the determination of which is a national competence. The Greek national postal regulatory authority has informed the Commission that Hellenic Post has postponed closures in all non-urban areas and that discussions with Hellenic Post are underway. The Commission has announced in the Single Market Strategy 2 that the regulatory framework for postal services including the Directive will be revised and a new EU Delivery Act is envisaged for the second half of 2026 3 . A call for evidence 4 closed on 14 November 2025 and a public consultation will be launched in mid-December 2025 to enable stakeholders to provide feedback on the future regulatory framework including issues to which the Honorable Member refers to in his question. Under the principle of shared management running Cohesion Policy funds, the project selection and implementation fall under the mere responsibility of the Member States. It should be noted that maintenance costs cannot be financed. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:01997L0067-20080227. 2 https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/publications/single-market-our-european-home-market-uncertainworld_en. 3 https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/strategy-documents/commission-workprogramme/commission-work-programme-2026_en. 4 https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/14821-New-EU-Delivery-Act-EU-toreform-postal-rules_en.”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• 2025-10-23 “P-004180/2025 Answer given by Mr Várhelyi on behalf of the European Commission Vaccination in the EU against sheep and goat pox (SGP) is regulated under Regulation (EU) 2016/429 1 and Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/361 2 . The Member States vaccination plans must comply with these rules. Any temporary restrictions to intra-EU trade due to SGP outbreaks or vaccination, including risk mitigation measures enabling safe trade (e.g. milk heat treatment) and their duration, are defined in relevant EU rules adopted under the EU animal health legal framework. These rules are being updated and a new Annex to Regulation (EU) 2023/361 on SGP is being developed to specify risk mitigating measures and their duration for milk and milk products 3 . Meanwhile if a Member State decides to vaccinate, the Commission will adopt a decision establishing risk mitigating measures in line with the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH) 4 international standards and based on the treatments provided under Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687 5 . All measures and restrictions will be lifted as soon as the country demonstrates absence of virus circulation. The Commission maintains regular contact with Member States through the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed with information publicly available on its website 6 . Furthermore, it regularly shares updates on the epidemiological situation, the animal health legislation, its amendments and implementation with third countries via information notes, and with stakeholders during the meetings of the Animal Health Advisory Committee 7 and the civil dialogue group for animal production 8 . 1 OJ L 84, 31.3.2016, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/429/oj. 2 OJ L 52, 20.2.2023, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2023/361/oj. 3 https://food.ec.europa.eu/animals/animal-health/expert-group-animal-health_en. 4 https://www.woah.org/en/home/. 5 OJ L 174, 3.6.2020, pp. 64-139, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2020/687/oj. 6 https://food.ec.europa.eu/horizontal-topics/committees/paff-committees/animal-health-and-welfare_en. 7 https://food.ec.europa.eu/animals/animal-health/animal-health-advisory-committee_en. 8 https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/common-agricultural-policy/cap-overview/committees-and-expert-groups/civildialogue-groups_en.”
  Animal diseases prevention and management in the EU · Export of EU agri-food products
• 2025-10-22 “E-004148/2025 Answer given by Ms Kos on behalf of the European Commission The Commission expects Türkiye, as a candidate country and Council of Europe member, to respect media freedom and freedom of expression. These principles must be upheld by Türkiye, which has committed to aligning with the EU acquis, the European standards and values. They should apply to all journalists – Turkish or foreign. The Commission closely follows the situation of media freedom in Türkiye and provides regular assessments and recommendations in its annual reports. In its 2025 Enlargement report on Türkiye 1 , the Commission stressed the backsliding in the area of freedom of expression, which restrained the environment for journalists and media professionals in Türkiye, particularly through arbitrary arrests, detentions, prosecutions and convictions. It is crucial that journalists can do their job free of any threat of violence, harassment or intimidation to ensure that citizens have access to diverse and reliable information. The Commission has underlined on numerous occasions that Türkiye should guarantee a safe, pluralistic, and independent media environment, enabling journalists to operate without fear of reprisals, censorship or undue pressure. 1 https://enlargement.ec.europa.eu/turkiye-report-2025_en.”
  EU-Turkey relations
• 2025-10-15 “E-004045/2025 Answer given by Mr Dombrovskis on behalf of the European Commission 1. Greece has so far received more than 50% of its Recovery and Resilience Fund (RRF) allocation, more than the average across the EU Member States 1 . By end October 2025, EUR 9.94 billion had been disbursed to Greece in grants (55% of the total grant allocation) and EUR 11.4 billion in loans (64% of the total loans allocation). An additional EUR 2.1 billion is expected to be disbursed still this year, following the positive assessment by the Commission of the 6 th payment request for grants, which will bring the total grant disbursement to 66.1% of the total grant allocation. 2. The Commission closely monitors progress with the implementation of the recovery and resilience plans (RRP) in all Member States. The most common reasons for delays across all Member States, including Greece, are changes in external circumstances, such as increased inflation and supply disruptions, legal and practical difficulties arising from the implementation of measures, and delays related to public procurement 2 . Greece’s allocation under the RRF amounts to almost 16% of its gross domestic product, and the Commission has been working closely with the Greek authorities to facilitate the absorption of these funds and the timely completion of projects. 3. In its Communication ‘NextGenerationEU – The road to 2026’ 3 , the Commission has provided guidance to support Member States in planning ahead for the submission of the last payment requests in 2026, emphasising the importance of streamlining their recovery and resilience plans. As many Member States still need to fulfil a significant number of milestones and targets, efforts are on-going to simplify the RRPs and adhere to the established timelines, while complying with all requirements of the RRF Regulation 4 . 1 COM(2025) 637 final – Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation of the Recovery and Resilience Facility. 2 European Court of Auditors, Special report on Absorption of funds from the Recovery and Resilience Facility (2024). 3 COM(2025) 310 final/2 – NextGenerationEU – The road to 2026. 4 Regulation (EU) 2021/241 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 February 2021 establishing the Recovery and Resilience Facility, OJ L 57, 18.2.2021, p. 17.”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• 2025-10-15 “E-004044/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission Based on an exclusive competence of the European Union (Art. 3 Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union), the Commission pursues conservation of marine biological resources under the Common Fisheries Policy Regulation (1380/2013) 1 (CFP). Decisions to prohibit or limit certain fishing techniques in marine protected areas must be taken in that context and consider the type of fisheries, the characteristics of the area and the impact on marine ecosystems. Case-by-case assessments are needed to determine where and how less harmful techniques are needed to achieve the conservation objectives of marine protected areas. This allows to address the issue without disproportionately impacting fishing communities and is in line with the European Ocean Pact 2 . Under both the Birds Directive (2009/147/EC) 3 and Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC) 4 , Member States must protect ecosystems via the designation and management of protected sites. If the conservation of these sites necessitates regulating fishing activity, fisheries conservation measures in marine protected areas can be adopted by Member States in waters under their sovereignty or jurisdiction and so long as other Member States with a direct management interest in the fishery concerned are not affected. If other Member States are affected, Art. 11 and 18 of the CFP Regulation requires them to submit joint recommendation on measures to be adopted by the Commission. Finally, the Commission has recently published guidance 5 on the application of the Habitats Directive and the Birds Directive in relation to marine fishing activities. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2013/1380/oj/eng. 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52025DC0281. 3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2009/147/oj/eng. 4 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/1992/43/oj?eliuri=eli%3Adir%3A1992%3A43%3Aoj&locale=en. 5 https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/7557c784-9f37-11f0-97c8-01aa75ed71a1/language-en.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries · Funding for fisheries and aquaculture
• 2025-10-14 “E-004028/2025 Answer given by Mr Jørgensen on behalf of the European Commission The Commission takes good note of the issues raised by the Honourable Member. On 3 November 2025, Greece submitted to the Commission a proposal to revise its Recovery and Resilience Plan (RRP), as last amended in June 2025. The Commission will examine this proposal in the coming period, in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2021/241 1 , including whether the reasons put forward justify an amendment to the Plan. While this assessment is ongoing, the Commission cannot comment on the content of the submission or on specific proposals concerning the inclusion or exclusion of measures. The Commission recognises that the tight implementation deadlines under the Recovery and Resilience Facility (August 2026) may justify decisions by Member States to remove or rescope measures where implementation risks are high, provided this is due to objective circumstances 2 . Such amendments must still meet the Article 19 assessment criteria 3 and maintain the overall goals and level of ambition of the Greek RRP. In parallel to the ongoing revision process of the Greek RRP, and in particularly relevant for investment measures that may be removed or downscaled for various objective circumstances, the Commission encourages Greece to also use complementary EU instruments, such as the structural funds and the social climate fund, to continue supporting vulnerable consumers and energy community initiatives. Furthermore, the Commission invites the national authorities to ensure the meaningful participation of local authorities and civil society organisations, where relevant, in the design and governance of such programmes, to facilitate transparency, inclusiveness and timely delivery, and preserve the social and territorial objectives of the energy transition. 1 OJ L 57, 18.2.2021, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/241/oj. 2 In line with Article 21 of Regulation (EU) 2021/241. 3 Article 19 of Regulation (EU) 2021/241.”
  Energy (green transition) · EU expenditure on social policy
• 2025-09-24 “E-003707/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The specific project of Tsikalariou dam in Naxos is supported by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD). The EAFRD is implemented in shared management with the national authorities. The implementation of the project falls under the responsibility of the Member State. Under the Greek Recovery and Resilience Plan’s (RRP) measure 16285 supporting ‘Investments in the national irrigation network through Public Private Partnership schemes’, Greece committed to boost the supply and quality of irrigation water and to rationalise its consumption through the construction of irrigation networks infrastructure and a reform of the institutional, organisational and operational framework of the collective irrigation networks. The Commission services in charge of the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) are available to examine together with the Greek RRF Agency whether the irrigation network in Naxos could benefit of the support available under this RRP measure. To ensure effective and timely use of the available tools under the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), the Commission services provide technical guidance to Member States through regular communication. The Commission can also encourage Member States to make full use of the available funding opportunities and technical assistance. However, the day-to-day management of investments financed by the CAP, including water infrastructure projects, falls under the responsibility of the relevant national authorities.”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• 2025-09-24 “E-003706/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 1. A detailed list of actions to tackle sheep and goat pox (SGP) in every Member States is not currently available. Preventive measures can be supported through the publicly available Common Agriculture Policy (CAP) Strategic Plans (CSPs). Exceptional EU support 1 may also be granted to cover market losses incurred by farmers located in areas under movement restrictions by veterinary measures. Support can also be granted under the Agricultural de minimis Regulation 2 , under the Agricultural Block Exemption Regulation (ABER) 3 or the Agricultural State aid Guidelines 4 . 2. The Greek authorities communicated to the Commission under SA.118530 (2025/XA) a State aid scheme under the ABER 5 , based on the Ministerial Decision 59322/26923/5-3-2025 addressing also SGP 6 . Greece has not submitted related SGP requests for Measure 23 under the rural development programme or for exceptional market support measures under the Common Market Organisation. In addition, risk management, investments in biosecurity and agricultural restoration under the CSP, are tools that have not been used yet by Greece to tackle SGP. 3. To ensure effective and timely use of the above-mentioned instruments, the Commission is continuously providing guidance and technical support to Member States through regular communication. The Commission encourages Member States to make full use of the available financial and technical assistance available under the CSPs and the State aid rules, to protect the agricultural sector and prevent permanent production losses. However, the final decision on the allocation and implementation of these tools lies with the Member States. 1 Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 671). 2 Commission Regulation (EU) No 1408/2013 of 18 December 2013 on the application of Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to de minimis aid in the agriculture sector, as amended (OJ L 352, 24.12.2013, p. 9). 3 Commission regulation (EU) 2022/2472 of 14 December 2022 declaring certain categories of aid in the agricultural and forestry sectors and in rural areas compatible with the internal market in application of Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (OJ L 327 21.12.2022, p. 1). 4 Communication from the Commission Guidelines for State aid in the agricultural and forestry sectors and in rural areas 2022/C 485/01, C/2022/9120, OJ C 485, 21.12.2022, p. 1–90, as amended by Communication from the Commission correcting the Guidelines for State aid in the agricultural and forestry sectors and in rural areas, C/2024/1902, OJ C 1902, 5.3.2024. 5 https://competition-cases.ec.europa.eu/cases/SA.118530. 6 Government Gazette 1011/B/2025.”
  Animal diseases prevention and management in the EU · Agricultural funding
• 2025-09-10 “E-003516/2025 Answer given by Mr Serafin on behalf of the European Commission The Commission enforces EU law as the guardian of the Treaties, monitoring Member States' compliance. Between 2019 and 2025, it imposed EUR 226 million in financial sanctions against Greece for seven infringement cases. The Court of Justice of the EU imposes sanctions when a Member State fails to comply with a ruling (Article 260(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU)) or transposition obligations (Article 260(3) TFEU). Sanctions may include lump sums and daily penalties to incentivise compliance. The Commission proposes penalty amounts, but the Court decides the final figures. Even if a Member State complies during proceedings, the Commission maintains its claim for the lump sum. The Commission supports Member States in their implementation efforts through various compliance promotion activities, including new tools such as the transposition roadmap. The Commission's enforcement activities and Member States’ compliance with EU law can be followed through interactive maps and customisable graphs 1 . . For more details on the history of a case or to access the full database of infringement decisions, the infringement decisions' register 2 is open for consultation. 1 https://ec.europa.eu/implementing-eu-law/home/en. 2 https://ec.europa.eu/atwork/applying-eu-law/infringementsproceedings/infringement_decisions/?langCode=EN.”
  Transparency requirements of EU institutions · Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• 2025-09-03 “E-003385/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The EU has a strategic interest in a stable and secure environment in the Mediterranean and is firmly committed to ensuring that all countries respect the jurisdiction, sovereignty and sovereign rights of EU Member States, in accordance with international law, including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and customary international law. In this regard, coastal States have sovereignty over their territorial sea, including for taking necessary steps to prevent non-innocent passage. They may adopt laws and regulations related to innocent passage as per Article 21 UNCLOS. While the primary responsibility for the control of fishing activities in Member States’ waters falls on their authorities, the European Fisheries Control Agency (EFCA) coordinates Member States’ fisheries inspection activities in the Mediterranean through a dedicated Joint Deployment Plan, where the EFCA patrol vessel participates. It provides technical support to interested Member States through satellite monitoring and other activities.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2025-09-03 “E-003384/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission When planning the exceptional temporary support to farmers, forest holders and Small and Medium Enterprises, particularly affected by natural disasters, provided in accordance with Article 6a of Regulation (EU) 2020/2220 1 (so called Measure 23) the Member States were required to target the support to beneficiaries who were most affected by natural disasters, by determining eligibility conditions on the basis of available evidence (paragraph 4 of that Article). This was to ensure that the support would be for the benefit of the farmers who had suffered the most, also taking into account the limited available resources. The targeting of the support and its justification has been included in the relevant Rural Development Programme (RDP) and approved by the Commission. As different types of natural disasters have occurred across Europe, and as the structure and characteristics of the agricultural sector vary between the Member States, the groups of beneficiaries who were most affected by natural disasters, identified by the Member States as recipients of the aid granted under Measure 23, may vary as well. As laid down in paragraph 5 of Article 6a, the support has to be paid by 31 December 2025, based on applications for support approved by the competent authority by 30 June 2025. It is therefore not possible to change the targeting of the support or approve new applications for support now. 1 Regulation (EU) 2020/2220 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 December 2020 laying down certain transitional provisions for support from the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and from the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) in the years 2021 and 2022 and amending Regulations (EU) No 1305/2013, (EU) No 1306/2013 and (EU) No 1307/2013 as regards resources and application in the years 2021 and 2022 and Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 as regards resources and the distribution of such support in respect of the years 2021 and 2022.”
  Agricultural funding · Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1)
• 2025-07-02 “E-002699/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Fitto on behalf of the European Commission The Commission does not monitor the overall progress or effectiveness of the Greek AEGIS programme on civil protection, as it is primarily a national initiative managed by Greek authorities. However, the Commission follows up the implementation of specific components of the programme that are funded by the Cohesion Policy funds 1 , in line with the principle of shared management, as well as the investments implemented under the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) Plan (RRP) 2 . The Greek RRP contains a set of measures to improve civil protection. One of those measures related to the implementation of Regional Civil Protection Centres (PEKEPP) was removed from the RRP during its last revision adopted by the Council on 17 July 2025 3 , on the basis of Article 21 of the RRF Regulation 4 as no longer feasible within the RRF timeline due to objective circumstances. The Greek authorities provided the required justifications and evidence to this end. To note that the RRF only co-funded this measure at around one-fifth of its total estimated budget. The Union Civil Protection Mechanism (UCPM), through its capacity building tools, is cofinancing disaster resilience projects targeting local authorities and communities, including to Greek entities. One recent example of UCPM funded projects is ROSES 5 , coordinated by a Greek university, with a focus on strengthening risk awareness in Western Balkans crossborder areas by supporting local authorities and communities in disaster risk management. Another action is FIRE-SCENE 6 , led by Spain with the involvement of a Greek university, which is developing tools for wildfire risk governance in the Mediterranean, with strong participation from local stakeholders. 1 In the Programming Period 2021-2027, the Programme “Civil Protection” contributes with a total support of EUR 713 million. 2 https://commission.europa.eu/business-economy-euro/economic-recovery/recovery-and-resiliencefacility/country-pages/greeces-recovery-and-resilience-plan_en. 3 ST 11101/2025 4 Regulation (EU) 2021/241 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 February 2021 establishing the Recovery and Resilience Facility. 5 https://civil-protection-knowledge-network.europa.eu/projects/roses. 6 https://civil-protection-knowledge-network.europa.eu/projects/fire-scene.”
  Climate efforts
• 2025-07-02 “E-002700/2025 Answer given by Mr Várhelyi on behalf of the European Commission Control measures at EU level for sheep pox and goat pox (SGP) are laid in Regulation (EU) 2016/429 1 and Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687 2 . They include the killing of all animals in the affected establishments along with the creation of restricted zones around the outbreaks. Additional measures for Greece are set out in Commission Implementing Decision 2024/2207 3 . Member States may decide to implement vaccination against SGP as an additional measure in line with Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/361 4 . Specific EU measures for SGP are fine tuned in each affected Member State to be best adapted to the local epidemiological situation, considering the size of the area affected, the number of outbreaks, the structure of the livestock sector, the results of epidemiological investigations and other relevant information. The Commission is constantly evaluating the above measures in cooperation with Member States to be risk based, proportionate, and best adapted to each epidemiological event, ensuring compliance with the EU legal framework, while safeguarding both animal health and the internal market. The Commission has regular contact on SGP with all affected Member States and offers technical support via the EU reference laboratory for SGP and visits of the EU Veterinary Emergency Team (Greece in May 2025). Certain control measures are eligible for EU co-financing up to 30%, according to Regulation (EC) No 2021/690 5 and Annex 3 of Commission Implementing Decision C(2023) 8926 6 . EU financial support for SGP surveillance is also available in high risk areas through two cofinanced programmes 7 . The EU SGP vaccine bank can ship up to 500.000 doses of vaccines free of charge. No request has been received to date from Greece. 1 http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/429/oj. 2 http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2020/687/oj. 3 http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec_impl/2024/2207/oj. 4 http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2023/361/oj. 5 http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/690/oj. 6 C(2023) 8926 final, Commission Implementing Decision of 21.12.2023 on the financing of the Programme for the internal market, competitiveness of enterprises, including small and medium-sized enterprises, the area of plants, animals, food and feed, and European Statistics and the adoption of the work programme for 2024-2027 https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/e6150e32-3fa5-4276-923ba36faf4fec1e_en?filename=C_2023_8926_F1_COMMISSION_IMPLEMENTING_DECISION_EN_V3_P1_31 19489.PDF. 7 Through the Transboundary Animal Diseases (TADs) programmes (implemented in Greece, Bulgaria) and the T.H.R.A.C.E programme (Trans-boundary High Risk Area Coordinated Epidemio-surveillance programme) in place since 2013 (Greece, Bulgaria, Türkiye).”
  Animal diseases prevention and management in the EU
• 2025-06-18 “E-002458/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Fitto on behalf of the European Commission 1. As regards pillar II of the Just Transition Mechanism (JTM) the project ‘Kozani 230 megawatt photovoltaic’, which is receiving EUR 40 million, consists of setting up three solar photovoltaic powerplants, of which the first is already operational. The European Investment Bank (EIB) also finances another investment worth EUR 195 million, to be partially implemented in the region, which supports the development of photovoltaic plants and battery energy storage systems. Concerning pillar III of the JTM, one project is being implemented in the region – ‘Socioeconomic Transition of Western Macedonia 1 ’. The project comprises 15 sub-projects in five different areas of investments, including energy efficiency, renewable energy sources integration, measures upgrading buildings or urban renewal. The project is implemented by the region, acting as coordinator for six municipalities. The EU grant and the EIB loan for the project amount to EUR 14 million and EUR 58 million, respectively. The project started on 1 November 2023 and is due to end on 31 October 2026. 15 permanent jobs are expected to be created. 2. The EIB Advisory is assisting Western Macedonia with the preparation of a second investment worth around EUR 110 million. The envisaged loan scheme includes various types of investments across sectors, such as transport, energy efficiency, education, environment, health and digitalisation. 1 https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/portal/screen/opportunities/projectsdetails/44773066/101137296/JTM?order=DESC&pageNumber=1&pageSize=10&sortBy=es_SortDate&framew orkProgramme=44773066.”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• 2025-06-18 “E-002459/2025 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission The Commission has not received any official information from the Greek authorities regarding the fire in Langada, Kefalonia, and its environmental impact. The Waste Framework Directive 1 lays down the principles of the waste hierarchy Member States shall follow. Waste that cannot be prevented should be prepared for reuse or recycled and only as a last resort sent to landfills or incineration 2 . The Commission monitors and verifies Member State compliance with the applicable waste management targets. The Early Warning Reports published in 2023 concluded that Greece relies heavily on landfilling and significant illegal dumping rates and insufficient biowaste treatment capacity 3 . The Commission has been working to support Greece in tackling these issues on two different strands: it has provided technical support and advice; and where this fails, it has taken enforcement actions where it established that the problem was systemic. On 2 December 2014 4 the Court of Justice of the EU condemned Greece for not having executed its first judgment in Commission v Greece on illegal landfills 5 . The Commission envisages to continue applying this compliance strategy in order to minimise illegal landfilling and its negative impacts on human health and the environment. In parallel, Greece has allocated under the Cohesion Policy 2021-2027 EUR 911 million 6 to improve waste management practices and reduce landfill dependency, with a particular focus on waste prevention, recycling and the circular economy. 1 Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on waste and repealing certain Directives, OJ L 312, 22.11.2008, p. 3‐30, as amended by Directive (EU) 2018/851 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May, OJ L 150, 14.6.2018, p. 109–140. 2 Article 4 of Directive 2008/98/EC. 3 https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/b7434520-0350-11ee-87ec-01aa75ed71a1/language-el. 4 ruling C-378/13: https://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=157398&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode= lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=38646. 5 C 502/03, EU:C:2005:592. 6 https://cohesiondata.ec.europa.eu/2021-2027-Categorisation/2021-2027-Planned-finances-detailedcategorisation/hgyj-gyin/about_data.”
  Environmental crimes and justice · Air quality policy
• 2025-05-26 “E-002094/2025 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission The Commission does not, at the moment, have any programme dedicated to monitoring the phenomenon of fir and plane trees die-back in Member States. Nevertheless, the Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) is working on climate resilience of forests, as shown with the recent JRC publications 1,2,3,4 . Several funding tools are available to address the issue, for instance rural development forest measures under the Common Agricultural Policy 5 or the EU programme for the environment and climate action 6 . Under Horizon Europe 7 , a co-funded partnership on Forests and Forestry for a Sustainable Future is proposed, where Member States are encouraged to join. Within the Cohesion policy 8 , the Greek Environment and Climate Change programme includes the implementation of plans for the prevention and management of climate change related forest risks, such as wildfires and diseases. The Commission proposed to set up an early-warning system for forest disturbances as part of the proposal for a Regulation on a monitoring framework for resilient European forests 9 , currently with the European Parliament and the Council. This would lay the necessary foundation for cooperation with the Member States on more comparable and higher quality monitoring of these negative impacts. On-the-ground interventions remain in the remit of the national authorities. Lastly, the Commission has started preparing a European Climate Adaptation Plan, which will set out a comprehensive framework and plan for action to support EU countries on climate resilience and preparedness. Expected to be adopted during the second half of 2026, this initiative will be developed with all relevant stakeholders through an open and participatory process. 1 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-04959-9. 2 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378023000420. 3 https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC126966. 4 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41597-025-04408-y. 5 https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/cap-my-country/sustainability/forestry/forestry-explained_en#financialsupport-for-forestry-in-the-cap. 6 LIFE: https://cinea.ec.europa.eu/programmes/life_en. 7 https://commission.europa.eu/funding-tenders/find-funding/eu-funding-programmes/horizon-europe_en. 8 https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/2021-2027_en. 9 https://environment.ec.europa.eu/publications/proposal-regulation-forest-monitoring-framework_en.”
  EU policy on infrastructure for preventing climate-related disasters (floods, droughts, extreme weather etc.) · Nature protection and restoration in the EU · Management of EU forests
• 2025-05-26 “E-002095/2025 Answer given by Mr Jørgensen on behalf of the European Commission The Commission will put forward a European Affordable Housing Plan and propose an EU strategy for sustainable tourism early 2026 with an extensive stakeholder consultation in 2025. In respect of funding and financing, various EU funds are already available to support social and affordable housing 1 and student housing. These funds and programmes include the Recovery and Resilience Facility, the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund Plus, the InvestEU, the Horizon Europe, the Technical Support Instrument, the Single Market Programme, the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund, and the Social Climate Fund. In addition, the Cohesion Fund and the Just Transition Fund also support the investments in the energy efficiency of housing stock. To assist Member States, the Commission has published a toolkit that provides an overview of available EU funding opportunities in housing, too 2 . On 1 April 2025, the Commission proposed a mid-term review to modernise Cohesion policy – including flexibilities and incentives to encourage Member States and regions to double their investments in affordable housing under Cohesion policy - and adopted a new financial instrument model for affordable housing (for combining Cohesion policy funding with resources from the European Investment Bank and other financial institutions) 3 . Actions under regional programmes are decided and managed by the respective managing authorities of Member States. In line of the principle of subsidiarity, whether a preparedness mechanism the Honourable Member refers to is to be set up is subject to the decision and organisation of national, regional and local authorities. 1 For example new social and affordable housing, and refurbishment of old housing stock, blocks of flats, etc. 2 Social Housing and beyond, https://european-social-fund-plus.ec.europa.eu/en/news/commission-launchestoolkit-support-social-housing-member-states. 3 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_25_929/ - Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulations (EU) 2021/1058 and (EU) 2021/1056 as regards specific measures to address strategic challenges in the context of the mid-term review (COM(2025) 123). Currently, Greece has allocated some EUR 751 million for energy efficiency interventions in residences under the national Programmes ‘Environment and Climate Change 2021-2027’ and Just Transition Programme as well as under some regional programmes.”
  EU strategy for tourism development · Cohesion and rural funding
• 2025-04-28 “E-001697/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The Commission ensures, within the remit of its competence, the respect of fundamental rights enshrined in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (the Charter), including the right to property 1 . According to its Article 51(1) the provisions of the Charter are addressed to Member States only when they are implementing EU law. The Commission is not responsible for monitoring the application of national laws for matters, such as property rights, which do not fall within EU competence. Should there be indications of a potential breach of EU law, the Commission will examine the matter carefully and act accordingly. Similarly, the Commission has no competence to directly regulate land use in Member States. However, as announced in the Vision for Agriculture and Food, the Commission will work towards establishing an ‘EU Observatory for Agricultural Land’, starting with a pilot project in 2025. It will enhance transparency and cooperation in land transactions and transfers of land use rights, price trends and market behaviour, changes in land use, and loss of agricultural and natural land. Small property owners in rural areas can benefit from - among other things - Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) support, provided they comply with the CAP eligibility conditions and the support serves the CAP’s objectives (which cover a range of economic, environmental and social issues). One of these objectives includes promoting local development in rural areas. For instance, CAP income support can specifically target small farms. The CAP can also support particular investments and/or business development if so decided by the Member State, and this can be targeted at smaller entities where appropriate. 1 Article17 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• 2025-04-24 “E-001667/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Fitto on behalf of the European Commission 1. In 2021-2027, at least EUR 14.8 billion from Cohesion Policy funds is allocated to support islands, targeting competitiveness, green transition, better connectivity, housing, sustainable tourism and inclusive growth. Member States may also use these funds for disaster risk management, including flood prevention, response and resilience measures in islands, based on the national or subnational climate risk assessments. Greece, in particular, allocates EUR 726 million in public funding for flood risk prevention and management, including in insular areas, under the Cohesion Policy programmes. As per the shared management principle, national authorities are responsible for selecting and implementing projects. Furthermore, under the Greek Recovery and Resilience Plan 1 , the reform for the preparation of urban plans addresses gaps in spatial planning and land use to promote sustainable economic activity and environmental protection. 2. The Commission acknowledges the pressure from excessive tourism and construction in islands. However, the EU has no competence on construction policy. 1 https://commission.europa.eu/business-economy-euro/economic-recovery/recovery-and-resiliencefacility/country-pages/greeces-recovery-and-resilience-plan_en.”
  EU policy on urban development · EU strategy for tourism development
• 2025-04-24 “E-001668/2025 Answer given by Mr Dombrovskis on behalf of the European Commission The RRF 1 supports reforms and investments proposed by the Member States, who are responsible both for their design and their implementation. In their Recovery and Resilience Plans (RRPs), Member States explain how measures contribute to the digital transition. They are also required to assign relevant measures in their plan to a digital intervention field (IF) according to the methodology in Annex VII of the RRF Regulation 2 . Several IFs focus on the digitalisation of small and medium-sized enterprises (SME) and startups and on actions supporting digital skills development, which can benefit SMEs. Support for the digitalisation of public administration, including the regional level, are captured, too. Member States update the Commission on the implementation status of milestones and targets twice a year and the Commission assesses the fulfilment of the requirements set in the Council implementing decisions in the context of the payment requests submitted by Member States. The RRF Regulation requires Member States to report twice a year on the 100 final recipients of the largest amount of funding, which are published on the Recovery and Resilience Scoreboard. Many digital projects can also be found in the map on the Commission’s RRF website 3 . Member States are encouraged to consult and involve stakeholders in each phase – design and implementation – to ensure impactful and relevant measures. During implementation, Member States must comply with national and EU legislation, including State aid and public procurement rules. However, the RRF Regulation does not set any requirement for RRPs to benefit a specific sector or type of beneficiaries, leaving it to the Member States to identify the most appropriate ones according to their own national challenges. 1 Recovery and Resilience Facility. 2 Regulation (EU) 2021/241 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 February 2021 establishing the Recovery and Resilience Facility. 3 https://commission.europa.eu/business-economy-euro/economic-recovery/recovery-and-resiliencefacility_en#map.”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• 2025-04-24 “E-001661/2025 Answer given by Mr Tzitzikostas on behalf of the European Commission 1.The Commission acknowledges the importance of improving transport connectivity in remote and mountainous areas such as those between Arta and Karditsa. Enhancing accessibility in such regions can contribute to addressing demographic decline, fostering economic development, and promoting social and territorial cohesion - which is central to EU regional policy. 2. Sections of the Arta–Karditsa route on the trans-European transport network (TEN-T) could be eligible for EU funding under the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF). However, the envelope for the current financing period has been exhausted with the completion of the 2024 CEF call. Under the Commission’s proposal for 2028–2034 Multiannual Financial Framework, transport investments will follow a new structure that includes a revamped CEF for Transport with a provisional budget of EUR 51.5 billion. Investments may also be supported through national envelopes. Until the next budget is adopted and priorities defined, such projects could for now also be financed under the cohesion policy funds. 3. The Commission supports investment in remote and mountainous regions under the ‘Europe closer to citizens’ policy objective of Cohesion Policy. The 2021–2027 Partnership Agreement between the Commission and Greece includes priorities to improve accessibility and connectivity, promote local entrepreneurship, circular and blue economy, advance the green and digital transitions, and enhance the quality of life in rural and less-developed areas. The Commission will continue to work with national and regional authorities to ensure that available EU funds contribute to infrastructure projects that promote social cohesion, economic resilience and the green transition in such areas.”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• 2025-04-24 “E-001669/2025 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission The Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) 1 requires Greece to develop a marine strategy to achieve good environmental status in its marine waters. The strategy must cover eleven MSFD descriptors, including pressures related to marine pollution. The strategy must include a monitoring programme and a programme of measures. It is a Member State’s primary responsibility to implement EU legislation and thus take measures to reduce levels of contaminants. The latest MSFD Greek programme of measures was submitted in March 2024, two years after its due date. The Commission therefore could not assess it in time for its report 2 , which included the assessment of 17 Member States 3 . The Commission is committed to ensure a coordinated and consistent transposition of the Single-Use Plastics Directive (SUPD) 4 . The Commission has evaluated the Greek transposition of the SUPD 5 and decided to contact national authorities to clarify some aspects of the Greek legislation. The Commission provides financial incentives for public-private joint projects through its various funding programmes. The European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund 6 can be used for compensation for temporary or permanent cessation upon the fulfilment of certain requirements. Funding can also support diversification of activities and actions contributing to a good environmental status, including restoration, conservation and protection of ecosystems and biodiversity. The EU programme for the environment and climate action 7 can complement funding related to pollution. The Commission support to Member States through the MSFD common implementation strategy 8 may be revamped following the MSFD review announced in the Ocean Pact 9 and Water Resilience Initiative 10 . 1 Directive 2008/56/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 establishing a framework for community action in the field of marine environmental policy (Marine Strategy Framework Directive), OJ L 164, 25.6.2008, p. 19–40. 2 So as to comply with the Commission requirements under Article 16 of the MSFD. 3 COM(2025) 3 final, February 2025. The assessment for Greece is expected later in 2025. 4 Directive (EU) 2019/904 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 June 2019 on the reduction of the impact of certain plastic products on the environment, OJ L 155, 12.6.2019, p. 1–19. 5 Including via the Technical Regulation Information System database: https://technical-regulation-informationsystem.ec.europa.eu/en/search. 6 https://oceans-and-fisheries.ec.europa.eu/funding/emfaf_en. 7 LIFE: https://cinea.ec.europa.eu/programmes/life_en. 8 https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/marine-environment/implementation-marine-strategy-frameworkdirective_en#common-implementation-strategy. 9 https://oceans-and-fisheries.ec.europa.eu/european-ocean-pact_en. 10 https://commission.europa.eu/topics/environment/water-resilience-strategy_en.”
  Microplastics · EU ocean policy
• 2025-04-10 “E-001497/2025 Answer given by Ms Zaharieva on behalf of the European Commission Horizon Europe 1 , the European Regional Development Fund, the Just Transition Fund and the Recovery and Resilience Facility, provide research and innovation (R&I) investment opportunities for boosting innovation. In order to make the most of these opportunities, Member States are encouraged to boost their R&I potential through enhanced capacities linked to investments and reforms. The Greek R&I system has shown improvements in recent years. Greece is a ‘moderate innovator’ according to the European Innovation Scoreboard 2 , and R&D intensity has been steadily increasing over the last decade 3 . Notwithstanding this progress, Greece still faces challenges to boost its innovative ecosystem, and it would benefit from a long-term strategy for R&I investments to ensure stability of funding and enhance its R&I potential. Organisational arrangements and institutional structures for R&I can follow different pathways in Member States. R&I policy, by its very cross-cutting nature and role in several policies should adopt a ‘whole of government approach’ where actions are in close synergy and mutually beneficial with other sectoral policies, notably education policies, and therefore a close collaboration is encouraged. The Technical Support Instrument or the Horizon Policy Support Facility (PSF) 4 give Member States practical support to design, implement and evaluate reforms that enhance the quality of R&I investments, and policies. Greece used the PSF to review the R&I policy framework for the national research infrastructures and assess how they were progressing. The analysis provided clear recommendations 5 and showed that these infrastructures deserve recognition, but also further efforts and investment. 1 https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-opencalls/horizon-europe_en. 2 Greece is at 77.5% of the EU average. 2024 (EIS) European Innovation Scoreboard: provides a comparative analysis of innovation performance for EU countries, including the relative strengths and weaknesses of their national innovation systems. See: https://ec.europa.eu/assets/rtd/eis/2024/ec_rtd_eis-country-profile-el.pdf. 3 (https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/rd_e_gerdfund__custom_14033923/default/table?lang=en) . Greece: 0.72% in 2012 and 1.49% in 2023. Research and development (R&D) intensity is defined as gross domestic expenditure on R&D as a percentage of gross domestic product. EU average is 2.24% in 2023. 4 See: https://projects.research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/en/statistics/policy-support-facility. 5 EC 2023: https://projects.research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/en/statistics/policy-support-facility/psfopen/support-greece-implementation-psf-country-recommendations.”
  Research priorities within the EU · Governance of academic priorities within the EU
• 2025-04-08 “E-001432/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Fitto on behalf of the European Commission The Commission recognises the vital role of energy communities and small and mediumsized renewable energy producers for advancing the Just Transition Fund (JTF) goals. Through a dedicated call under the Just Transition Programme (JTP), an energy community 1 has already been selected for funding 2 . Under the shared management of Cohesion Policy funds, Managing Authorities define the selection criteria and manage implementation. In this context, calls for proposals may prioritise projects with secured energy connections and sufficient maturity- both essential to meeting tight JTF implementation deadlines. However, grid capacity and connection permits lie with national grid operators and fall outside the JTF Managing Authority’s remit. Small and medium-sized enterprises and energy communities benefit from EU frameworks ensuring fair, proportionate procedures under the Electricity Market Directive 2019/944 3 and the Renewable Energy Directive 2018/2001 4 . The revised Renewable Energy Directive 2023/2413 5 further accelerates permitting for small-scale projects, including for renewable self-consumers and energy communities. The Commission supports Member States with implementation and will propose a European Grid Package in 2026. Out of a total budget of EUR 1.6 billion for the JTP, some EUR 1 billion is allocated to Western Macedonia to modernize its economy, restore jobs, up-/re-skill its workforce, promote social inclusion and employment 6 and support green transition 7 . The region also receives some EUR 394 million from the regional programme Western Macedonia 8 . Member States can join the Just Transition Platform 9 and the Cohesion for Transitions Community of Practice 10 to exchange best practices and strengthen interinstitutional capacity. 1 Selected energy community in Kozani: https://eydam.gr/wpcontent/uploads/2024/10/MIS6007002_%CE%91%CF%80%CF%8C%CF%86%CE%B1%CF%83%CE%B7_% CE%A8%CE%94%CE%A6%CE%9A%CE%97-6%CE%9F%CE%A5.pdf. 2 https://eydam.gr/27-9-2023-stirixi-energeiakon-koinotiton-gia-2/. 3 Article 15 and 16 of Directive (EU) 2019/944 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 June 2019 on common rules for the internal market for electricity and amending Directive 2012/27/EU (recast). 4 Article 21 and 22 of Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources (recast). 5 Directive (EU) 2023/2413 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 October 2023 amending Directive (EU) 2018/2001, Regulation (EU) 2018/1999 and Directive 98/70/EC as regards the promotion of energy from renewable sources, and repealing Council Directive (EU) 2015/652. 6 JTF aims to support more than 20 000 unemployed persons and 8 000 persons at risk of unemployment in the areas affected by the de-carbonisation, mainly Western Macedonia and Megalopoli areas. 7 Green transition actions include energy efficiency, RES expansion, and land repurposing. 8 Though the support of the European Regional Development Fund and European Social Fund+. 9 https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/funding/just-transition-fund/just-transition-platform_en. 10 https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/policy/communities-and-networks/cohesion-4-transition_en.”
  Climate efforts
• 2025-04-02 “E-001359/2025 Answer given by Mr Tzitzikostas on behalf of the European Commission Under the Greek Recovery and Resilience Plan (RRP) 1 , the ‘Tourism Development’ 2 and ‘Upgrade Interventions for Regional Ports’ 3 measures support significant port investments aiming to extend the tourism season in Greece beyond the summer months and promote alternative forms of tourism, contributing to economic resilience, sustainable growth and social and territorial cohesion. These investment measures provide funding for infrastructures and interventions in regional ports, tourist ports and marinas. The EU Cohesion Policy also supports investments in port infrastructure to enhance access to coastal and island regions and strengthen local economies. In Greece, around EUR 228 million has been allocated through national and regional programmes to improve port facilities, aiming to boost connectivity, foster economic development in island areas, and stimulate tourism growth. In particular, funding programmes support sustainable maritime tourism such as a call for Green Transition Projects under the Interreg NEXT MED to tackle climate challenges across the Mediterranean region 4 . Under the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF), regional flagship projects 5 have been supported to strengthen the competitiveness of coastal tourism as well as to promote sustainable transport and ports in the Mediterranean. The Transition Pathway for Tourism and EU Agenda for Tourism 2030 emphasises the need to transition to a sustainable development model that includes island and coastal economies, considering that 45% of nights spent in the EU are in coastal destinations. 1 https://commission.europa.eu/business-economy-euro/economic-recovery/recovery-and-resiliencefacility/country-pages/greeces-recovery-and-resilience-plan_en. 2 measure ID: 16931. 3 measure ID: 16975. 4 https://www.interregnextmed.eu/apply-for-funding/second-call-for-proposals/. 5 https://cinea.ec.europa.eu/news-events/news/promoting-sustainable-blue-economy-emfaf-flagship-call-2021projects-year-2023-07-24_en, https://cinea.ec.europa.eu/news-events/news/new-emfaf-regional-flagship-projects-just-kicked-their-work-202310-12_en.”
  EU strategy for tourism development
• 2025-04-02 “E-001355/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The Commission monitors the implementation of Greek Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) Strategic Plan (CSP) 1 , amongst others through the monitoring committee meetings, annual performance reports and the annual review meetings. However, based on the principles of shared management applicable to the CAP, the project implementation monitoring process falls under the responsibility of the Member States, and, hence, the Commission does not have information on individual submitted applications. JASPERS cannot provide technical assistance relevant to the irrigation projects in question since JASPERS has been set up as a Cohesion Policy instrument and does not provide technical assistance in the field of agriculture. However, technical assistance support is available under the CSP. It is up to the Member States to make best use of the CSP resources allocated to technical assistance to boost the administrative readiness and speed-up the preparation of projects. The CSPs offer possibilities for interventions for land development and irrigation projects through the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) 2 . The Greek CSP contains relevant investment interventions, including projects in irrigation. It finances land projects aiming primarily at increasing the efficiency of water use in agriculture, through interventions, such as reservoirs, dams, ponds etc., and the modernisation of irrigation networks. The Commission services in charge of the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) 3 are available to examine with the Greek RRF Agency whether the irrigation network in question could benefit under the 'Investments in the national irrigation network' measure. 1 http://www.agrotikianaptixi.gr/el/keimeno-synimmena-paa/egkrisi-tropopoiiseis 2 Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 435, 6.12.2021, pp. 1-186). 3 https://commission.europa.eu/business-economy-euro/economic-recovery/recovery-and-resilience-facility_en”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• 2025-03-19 “E-001163/2025 Answer given by Ms Kos on behalf of the European Commission The arrests of Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu and many protestors give rise to questions regarding Türkiye's adherence to its long-established democratic tradition. As a Council of Europe member and EU candidate, Türkiye must uphold the highest standards in the protection of fundamental rights, respect of democratic principles and the rule of law. The rights of elected officials, as well as the right for peaceful demonstrations need to be respected. On 19 March 2025, the High Representative/Vice-President and the Commissioner for Enlargement issued a Joint Statement 1 noting that respect for fundamental rights and the rule of law are essential for the EU accession process and will continue to be an integral part of EUTürkiye relations. The President of the Commission also answered a media question with a similar message. In view of the current developments, the Commissioner for Enlargement has cancelled a visit to the Antalya Diplomatic Forum that was planned from 11 to 13 April 2025. Türkiye is a key partner for the EU and a candidate country. However, accession negotiations with Türkiye have remained at a standstill since 2018, in line with the Council Conclusions. The EU’s serious concerns about the continued deterioration of democratic standards, the rule of law, the independence of the judiciary and respect for fundamental rights have not been yet addressed as confirmed most recently by the December 2024 Council Conclusions on enlargement 2 . The issue will continue to be raised on all levels with the Turkish authorities. 1 https://enlargement.ec.europa.eu/news/joint-statement-high-representativevice-president-kallas-andcommissioner-kos-recent-events-2025-03-19_en. 2 https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-16983-2024-INIT/en/pdf.”
  EU-Turkey relations
• 2025-03-19 “E-001168/2025 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission Marathonisi island is part of the Kolpos Lagana Zakynthou (Akr. Geraki – Keri) kai nisides Marathonisi kai Pelouzo Natura 2000 site (special area of conservation GR2210002). According to Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive 1 , plans or projects likely to have a significant effect on Natura 2000 sites, either individually or in combination with other plans or projects, must be subject to an assessment of their implications for the sites. They can only be authorised if the integrity of the sites is safeguarded. When adverse effects on the integrity of a site cannot be excluded, the plan or project can exceptionally be authorised under Article 6(4) of the Directive only under certain conditions. The Commission is not aware of the building permit mentioned by the Honourable Member. Member States are primarily responsible for monitoring the application of the relevant legal provisions, including the Habitats Directive, and for taking the necessary enforcement steps. National courts are also fully competent to verify the compatibility of a permit with national and EU legislation. In its role as guardian of the Treaties, the Commission will monitor the situation and may decide to take appropriate action. The Commission aims to swiftly follow up on systemic issues involving the application of EU law in EU countries. However, one-off instances are better dealt with at national level, as long as there are available remedies, including judicial ones. In these cases, it is up to the national courts to apply and enforce citizens' rights under EU law. 1 Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7–50.”
  Nature protection and restoration in the EU
• 2025-03-10 “E-001021/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Fitto on behalf of the European Commission Greece is among the best-performing countries in the implementation of Cohesion policy programmes, placing 5th in the EU with a payment rate of 15% compared to the EU average of 8.7%. According to the CPR 1 governing Cohesion Policy funding, the implementing period extents until December 2029, allowing adequate time for continued progress. Greece has allocated some EUR 898 million among the programmes for technical assistance actions, including a dedicated Technical Assistance programme. Under this programme, some EUR 100 million is earmarked for enhancing the capacity of beneficiaries to support the effective implementation of programmes. The Commission may also provide technical assistance for institutional strengthening and administrative capacity-building, through instruments such as peer-to-peer exchanges, dissemination of best practices, and targeted expert support. Furthermore, a Member State, can request support via the Technical Support Instrument (TSI) 2 for reforms in key policy areas. Under TSI 2021, Greece received assistance to modernise the legal framework of the Public Investment Programme. Through the Structural Reform Support Programme 3 , Greece was also supported in defining its post-2020 regional development priorities and assessing the governance of European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF). Greece may submit further requests for support under the TSI 2026 cycle 4 that will be assessed based on their merit and on pre-determined criteria. Regular progress meetings and performance reporting, enables the Commission to closely track implementation and ensure the timely and efficient use of EU funds. 1 Regulation (EU) 2021/1060 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2021 laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund Plus, the Cohesion Fund, the Just Transition Fund and the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund and financial rules for those and for the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund, the Internal Security Fund and the Instrument for Financial Support for Border Management and Visa Policy. 2 Article 5 of the Regulation (EU) 2021/240 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 February 2021 establishing a Technical Support Instrument OJ L 57, 18.2.2021, p. 1–16 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, GA, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV) https://reform-support.ec.europa.eu/whatwe-do/revenue-administration-and-public-financial-management/modernising-legal-framework-publicinvestment-programme-greece_en and the new legislative framework adopted in September 2024 (available in Greek https://epde.gr/portal/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/%CE%BD.5140_30.9.2024_%CE%9D%CE%AD%CE%BF-%CE%91%CE%A0%CE%94%CE%95.pdf 3 SRSP project ‘Regional policy for Greece post 2020’ aiming to support an improved performance of Regional and Cohesion Policy. 4 Assessment criteria include alignment with Country Specific Recommendations, and consideration of existing technical assistance funded under Cohesion Policy.”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• 2025-03-06 “E-000954/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission On 27 February 2025 1 Greece submitted the Annual Performance Report 2 covering the expenditure for claim year 2023. The Commission has reviewed the data provided and has communicated its assessment to the Greek authorities on 8 April 2025. Overall, the absorption of second pillar funds under the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) in all member states is just picking up the speed, after the reformed CAP was launched in 2023. For Direct Payment though, the absorption of funds for claim year 2023, paid in 2024, is of 95%. Funds for technical assistance are available within the CAP Strategic Plan (CSP) and may be used to finance a broad range of activities. Since the start of 2024, the Commission, together with the Member State experts and sector stakeholders, has been analysing the possibilities to further simplify and streamline implementation of the reformed CAP. The first round of simplifications was done in early 2024 and the second one is expected in the second quarter of 2025. However, it is also a responsibility of a Member State to remove bureaucratic obstacles when it comes to interaction with the final beneficiaries. The CAP is implemented under shared management. Member States have an obligation to protect Union funds from irregularities and fraud. The Commission conducts risk-based audits to check if the CAP governance systems put in place by the Member State function properly to ensure the legality and regularity of the CAP expenditure. If deficiencies are established, the Commission imposes net financial corrections (recovered to the EU budget) 3 . Moreover, in the case of Greece, the Minister for rural development and food placed the paying agency under probation on 12 September 2024 upon request from the Commission. 1 https://www.agrotikianaptixi.gr/9i-grapti-diadikasia-epitropis-parakolouthisis-ss-kap/ 2 As required by article 134 of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 435, 6.12.2021, pp. 1-186). 3 https://commission.europa.eu/system/files/2020-10/agri_sp_2020_2024_en.pdf - Strategic Plan 2020-2024 Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, page 30-32.”
  Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1) · Agricultural funding
• 2025-03-05 “E-000948/2025 Answer given by Mr Dombrovskis on behalf of the European Commission The Recovery and Resilience Facility 1 (RRF) supports 103 investments and 76 reforms in Greece as set out in a national plan (Greece 2.0) submitted by the Greek authorities to the Commission. Disbursement of funds is based on satisfactory fulfilment of related milestones and targets following an assessment carried out by the Commission 2 . This assessment concerns the fulfilment of the requirements set out in the Council Implementing Decision 3 and verification is based on related evidence submitted by the Greek authorities (e.g. adoption of a law). So far, 51% of RRF funds has been disbursed to Greece, and following the recent endorsement by the Commission of the fifth payment request for EUR 3.1 billion, total disbursements to the country will reach 59% in the next months. The Greek authorities have adopted measures to facilitate the smooth implementation of the plan and boost administrative capacity, including through the establishment of a dedicated agency (EYSTA) that is part of the Greek Ministry of Economy and Finance. In the Council’s country-specific recommendations to Greece of July 2024 4 , Greece is further recommended to strengthen administrative capacity to manage EU funds, including RRF funds, accelerate investments, and maintain momentum in the implementation of reforms. Greece is notably recommended to address challenges related to: (i) lengthy litigation processes in public procurement procedures that risk causing delays in investments; (ii) slow transfer of property rights; and (iii) weak coordination among Ministries. 1 https://commission.europa.eu/business-economy-euro/economic-recovery/recovery-and-resilience-facility_en 2 https://commission.europa.eu/business-economy-euro/economic-recovery/recovery-and-resiliencefacility/country-pages/greeces-recovery-and-resilience-plan_en 3 https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/803810c9-c307-412e-8e9e238ae6e76734_en?filename=COM_2024_591_1_EN_annexe_proposition_cp_part1_v4.pdf 4 https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/96abbf09-3934-40a6-b234f60c93928a87_en?filename=com_2024_608_1_en.pdf”
  EU fiscal rules and oversight of national budgets · Conditions to access EU budget
• 2025-02-27 “E-000870/2025 Answer given by Mr Jørgensen on behalf of the European Commission Greece started long-term planning of its future hydrogen infrastructure development within the European Ten-Year Network Development Plan 1 . The Greek hydrogen backbone project, which aims at connecting the future hydrogen production sites with Greek off-takers and European markets, is included in the Union list of Projects of Common Interest (PCIs) and Projects of Mutual Interest (PMIs) 2 . PCI status helps project development by providing streamlined permitting processes, and priority regulatory treatment. Given its PCI status, the Greek hydrogen backbone project is for example eligible for the financial support under the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) under certain conditions. In 2025, the Commission allocated EUR 5.4 million to the project under CEF to support DESFA, the Greek transmission system operator, with studies that are necessary to realise this investment. The CEF support will de-risk and accelerate the project. Renewable hydrogen can be supported with the Modernisation Fund and Greece can take part in the auctions-as-aservice of the European Hydrogen Bank auctions under the Innovation Fund. The Commission is also in contact with the Greek administration for example within the context of Greece’s implementation of its recovery and resilience plan (RRP), which includes hydrogen-related actions 3 . In addition, Greece like other Member States will need to transpose the recent EU hydrogen legislation, which includes the sectoral consumption targets for industry and transport under the revised Renewable Energy Directive 4 and the recast Gas Directive 5 . The Commission is supporting Member States in this work through different means 6 . 1 https://www.entsog.eu/tyndp#entsog-ten-year-network-development-plan-2024 2 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_23_6047 3 The Greek RRP includes a relevant reform on the framework for hydrogen, which shall include licensing and permitting procedures. 4 Directive (EU) 2023/2413, transposition deadline 21 May 2025. 5 Directive (EU) 2024/1788, transposition deadline 5 August 2026. 6 This includes workshops on the consumption targets under the Renewable Energy Directive and a Q&A tool for Member States administrations on the Gas Directive.”
  Low-carbon hydrogen · EU energy infrastructure integration · EU industrial funding
• 2025-02-11 “E-000636/2025 Answer given by Mr Kubilius on behalf of the European Commission Greece is an active user of the EU’ satellite mapping Copernicus Emergency Management Service (CEMS) 1 , that is coordinated via the Emergency Response Coordination Centre 2 , working on a 24 hours/7 days basis. The Commission stands ready to activate CEMS anytime for the Cyclades area upon Greece’s request. In addition to the rapid mapping service of damage, the risk and recovery service could support other cartographic products, such as monitoring ground deformation or preparing evacuation plans for a future episode. Furthermore, the Commission supports Member States in managing the consequences of seismic activities and to mitigate the impact of future earthquakes, like common Eurocode standards for seismic design, or funding for collaborative projects, including for seismic retrofitting of buildings. For the current programming period, cohesion policy supports Greece with approximately EUR 130 million for the prevention and management of risks related to natural hazards not linked to climate change, including earthquakes. The Greek recovery and resilience plan 3 includes an investment comprising the evaluation of seismic risk of various critical buildings. Greece can activate the EU Civil Protection Mechanism 4 under the conditions laid down in the EU legislation. Furthermore, the Commission supports disaster prevention and preparedness through disaster resilience grants and the Technical Assistance Financing Facility. Greek entities have participated in projects on seismic resilience under the Knowledge for Action in Prevention and Preparedness call for proposals. The EU Solidarity Fund 5 can be activated at the request of Greece demonstrating that the total direct damage exceeds the applicable thresholds 6 . 1 https://mapping.emergency.copernicus.eu/ 2 https://civil-protection-humanitarian-aid.ec.europa.eu/what/civil-protection/emergency-response-coordinationcentre-ercc_en 3 https://commission.europa.eu/business-economy-euro/economic-recovery/recovery-and-resiliencefacility/country-pages/greeces-recovery-and-resilience-plan_en 4 https://civil-protection-humanitarian-aid.ec.europa.eu/what/civil-protection/eu-civil-protection-mechanism_en 5 Council Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002 of 11 November 2002 establishing the European Union Solidarity Fund (OJ L 311, 14.11.2002, p. 3) as amended by Regulation (EU) No 661/2014 of the European Parliament and the Council of 15 May 2014 (OJ L 189, 27.6.2014, p. 143) and by Regulation (EU) 2020/461 of the European Parliament and the Council of 30 March 2020 (OJ L 99, 31.3.2020, p. 9); https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:32002R2012 6 Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002.”
  EU Development & Humanitarian Aid
• 2025-02-06 “E-000556/2025 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission According to the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive 1 , prior to granting consent for such projects, it is up to Member States to determine whether an EIA is necessary, based on a case-by-case analysis or by setting specific criteria 2 . Such an assessment, if required, will consider the impacts of the projects on cultural heritage and environmental aspects. The Commission does not verify whether individual building permits comply with the relevant national legislation. Without prejudice to the Commission’s role as guardian of the Treaties, it is primarily the responsibility of the Greek authorities to ensure that projects are developed in full compliance with EU law. In parallel, the Commission prioritises its enforcement efforts on cases pointing to a systemic breach of EU law 3 . For instance, the Commission ensures that the national legal framework complies with EU legislation by checking the transposition of directives, which it has done for the EIA Directive. The Commission also prioritises infringements preventing national judicial systems from ensuring effective enforcement of EU law or showing a persistent failure by a Member State to apply EU law correctly, with sufficient evidence of a general practice. Funding possibilities are available under the EU Cohesion Policy Funds 4,5 . Under the shared management and subsidiarity principles governing these funds, project selection and implementation fall under the responsibility of the Member State. No financial support has been provided by the Cohesion Policy funds for this project. There is a relevant reform 6 included in the Greek Recovery and Resilience Plan 7 . There are also funding opportunities through the EU programme for the environment and climate action 8 . 1 Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, OJ L 26, 28.1.2012, p. 1–21, as amended by Directive 2014/52/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014, OJ L 124, 25.4.2014, p. 1–18. 2 such as the location, size or type of project. 3 As set out in the Communication of 19 January 2017 (EU law: Better results through better application C/2016/8600, OJ C 18, 19.1.2017, p. 10–20) and in the Communication of 13 October 2022 COM(2022) 518 final - Enforcing EU law for a Europe that delivers. 4 https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/funding/cohesion-fund_en 5 https://cohesiondata.ec.europa.eu/countries/GR/21-27 6 ‘Preparation of Urban Plans in implementation of the urban policy reform’ 7 https://commission.europa.eu/business-economy-euro/economic-recovery/recovery-and-resiliencefacility/country-pages/greeces-recovery-and-resilience-plan_en 8 LIFE, https://cinea.ec.europa.eu/programmes/life_en”
  Nature protection and restoration in the EU · EU strategy for tourism development
• 2025-02-03 “E-000470/2025 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission 1. In December 2020, the Commission adopted the recast Drinking Water Directive 1 to be transposed by the Member States into national law and complied with its provisions by January 2023. This Directive includes per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) quality standards and minimum monitoring requirements for drinking water at the point of compliance such as the household tap. Member States are committed to ensuring compliance with these PFAS quality standards by January 2026. Maximum levels for specific PFAS in certain foodstuffs have been established in 2023 by a Commission Regulation 2 . Member States will report all findings of their food controls to the European Food Safety Authority. 2. The Drinking Water Directive provides for Member States to ensure that information on the quality of water supplied is made available to consumers, including the results of PFAS monitoring from January 2026. In case of exceedances, Member States will take appropriate measures to protect human health and ensure that consumers are informed. 3. The Commission’s Zero Pollution Action Plan 3 aims significantly to reduce pollutant levels in the environment by 2050, including PFAS pollution. Various research and innovation projects on PFAS have been funded under the Horizon 2020 4 and Horizon Europe 5 programmes. The ongoing Horizon 2020 project ‘ZeroPM’ 6 developed next generation remediation techniques to sustainably remove prioritised substances from water resources and drinking water. A Greek partner is involved in the project. Information on these programmes is publicly available. 1 Directive (EU) 2020/2184 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2020 on the quality of water intended for human consumption (recast), OJ L 435, 23.12.2020, p. 1–62. 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/915/oj/eng 3 https://environment.ec.europa.eu/strategy/zero-pollution-action-plan_en 4 https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-opencalls/horizon-2020_en 5 https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-opencalls/horizon-europe_en 6 https://zeropm.eu/”
  Water pollution · PFAs
• 2025-01-15 “E-000158/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission 1. The Commission recalls that the use of towed gears, including boat seines, is prohibited within 3 nautical miles of the coast or within the 50 m isobath where that depth is reached at a shorter distance from the coast 1 . Derogations can be granted under certain conditions by the Commission at the request of a Member State provided that the fisheries concerned are subject to a management plan. In December 2021, Greece informed the Commission of its decision to withdraw a request for derogation and not adopt the related management plan. Such decision of a Member State only ends the derogation process and does not constitute a violation of EU law. If the derogation from the prohibition for the use of boat seines is not requested, the adoption of the related management plan is no longer necessary. 2. The European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF) 2 is designed to offer support to the fisheries sector in many ways, notably to contribute to the sustainable use and management of aquatic and maritime resources. Competent authorities can consider mobilising financing from the Greek EMFAF Programme to provide support to the fisheries sector concerned. The activation of EMFAF financial support should be in line with the objectives of the Greek EMFAF Programme as agreed between the Commission and Greece. Member States may equally grant State aid to undertakings in the fisheries sector in line with the Fisheries State aid guidelines 3 . 3. A Member State's choice to withdraw a request for a derogation and subsequently not adopt the related management plan does not breach EU law. Therefore, the Commission does not have any grounds to intervene. 1 Article 13 of Regulation (EC) No 1967/2006, eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32006R1967 2 https://oceans-and-fisheries.ec.europa.eu/funding/emfaf_en 3 Communication from the Commission, Guidelines for State aid in the fishery and aquaculture sector, OJ C 107, 23.3.2023, p. 1.”
  Funding for fisheries and aquaculture · Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2025-01-15 “E-000155/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Virkkunen on behalf of the European Commission The Commission recognises the significant challenge posed by disinformation and the manipulative use of bots in the digital landscape. Under the Digital Services Act 1 (DSA), providers of designated very large online platforms and search engines are required to assess and mitigate systemic risks. Such risks may stem inter alia from the inauthentic use of their service, such as the creation of fake accounts, or the use of bots. The Commission has already launched formal proceedings under the DSA against X, Meta and TikTok connected to this. On 13 February 2025, the Commission and the European Board for Digital Services 2 endorsed the official integration of the voluntary Code of Practice on Disinformation 3 into the framework of the DSA making it a Code of Conduct under Article 45. The Code of Conduct foresees specific measures that signatories commit to take to address notably the malicious use of automated systems like bots 4 . This integration will make the Code a benchmark for determining platforms’ compliance with the DSA. For providers of very large online platforms and search engines who are signatories to the Code, their commitments will be subject to annual independent audits. Through the Horizon Europe programme 5 , the Commission is also funding several research projects to help detection and countering of bot networks. For example, among other functionalities, the VERA.AI 6 project aims to develop tools to identify patterns of synchronised activity where accounts share identical or similar content to amplify disinformation campaigns. Finally, the Commission will propose a European Democracy Shield, as a horizontal strategic framework to better protect and promote democracy in the EU. It will notably address foreign informational manipulation and interference and disinformation. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=LEGISSUM:4625430 2 https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/dsa-board 3 https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/code-practice-disinformation 4 https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/code-conduct-disinformation 5 https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-opencalls/horizon-europe_en 6 ‘VERification Assisted by Artificial Intelligence’: https://www.veraai.eu/home”
  Disinformation & online freedoms
• 2025-01-15 “E-000149/2025 Answer given by Mr Jørgensen on behalf of the European Commission The Commission takes note of the information provided on the situation in Greece. The imposition of compensatory (reciprocal) fees could be one way to consider the needs of local population and share the benefits of the green transition. Moreover, Article 15d (2) of the revised Renewable Energy Directive 1 , with transposition deadline on 21 May 2025, obliges Member States to adopt measures to promote public acceptance of renewable energy projects by means of direct and indirect participation of local communities in those projects. The application of compensatory (reciprocal) fees, depends on the specific rules in the relevant national legislation. Non or incorrect application of national legislation must be brought up and decided before national courts. Given the need to adjust to national and local circumstances, a “one size fits all” solution has not been identified in this area. The Commission will continue to promote the exchange of best practices among Member States, including via the upcoming Citizens Energy Package and engagement in regional high-level groups 2 . 1 Directive (EU) 2023/2413 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 October 2023 amending Directive (EU) 2018/2001, Regulation (EU) 2018/1999 and Directive 98/70/EC as regards the promotion of energy from renewable sources, and repealing Council Directive (EU) 2015/652 (OJ L, 2023/24, 31.10.2023, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2023/2413/oj). 2 https://energy.ec.europa.eu/topics/infrastructure/high-level-groups_en”
  Energy (green transition)
• 2025-01-15 “E-000156/2025 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission 1. In 2021, Greece generated 509 kg/per capita of municipal waste, close to the EU average of 527 kg/per capita. The recycling rate was 17%, significantly below the EU average of 49%. The rate of composting and anaerobic digestion also remains very low at 2%. Landfilling is still the dominant treatment method for municipal waste, at 80%. Separate collection currently delivers only moderate capture rates, but the legislative framework aims to improve the situation, including via pay-as-you-throw schemes. 2 & 3. Under its Recovery and Resilience Plan 1 (reform measure ‘Waste management law for the implementation of sustainable landfilling and recycling’), Greece adopted law 4819/2021, providing, inter alia, for the application as of 2022, of a landfill tax whose tariffs progressively increase until 2027, and established a regulatory authority for waste management. The Early Warning Report 2 , recommended that Greece should increase the landfill tax (set at EUR 20/tonne as of 2022) and to use its revenues to finance waste prevention, separate collection and recycling actions of municipalities and waste management bodies. This report also recommended financing incentives to help reduce the amount of mixed waste 3 . For the 2021-2027 period, Cohesion Policy 4 supports Greece with EUR 853 million to support the collection and treatment of separately sorted waste, aiming to enhance recycling performance and meet the EU recycling and landfill targets in the coming years. 1 https://reform-support.ec.europa.eu/what-we-do/recovery-and-resilience-plans_en 2 https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/b7434520-0350-11ee-87ec-01aa75ed71a1/language-el 3 e.g. pay as you throw schemes. 4 https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/policy/what/investment-policy_en”
  Energy (green transition)
• 2025-01-09 “E-000065/2025 Answer given by Mr Jørgensen on behalf of the European Commission The EU legislative framework on energy is designed to let consumers and communities benefit from the clean energy transition and to directly participate in the market, including by producing and sharing their own renewable energy. Article 15d (2) of the revised Renewable Energy Directive 1 , with transposition deadline on 21 May 2025, requires Member States to promote public acceptance of renewable energy projects by means of direct and indirect participation of local communities in those projects. This also applies to offshore projects. There is no ‘one size fits all’ solution in this area. Therefore, the Commission will continue promoting the exchange of best practices among the Member States, including via the regional high-level groups 2 . Furthermore, Member States may apply for technical assistance under the Technical Support Instrument to receive support in designing suitable mechanisms for the participation of local communities in renewable energy projects, including offshore wind farms. The President of the Commission tasked the Commissioner for Energy and Housing to develop a Citizens Energy Package to increase citizens’ participation in the energy transition. 1 Directive (EU) 2023/2413 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 October 2023 amending Directive (EU) 2018/2001, Regulation (EU) 2018/1999 and Directive 98/70/EC as regards the promotion of energy from renewable sources, and repealing Council Directive (EU) 2015/652 (OJ L, 2023/24, 31.10.2023, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2023/2413/oj). 2 https://energy.ec.europa.eu/topics/infrastructure/high-level-groups_en”
  Energy (green transition)
• 2024-12-06 “E-002803/2024 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission It is the duty of the national competent authorities to assess the impacts of the mentioned project as required by EU law. The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive 1 requires that, before a consent is given, projects likely to have significant effects on the environment be subject to an assessment. For installations for hydroelectric energy production 2 , the authorities must determine whether an assessment is necessary through a case-by-case study or previously set thresholds or criteria. Such an assessment, if required, will take into account the impacts of the projects on the environment and on cultural heritage aspects. Under Article 6 of the Habitats Directive 3 , if the project is likely to have a significant negative effect on a Natura 2000 site, the competent authorities must conduct an appropriate assessment of its implications for the site in view of its conservation objectives 4 . Where the obligation to carry out assessments arises simultaneously from the EIA Directive and the Habitats Directive, the Member State must, where appropriate, provide for coordinated and/or joint procedures. Under the Water Framework Directive 5 , Member States must ensure that activities like transfer of water doesn’t result in any deterioration of the status of any body of water, and all necessary measures are taken to prevent negative impacts. Member States have a primary responsibility to ensure that renewable energy projects are developed in full compliance with EU legislation. The protection and conservation of cultural heritage of European significance are also primarily a national responsibility 6 . In its role as guardian of the Treaties, the Commission will continue monitoring the situation and may decide to take appropriate action. 1 Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, OJ L 26, 28.1.2012, p. 1–21, as amended by Directive 2014/52/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014, OJ L 124, 25.4.2014, p. 1–18. 2 Referred to in Annex II, 3 h) of the EIA Directive. 3 Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7‐50. 4 Commission’s guidance document: Guidance on the requirements for hydropower in relation to EU nature legislation, Publications Office of the European Union, 2018, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2779/43645 5 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. 1–73. 6 Articles 3 and 167 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.”
  Energy (green transition)
• 2024-12-06 “E-002804/2024 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission The Commission ensures, within the remit of its competence, the respect of fundamental rights enshrined in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (the Charter), including the right to property 1 . According to its Article 51(1) the provisions of the Charter are addressed to Member States only when they are implementing EU law. In this case, it is for Member States, including their judicial authorities, to ensure that fundamental rights are effectively respected and protected in accordance with their national law and international human rights obligations. The Commission is not responsible for monitoring the application of national laws for matters, such as property rights, which do not fall within EU competence. Therefore, the Commission has not issued and does not plan to issue any guidelines to resolve environmental protection conflicts with property rights. It is up to the Member States to identify and use EU cofinancing, provided that the eligibility and selection criteria of any relevant EU programmes or funding tools are fulfilled. Cohesion Policy 2 , through projects co-financed by the European Regional Development Fund 3 , provides tools that can contribute to addressing challenges related to forest maps and property management in Greece 4 . In line with this, Greece’s Recovery and Resilience Plan 5 includes a reform to finalise the national cadastre, establishing an efficient land registry system and providing legal certainty for property rights (measure 16986). By mid-2025, the cadastral mapping is expected to be completed, with all property rights available for public display. 1 Article17 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. 2 https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/policy/what/investment-policy_en 3 https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/funding/erdf_en 4 For instance, the project Development of an Integrated Information System for the Central Geospatial Infrastructure (ERDF co-financing: EUR 0.6 million) focuses on creating a comprehensive geospatial information system to manage grazing lands, immovable property, and agricultural registers, supporting improved land and forest management. Similarly, the project Digitization of the Historic Archive of Aerial Photographs (ERDF co-financing: EUR 3.3 million) involves preserving and digitizing aerial photographs to create a Geographic Information System (GIS), which will contribute to documenting forest and land boundaries, improving transparency, and supporting sustainable land management efforts. 5 https://commission.europa.eu/business-economy-euro/economic-recovery/recovery-and-resiliencefacility/country-pages/greeces-recovery-and-resilience-plan_en”
  Management of EU forests
• 2024-11-12 “E-002501/2024 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Mînzatu on behalf of the European Commission Social leasing has the potential to become an innovative tool for achieving social objectives and sustainable development. It could be potentially used by social enterprises as part of their business model to increase their social impact, for example by making their products or services more accessible to low-income individuals or underserved communities. Considering that it is a relatively new model, the Commission is not currently planning a framework of guidelines on social leasing. However, it is possible to fund pilot social leasing projects at European level via the existing funding mechanisms, such as the European Regional Development Fund and the European Social Fund Plus, subject to such initiatives meeting the necessary criteria of these funding mechanisms. The Commission is committed to supporting the social economy, including social enterprises, in all its dimensions by continuing to implement the action plan for the social economy 1 , which is in place until 2030. The Council recommendation on developing social economy framework conditions 2 recommends Member States to promote a favourable ecosystem for social and place-based innovation, including by promoting the social economy as a means to strengthen the fairness of the transitions. Social leasing initiatives could play a role in this respect. 1 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, ‘Building an economy that works for people: an action plan for the social economy’ (COM(2021) 778 final) - https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52021DC0778 2 Council recommendation of 27 November 2023 on developing social economy framework conditions (C/2023/1344) - https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32023H01344”
  EU policy on social criteria in public funding · EU expenditure on social policy
• 2024-11-07 “E-002466/2024 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The Commission is committed to help address the challenges faced by the beekeeping sector through the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and various policy initiatives to safeguard pollinators and their environment. Under the national CAP Strategic Plans, beekeepers can benefit from apiculture support with an annual EU budget of EUR 60 million, which is at least doubled with national co-financing to support investments/actions to improve production and marketing, prevent damage caused by adverse climate and promote climate change adaptation practices. The CAP also supports the adoption of bee-friendly farming practices including pesticide risk reductions or increasing floral resources in non-productive landscape features. Further exceptional emergency measures 1 to support farmers were adopted by the Commission in October 2024. As expressed in its replies to written questions E-000209/2024 2 and 000343/2024 3 , the Commission adopted measures to address honey adulteration at EU level. EU import requirements were reinforced with an authenticity requirement for exporting countries 4 and the import of honey is now only possible from listed establishments 5 . In 2023, the Commission launched a project to harmonise analytical methods to better detect honey adulterants, while Directive (EU) 2024/1438 6 introduced mandatory indication of origin for honey blends and new provisions on traceability and authenticity. The promotion of a viable beekeeping sector and protection of biodiversity are key priorities for the Commission. While the introduction of an annual pollination subsidy is not currently foreseen, the Commission will continue to engage with stakeholders and Member States to develop effective strategies for the sector. 1 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_24_5321 2 https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/-ASW_EN.html 3 https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/-ASW_EN.html 4 http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2020/2235/oj 5 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:L_202302652 6 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32024L1438”
  Agricultural funding
• 2024-11-05 “E-002423/2024 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) through the CAP Strategic Plans (CSPs) 1 provides for a number of interventions that help farmers to perform preventive actions, especially to prevent crises and build on medium and long-term resilience. For mitigating short-term impacts, the available tools include direct payments, which support farmers’ incomes, risk management tools helping farmers managing production risks due to adverse events, as well as sectoral interventions supporting replanting or restocking, and investments in the restoration of production potential. Moreover, in response to the severe weather events that hit the EU in 2024, exceptional measures have been introduced under the Rural Development Programmes to help farmers recovering from the damages suffered 2 . The programme for the smaller Aegean islands supports the production of mastic from Chios 3 , and it may be amended in the event of exceptional circumstances. The CAP also supports - trough the EIP-AGRI 4 Operational Groups - the bottom-up development of innovative technologies and approaches as well as the dissemination and sharing of good practices. Information on funded projects, workshops, seminars, brokerage events and publications are available via the European CAP Network website 5 . Under the CSPs, Member States are expected to improve the functioning of the Agriculture Knowledge and Innovation System (AKIS) increasing knowledge flows and ensuring that AKIS actors cooperate to provide advice and innovation services to farmers. Additionally, the Commission is regularly organising exchanges with national administrations on good practices and lessons learnt 6 . 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?toc=OJ%3AL%3A2021%3A435%3ATOC&uri=uriserv%3AOJ.L_.2021.435.01.0001.01.EN G 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/3242/oj/eng 3 https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/common-agricultural-policy/market-measures/outermost-regions-and-smallaegean-islands/smaller-aegean-islands_en 4 The European Innovation Partnership for Agricultural Productivity and Sustainability (EIP-AGRI). 5 https://eu-cap-network.ec.europa.eu/index_en 6 On 17 December 2024 an expert group meeting was organised to exchange on risk management strategies and preparedness. Presentations are available here: https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/expert-groupsregister/screen/meetings/consult?lang=en&meetingId=58606&fromExpertGroups=3806”
  GMOs
• 2024-09-30 “E-001880/2024 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Fitto on behalf of the European Commission 1. The Commission supports Member States in strengthening administrative capacity for Cohesion Policy through knowledge development (studies, pilot projects) and dissemination (workshops, training, toolkits, networking, peer exchanges). In 2024, a Network of Heads of Managing Authorities was launched to foster knowledge-sharing and inspire leadership in implementing cohesion policies. For Greece, addressing weaknesses in local authorities and targeted beneficiaries is a priority under the 2021–2027 Partnership Agreement. Therefore, with the support of the Cohesion Policy Funds 1 , some EUR 100 million 2 have been allocated under the ‘Technical Assistance and Beneficiary Support Programme’ 3 supplemented by additional technical assistance funds under regional and sectoral programmes. 2. The Regional Programmes promote the sustainable and integrated development of all types of territories, including those of small islands, fostering territorial cohesion, diversifying economic activities, creating quality jobs, improving skills, and enhancing infrastructure and services. Moreover, based on a coherent strategic plan covering certain areas 4 , the GR-eco Islands initiative 5 , co-financed with EUR 157 6 million, will apply to a limited number of small islands 7 and promote the transition to energy neutrality and sustainable economic activity, including tourism. The Greek Recovery and Resilience Plan, along with the Cohesion policy, includes investments to support the islands like the electricity interconnection of the islands with the mainland electricity system and upgrades to island port infrastructure, and reforms like the legal framework for the transition to Gigabit broadband connectivity via submarine cables. 1 Specifically, under the European Regional Development Fund and the European Social Fund+. 2 Public expenditure. 3 http://www.tye.gr/en/Pages/default_old.aspx 4 Areas such as energy, environment, circular economy, transport, tourism, culture and agri-food. 5 https://peka-program.gr/protovoulia-gr-eco-islands/ 6 The initiative is co-financed with EUR 100 million under the 2021-2027 ‘Environment and Climate Change Programme’ 6 and EUR 57 million under the ‘Just Transition Development Programme’. 7 Islands of the South and North Aegean and the Ionian islands.”
  Cohesion and rural funding · Funding for OCTs and outermost regions
• 2024-09-17 “E-001726/2024 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Šefčovič on behalf of the European Commission The EU works with the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (GFCM) on the issue of the spread of Non-Indigenous Species (NIS). The GFCM 2030 Strategy recognises its importance and makes its work on NIS a priority 1 . Several pilot projects and research programs, in which Member States take part, have been developed advancing data collection, information sharing and establishing comprehensive mitigation measures. These include a pilot study on NIS in the eastern Mediterranean and the creation of a NIS observatory. While initially focused on the east, the aim is for the observatory to eventually be expanded to the entire region. Regarding the compensation available to fishers, the EU provides for the funding of national initiatives under the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF). Several Mediterranean Member States have identified the threat posed by NIS and put in place measures and solutions to combat them. In Cyprus, a scheme has been put in place to compensate fishers for their pufferfish catches 2 . Other Member States, such as Greece, have funded innovative projects which help turn this threat into an economic opportunity 3 . Our Mediterranean neighbours have also been developing mitigation and adaptation measures, expanding their research on pufferfish species. At the 2024 GFCM Fish Forum, Tunisia and Türkiye presented pufferfish-focused research with the latter having developed the production of pufferfish leather 4 . The EU has been financially supporting the GFCM’s capacity building work under the MedSea4Fish programme which has also focused on providing GFCM parties with support in their research and data collection on NIS, ensuring a uniform ability to combat invasion. 1 GFCM 2030 Strategy Action Plan(https://www.fao.org/gfcm/2030strategy): Target 1.4 on the need to prevent and mitigate ‘threats to fisheries and the marine environment, including plastic pollution, climate change and the expansion of non-indigenous species’ 2 www.moa.gov.cy/emfaf 3 The Greek example of turning pufferfish into fishmeal is particularly relevant https://oceans-andfisheries.ec.europa.eu/news/turning-toxic-pufferfish-invader-aquaculture-feed-2023-1222_en#:~:text=The%20pufferfish%2C%20originating%20from%20the,to%20have%20no%20commercial%20value .https://oceans-and-fisheries.ec.europa.eu/news/turning-toxic-pufferfish-invader-aquaculture-feed-2023-12-22_en 4 https://pufferfishleather.com/”
  Funding for fisheries and aquaculture · Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2024-09-15 “E-001715/2024 Answer given by Mr Wojciechowski on behalf of the European Commission The Commission places significant importance on investing in research and innovation to address plant health challenges, with EUR 189 million allocated over the past 4 years through Horizon Europe 12 . Plant health research and innovation, including the development of knowledge and tools to tackle plant pests, remains a priority in the future work programmes under Cluster 6 3 of Horizon Europe. Cryphonectria parasitica is regulated in the EU as protected zone quarantine pest. Furthermore, the pest is regulated in the EU as Union regulated non-quarantine pest (RNQP) and as a result the propagating material specifically of Castanea sativa (chestnuts) introduced into or moved in the whole EU has to be free from the pest. As Greece is not a protected zone, eradication of the pest is not a legal obligation and therefore no financial contribution from the Single Market Programme is provided for such measures. However, the Common Agricultural Policy Strategic Plan Regulation 4 offers Member States different possibilities to help farmers cope with pest infestations which may include support for investments, support in form of loans, guarantees and working capital, insurance schemes, cooperation projects and advisory services. It is up to Member States to plan and implement such measures. The EU Horizon Europe funded project AdvisoryNetPEST 5 will establish and upgrade a network of advisory services across the EU, increasing the knowledge sharing between advisors, and among the whole AKIS 6 , promoting the adoption of innovative solutions on crop protection by farmers. 1 https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-opencalls/horizon-europe_en 2 https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/document/e8a5772e-9fca-4583-a81b-649729068f1e_en 3 https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-opencalls/horizon-europe/strategic-plan_en 4 Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 2 December 2021 establishing rules on support for strategic plans to be drawn up by Member States under the common agricultural policy (CAP Strategic Plans) and financed by the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and repealing Regulations (EU) No 1305/2013 and (EU) No 1307/2013, OJ L 435/1, 6.12.2021. 5 https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/101134122 6 Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation Systems.”
  GMOs
• 2024-09-05 “E-001625/2024 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission To help Member States to cope with droughts and water scarcity, the EU provides co-funding for sustainable water management, water resource conservation and water infrastructures including for nature-based solutions to increase water retention for drought risk mitigation. The EU also helps Member States to improve their drought management by bringing experts together in a Network of European Drought Observatories 1 and in the Common Implementation Strategy Working Group on Water Scarcity and Droughts. The Copernicus European Drought Observatory is helping Greece to set up a drought observatory in Athens. Between 2021 and 2027, ca. EUR 13 billion of Cohesion Policy funds 2 will be invested in water management infrastructures. More than EUR 4 billion will be invested for the prevention of storms and droughts across the EU. Of these funds EUR 541 million will be invested in Greece’s water infrastructures (drinking water), EUR 85 million in water management and resource conservation 3 . The Common Agricultural Policy 4 funds soil improvements on 36.5% of Greece’s agricultural area 5 , more efficient irrigation and water reuse, as well as more climate resilient crops. Horizon Europe 6 supports water resilience and sustainable water management inter alia through its Missions and Partnerships 7 . The announced European Water Resilience Strategy 8 will further strengthen all of these initiatives to support Europe’s water resilience for competitiveness, for food and energy security, human health and the environment. 1 https://drought.emergency.copernicus.eu/ 2 https://cohesiondata.ec.europa.eu/stories/s/21-27-Sustainable-water-management/ehce-gj6d 3 https://cohesiondata.ec.europa.eu/2021-2027-Categorisation/Water_2/2aig-bg4c 4 https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/common-agricultural-policy_en 5 Greece’s Strategic Plan for the Common Agricultural Policy (2023-2027) – 36.5% of the utilised agricultural area will receive support (under eco-schemes and agri-environment climate interventions) for practices beneficial for soil management to improve soil quality and biota. 6 https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-opencalls/horizon-europe_en 7 Of particular relevance are the partnerships ‘Water Security for the Planet (https://www.water4allpartnership.eu/), the Partnership on Research and Innovation in the Mediterranean Area (PRIMA, https://primamed.org/) together with the Missions ‘Restore our Ocean and Waters by 2030’ (https://research-andinnovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-open-calls/horizon-europe/eumissions-horizon-europe/restore-our-ocean-and-waters_en), Adaptation to Climate Change’ (https://researchand-innovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-open-calls/horizoneurope/eu-missions-horizon-europe/adaptation-climate-change_en) and ‘A Soil Deal for Europe’ (https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-opencalls/horizon-europe/eu-missions-horizon-europe/soil-deal-europe_en#what-are-eu-missions). 8 President of the Commission’s Political Guidelines 2024-2029: https://commission.europa.eu/about-europeancommission/towards-new-commission-2024-2029_en”
  Energy (green transition)
• 2024-08-28 “E-001564/2024 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Šefčovič on behalf of the European Commission There is ample evidence that certain pharmaceuticals are posing problems in rivers and thus to human and animal health 1 . Starting with the Strategic Approach to Pharmaceuticals in the Environment 2 in 2019 and the subsequent European Green Deal 3 including notably the Zero Pollution Action Plan 4 , there is a high-level of attention at EU level to the toxicity of pharmaceuticals in the environment and action is being taken to better monitor and reduce the presence of pharmaceutical residues in water bodies, including through funding research and innovation 5 . The proposal to revise the list of Surface and Groundwater Pollutants 6 includes for the first time certain pharmaceuticals compounds and proposes maximum concentrations to be respected. The Commission counts on the co-legislators to support the high level of ambition of this proposal in the forthcoming trilogues. The recast Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive 7 includes new obligations to remove micropollutants such as pharmaceuticals from all large urban wastewater treatment plants (above 150 000 inhabitants) but also for smaller plants when there is a risk for the environment or for human health. In line with the ‘polluter pays' principle, industry will be required to contribute to the financing of the additional infrastructures needed to remove micropollutants. This will also incentivise research and innovation into toxic-free products. The proposal for the revision of pharmaceutical legislation 8 represents a significant step forward in mitigating the impacts of pharmaceuticals on the environment i.e. it requires the Environmental Risk Assessment for antimicrobial to cover the whole life cycle including manufacturing. 1 https://circabc.europa.eu/w/browse/677b0752-676a-4a17-a60a-08a833fcc204 2 European Union Strategic Approach to Pharmaceuticals in the Environment as required by Article 8c of Directive 2008/105/EC as amended by Directive 2013/39/EU: https://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/waterdangersub/pharmaceuticals.htm 3 https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/priorities-2019-2024/european-green-deal_en 4 https://environment.ec.europa.eu/strategy/zero-pollution-action-plan_en 5 https://cordis.europa.eu/programme/id/HORIZON_HORIZON-CL6-2022-ZEROPOLLUTION-01-01/en, https://cordis.europa.eu/programme/id/HORIZON_HORIZON-CL6-2022-ZEROPOLLUTION-01-04/en and https://cordis.europa.eu/programme/id/HORIZON_HORIZON-CL6-2024-ZEROPOLLUTION-02-1-two-stage 6 COM(2022) 540 final of 26.10.2022. 7 for which a political agreement was reached by co-legislators and that is expected to be adopted soon, https://environment.ec.europa.eu/publications/proposal-revised-urban-wastewater-treatment-directive_en 8 https://health.ec.europa.eu/medicinal-products/pharmaceutical-strategy-europe/reform-eu-pharmaceuticallegislation_en”
  Water pollution
• 2024-08-20 “E-001532/2024 Answer given by Mr Dombrovskis on behalf of the European Commission Under the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF), Member States received up to 13% of their total grant allocation as pre-financing in 2021 to support early efforts to implement measures. Since then, funds are disbursed to Member States upon the satisfactory fulfilment of pre-defined milestones and targets that track important steps in the implementation process of reforms and investments. Member States can submit payment requests twice per year. The speed of disbursements is determined by the pace of implementation, which is fully under control of the Member States. When facing implementation issues, due for example to supply chain disruptions, Member States can request to amend their Recovery and Resilience Plan (RRP) to remove bottlenecks. The Commission supports Member States in identifying and addressing challenges, through continuous bilateral discussions but also through the informal RRF expert group, where horizontal guidance is provided and Member States exchange good practices. The Commission has taken steps to facilitate implementation, for example through updated written guidance to Member States, which explains how Member States may propose to modify measures in case they can be implemented with a lower administrative burden 1 . The Technical Support Instrument provided additional support to Member States in enhancing administrative capacity. The Commission also published its payment suspension methodology, thereby providing legal certainty to the Member States on how partial payments will be made when only a part of the milestones and targets of a payment request has not been fulfilled. The Commission will continue to support Member States in implementing their RRPs. 1 OJ C/2024/4618 available at https://commission.europa.eu/publications/updated-guidance-recovery-andresilience-plans_en”
  Climate efforts
• 2024-08-07 “E-001483/2024 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Šefčovič on behalf of the European Commission The Commission was not aware of the alleged problematic functioning of the coal mine in Achlada. Industrial installations for the extraction of coal are listed in Annex II (point 2.e) of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive 1 . According to Article 4 of the EIA Directive, prior to granting a consent for such projects, Member States are required to determine whether an environmental impact assessment is necessary, based on a case-by-case analysis or by setting specific criteria (such as the location, size or type of a project). Should such an assessment be required it would examine the impacts of the project on various elements, including on air quality. Member States are primarily responsible to ensure compliance with EU law, including verifying individual cases of potential breach of the relevant rules, and taking the necessary steps for enforcement and the appropriate measures to address any matter that has arisen. In the present case, the competent Greek authorities should verify whether the private company operating the mine complies with the permit that was granted to it, and in particular with any environmental conditions imposed. It should be stressed that human health protection aspects shall be fully taken into account in the permitting phase, including at the stages of granting, reviewing and updating of permits. 1 Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, OJ L 26, 28.1.2012, p. 1–21, as amended by Directive 2014/52/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014, OJ L 124, 25.4.2014, p. 1–18.”
  Energy (green transition)
• 2024-07-22 “E-001396/2024 E-001447/2024 Answer given by Ms Kyriakides on behalf of the European Commission Measures against peste des petits ruminants (PPR), like compensation to owners for the animals culled, may be eligible for EU co-funding, at a maximum rate of 30% (Regulation (EU) No 2021/690 1 and Commission Implementing Decision C(2023) 8926 2, Annex 3 3 thereof). In line with Regulation (EU) 2021/2115, depending on the identified needs and intervention strategy, through their Common Agricultural Policy Strategic Plans, Member States may provide support for investments in preventive actions and for restoration of agricultural potential following natural disasters, adverse climatic events or catastrophic events 4 . This would also allow to support investments to restore agricultural production potential damaged by animal diseases or by measures taken to eradicate or contain the disease. EU financial support is provided for PPR surveillance, in risk areas, through the Transboundary Animal Diseases programmes (Greece and Bulgaria) and the Trans-boundary High Risk Area Coordinated Epidemio-surveillance (T.H.R.A.C.E.) programme (Greece, Bulgaria, Türkiye). Harmonised EU measures for PPR are set out in Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687 5 and Commission Implementing Decisions 2024/2119 6 (Romania) and 2024/2132 7 (Greece). Imports of animals from third countries are strictly regulated at EU level. The Commission has regular exchanges with Greece and Romania as well as offered technical support, via the EU reference laboratory for PPR, and visits of the EU Veterinary Emergency Team. Member States are updated through meetings of the Standing Committee for Plants, Animals, Food and Feed. The EU PPR vaccine bank, in place since 2018, could ship up to 500.000 doses of vaccines free of charge if a request is received. 1 http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/690/oj 2 C(2023) 8926 final, Commission Implementing Decision of 21.12.2023 https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/e6150e32-3fa5-4276-923ba36faf4fec1e_en?filename=C_2023_8926_F1_COMMISSION_IMPLEMENTING_DECISION_EN_V3_P1_31 19489.PDF 3 Annex 3 to C(2023) 8926 final, Commission Implementing Decision of 21.12.2023 https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/c69d5f53-6966-420f-86287ff84bf91646_en?filename=C_2023_8926_F1_ANNEX_EN_V2_P1_3132789.PDF 4 Article 73 of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32021R2115#:~:text=Regulation%20%28EU%29%202021%2F2115%20of %20the%20European%20Parliament%20and,Regulations%20%28EU%29%20No%201305%2F2013%20and% 20%28EU%29%20No%201307%2F2013 5 http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2020/687/oj 6 http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec_impl/2024/2119/oj 7 http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec_impl/2024/2132/oj”
  Animal diseases prevention and management in the EU · Agricultural funding