Eszter LAKOS

Policy topics Eszter LAKOS is active on

What Eszter LAKOS has said (32)

• 2025-09-22 “P-003652/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Ribera on behalf of the European Commission Following the judgment of the Court of Justice of 12 September 2025, the Commission decision of 6 March 2017 declaring the State aid compatible has been annulled. In its judgment, the Court of Justice considered that the public procurement procedures for the construction of nuclear power plants were ‘inextricably linked’ to the State support and needed to be examined more thoroughly in the Commission’s decision. The judgment of the Court of Justice is final and cannot be appealed. Following the annulment of the final decision, the State aid control procedure is again with the Commission, back at the stage after adoption of the decision to initiate the formal investigation procedure under Article 108(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). The Commission will assess the impact of the ruling on the investigation and decide on the next steps. The Commission cannot, at this stage, prejudge the outcome of that investigation. It is first and foremost an obligation for the Member State to ensure compliance with all applicable legislation.”
  Energy transition (state support) · Nuclear energy
• “Thank you. Thank you very much, chair. And thank you also for this insight. I would not elaborate on that, but just to mention that the pattern that we have saw in Hungary, it's very familiar with the Moldova. Foreign interference did not come as a single fake story, but as an entire ecosystem. Coordinated inauthentic networks, AI generated content, deepfakes, Kremlin friendly narratives amplified through friendly national outlets in the context of domestic information manipulation and interference. We had threat of sabotage. Smear campaigns to design to be. Trigger. Fear, confusion and distrust. And investigative journalists reported that the Russian operation in support of Viktor Orban was overseen by Sergei Kiriyenko, the principal architect of Russia's political influence and infrastructure at home and abroad, the same one who deployed his services, let's say, like this in Moldova. So my questions would be the following up to the experts who were also to the next ones. Where do you see that the most critical vulnerabilities are in this ecosystem? What are the early warning indicators that should national authorities and the EU bodies watch for these? When these networks move from one country to to another one? And what lessons should we already be drawing from this experience for future elections across Hungary? And let me just end on a positive note that these attacks happen because democratic choice still matters. And the outcome of the Hungarian elections also shows that voters ultimately make up their minds, and we should act earlier, coordinate better, and support independent media and fast paced, fact based public debate. And Europe can be more resilient than the forces trying to manipulate it. Thank you.”
  Foreign interference in Europe
• “Thank you. Chair. And thank you also for the director general, I would like to go to the battery booster strategy that we share the goals. And it's an important initiative at European level. And also for my country, Hungary, that we host. Um, as you could also hear a very significant, uh, battery production capacity in, in Europe. But we also have an experience that, uh, certain risks are attached to, to this sector, namely that we have seen regular workplace accidents and toxic substances leaking into the air and the groundwater, which is highly problematic because of the poor oversight of the Hungarian government, so that the polluting companies have repeatedly escaped meaningful legal consequences. And because of this, our local communities suffer from the consequences, both financial, for instance, the declining property prices, but also health related implications. So therefore, we think that the strategy should also address the risk associated with the battery. Manufacturing and public financing should incentivize the European battery producers that comply with high environmental and labor standards, and the planning and the regulatory approval of the battery plant must ensure that the local communities are involved as well. And of course, that would require also the genuine involvement of of of of the public and and transparent disclosure of the risk. So we share the interest in preserving European jobs in the automotive sector, but it cannot come at the cost of environmental degradation and safety of our communities. So if we have not, unless we have not had overseen something, I would like to ask you, how do you plan, um, to, to, um, address the environmental risk related to the production. Thank you very much.”
  Sustainability of batteries regulation
• “Commissioner. President. Dear colleagues, the European Commission's greet package reinforces what experts and participants in the market have been echoing for years. The green transition and energy security cannot exist without updated and well connected electricity grids. It's especially important for Hungary, which is in a strategic position between central Europe and East and southern Europe. Hungary is reliant on electricity imports, so, um, updating electricity grids could improve our energy security while our electricity needs increase because new factories are being built, the government has not treated modernizing the grids as a priority. So the renewable projects are just waiting for the infrastructure to be created and prices have been skyrocketing. This is irresponsible. The commission's package is right to put emphasis on an on accelerating. Um. Authorisation and permitting. We need the new grids to be able to provide affordable and safe energy, both for households and for our companies. And Hungary needs a government which is able to create this future. Thank you.”
  EU energy infrastructure integration
• “And this links also to focus a little bit on SMEs as it's done in this current program, along with the social sciences and humanities, that I think it should be seriously mainstreamed. And especially in the second pillar, we should focus on their added value on um. The elephant in the room very often, and it has been already mentioned. It's a widening participation which will be important for several, uh, countries. We believe that, um, it should be reinforced in the future to make it more effective because, of course, um, economic and innovation convergence, uh, makes us together stronger. Of course. Um, without endangering excellence, I think nobody is discussing and questioning this principle anymore. Um, and um, last, um, almost last. It's the issue of dual use that has been already mentioned, uh, by Mr. Repaci. Um, it we are discussing, uh, this also increasingly, of course, with the stakeholders. And here I agree again, it should be, uh, very clear rules until when we are going to finance, uh, dual use, under which conditions within the framework program and when it will go to the EDF, ECF, uh, in the future. Last but not least, in order the framework program to deliver, we, uh, need to have a deeper look also into, uh, the evaluation to make it more effective. And I look forward to working with you. Um, especially because, um, I agree with Mr. Repasky that it's very difficult to divide this package into specific program rules for participation because they live together. So I think in order to reinforce our position, we should, um, tackle these two together.”
  EU research funding
• “Thank you very much, chair. And thank you for all the ministers, deputy ministers who came here today to present the the priorities of the Cypriot presidency. I'm asking one question to Deputy Minister and Nicodemus Damiano, and it will relate to the FP ten and the MFF negotiations. May doesn't come by surprise. Um, so you are aware that widening participation of the framework programme has been elevated in the discussions to the MFF Artwork working party. Meaning that that has been squared bracketed. So it is not the research working party discussing it within the council. Um, it's not just about budget, but about the details of the different measures. So, um, in this House, several members and already, um, really a lot of stakeholders expressed very strong concerns towards this decision, and they are calling for taking out, um, widening from the square brackets and bring back the discussions to the research working party. So I was wondering whether you plan to take, uh, these out from the square brackets. Uh, and what are your plans to advance discussions within the RVP on widening participation? Thank you.”
  EU research funding
• “The clean industrial deal is a great opportunity for the EU and its member States to provide cheaper energy for its industries. In Hungary, the government likes talking about reduced utility prices, but forgets that Hungarian companies are paying the fifth highest energy price in the EU. The government does not support local Hungarian industry and Hungary is exposed to imported energy. In 2023, Hungary imported more energy than the much bigger Germany. Need. Hungary is the most dependent EU member states on imports of energy in before 2029. We will not have new wind turbine capacity joining the grid. Hungary is also dependent because even though the government ignored the problem, they are now, um, courting Chinese car and battery manufacturers. This will lead to an increase in energy prices and that will undercut the competitiveness of Hungarian industry. Um, we see the damage done through the lack of affordable energy prices. Uh. Thank you.”
  EU approach to energy security (home-made vs import sources)
• “Thank you very much chair. So the ERA act. And we will going to go for a j.m.r. Joint motion for resolution and questions to the Commission. Um, about the era, because it's a little bit difficult to grasp the concept for, for many. Um, it is based on the single market and how I look at it in the current state of geopolitical competition. And, you know, what is our competitiveness? Is that an overall enabler, uh, for competitiveness and ROI. We know it that it's it is lying very much at the heart of productivity. So ERA is important, and it's important that we move faster and closer together more efficiently. And we have a momentum, uh, now. And um, therefore we have prepared a draft motion for resolution with basically four main priorities. One is a strong binding and coherent ERA framework. Um, we would like to offer, um, introducing an ERA act in form of legislation, uh, possibly a regulation and also complementary, uh, legal measures to strengthen the governance, to streamline the monitoring and reporting tools and rationalize the different policy instruments. And of course, of course, alignment would be needed with key European, uh, initiatives. The other very important priority is protecting the freedom of scientific research, and we suggest a separate and dedicated legislative proposal safeguarding the freedom of research, also coupled with ethical standards that accompanies the ERA act. So timing would be important here too, to manage the two altogether. The third priority is on investment because of course money is um is is important. We call the commission to include in the act the 3% Gerd. So the GDP target at European level and also of course to support the national targets and roadmaps.”
  EU-level coordination of research agendas
• “Thank you very much. Chairman. Commissioner. Commissioner. Colleagues, I strongly support the European Democracy Shield and the creation of the European Democratic Resilience Centre. The shield is a strategic, society wide effort to strengthen our situational awareness, electoral integrity and democratic resilience. However, I believe that we must and can go further than this. Information manipulation and the influencing of public opinion do not only come from external actors, but also from within member States. This is just as a serious problem. The shield must therefore also take action against internal information manipulation. Unfortunately, the information environment in my country, Hungary, is one of the most disappointing examples in the EU. As the predator, the Hungarian government has gradually taken control of the media, which now acts as a megaphone for Russian propaganda. It uses every means at its disposal to do so, including deliberate misinformation and fake content produced by the help of artificial intelligence. Internal manipulation uses the same playbook as foreign interference only from within. Therefore, the sentence mandate must extend to algorithmic transparency, AI generated content, political advertising, bogus civil society organisations, and the legal loopholes that enabled such practices. We need EU minimum standards to protect the rights of our citizens, the mental well-being of our communities, and to strengthen our democracies. Thank you.”
  Disinformation & online freedoms
• “Madam chair, dear colleagues, the review of the Cyber Security Act is a very important step. It will lead to more uniform rules and bigger resilience. This is especially timely because the European Union is facing a constant threats, cyber attacks and sabotage from Russia. And the manipulation of information is happening as especially in the times of elections, as we could see in Romania and Moldova. In Hungary, the Cyber Security Act was transposed in a way that only one company got the monopoly for this area. And this is connected to government circles. This puts into question the transparency of this system. This same government has trouble protecting their own system. Russian hackers had years of access to government systems, and recently personal data of the opposition party were stolen and then leaked. This raises important concerns regarding the political neutrality of data protection. Cyber security is too important to make it a tool of political interests and to allow abuses. If cyber security is aimed at protecting the EU citizens, then we need a true transparency and independence. Otherwise, cyber security is not be a shield but a tool for political.”
  Scope of EU cybersecurity obligations
• “Madam president, Commissioner, dear colleagues, 25 years ago. Europe has launched an ambitious idea the European Research Area, a common space where researchers knowledge, technology and innovation could circulate freely across borders. Now take a moment and imagine a tree. Its trunk is research, strong and visible, feeding the crown where leaves grow and fruits appear. Innovation. But beneath the surface lies something that we rarely think about. The roots hidden underground. They anchored the tree, nourish it and allow it to grow and flourish. Those invisible roots are the European research Area. They quietly sustain the entire ecosystem, ensuring that research can thrive and that innovation can bear its fruit. Over the years, the European research area has evolved. But despite the progress, Europe's research and innovation landscape remains fragmented. Our researchers face administrative and structural barriers when moving between countries. Investments remain uneven, and we are far from the 3% GDP target, and too often, knowledge and innovation do not circulate across Europe as freely as they should. This is why today's debate on the ERA and the motion for resolution on the ERA act is so important. Once for all, we have an opportunity to address long standing challenges in Europe's research ecosystem, from fragmented frameworks and uneven R&D investment to barriers for research, careers and mobility. And we must do it right this time. As detailed in our resolution, it's imperative that the upcoming ERA act focuses on three fundamental aspects. First and foremost, we must put people at its very hard. Europe is home to more than 2 million researchers. Around a quarter of the world's scientific talent. Yet this talent is too often constrained by fragmentation and uneven framework conditions. We must end this precarity and persistent fragmentation. We need to support mobility, brain circulation between countries and sectors, and we have to make the entire Europe an attractive destination for the best talents around the world.”
  EU-level coordination of research agendas
• “Thank you very much. And thank you also for the commission, uh, for this presentation, I was all ears because I found it a very interesting topic, and especially if you are running up for for the next MFF. And despite the small budget that the EDF has learned that like 15 member states, uh, basically uh, supported the ROI in defense, um, as, as, as the EDF. And the other interesting thing that I learned, it was the Valley of Death, that from Horizon Europe, we think of it differently towards the market. But here at research level, we already had the Valley of Death that the EDF, um, has reached with success. And you have mentioned that, uh, there are now more than 50 prototypes, uh, that they are, you know, supposed to be created following the research phase. And, and then, uh, you mentioned also the continuity of the efforts. Um, so, um, is the commission planning to avoid that this project are going to face, again, the Valley of Death, uh, towards the market because in the ECF. So the European Competitiveness Fund, we see, you know, that that could be, uh, the bridging, uh, possibility, uh, and, um, it we can say that certain programs like the EDP, uh, may help, you know, to avoid risks.”
  Defence spending
• “Thank you very much, chair. And thank you also for the Commission to be here with us today and presenting this new piece, uh, from the Rearm Europe Plan. And of course, as you said, this is a top priority not just for the commission, but member states and the Parliament as well. You know what? We have to reinforce our defence capabilities and we have to invest more. We have to invest better, and we have to invest, you know, for more European. Um, and, uh, the parliament has done its homework on the because we had a fast track procedure at committee level. And of course, the national escape clause, uh, triggers some appetite from member states amongst my home country, also Hungary. And I would have three questions, um, to you, uh, two more content and two, uh, is more related to, to the money. So now we have a kind of patchwork, you know, of funds, of course, because, you know, we are in the midst of the, of the MFF and no fresh money can be expected, but mainly from the member states. I understand that if we transfer money from cohesion, then it is for the benefit of the member state who is making the transfer.”
  Defence spending
• “President. Commissioner, colleagues, I will continue in Hungarian. I would hope that. When we look at what is happening internationally in terms of education and research, obviously it's clear that Europe has to be more competitive. We want to attract brilliant researchers. We want to attract talent, and we need to do this in a way which has some degree of financial predictability, so that they know they have a decent career ahead of them. And if we want to attract young people and women, we also need to look at reconciling work and family life and make sure that the overall package is going to be attractive. In that way, we will be able to attract excellence. We need to look at the gap so that we can fill it. We need to ensure the infrastructure is there, and we need to ensure that all the different regions and all the different member states, including Hungary, are actually included in such a scheme so that we can return to academic freedom and return to having a decent research ecosystem so that talents can be nurtured. And for that, we need to ensure there is greater independence for research in high tech and in people's lives.”
  Research priorities within the EU
• “Thank you. Thank you very much. And it was a very new angle to me. And in my intervention, I was wondering on the online advertisement, um, rather than the content, uh, reward, uh, they became these rules became, uh, fully effective across Europe, also in my country, Hungary, where, you know, the political communication went online very, very strongly. So we, um, also have seen that messages are being transmitted less and less transparently at the same time. So there are ways to overturn overcome these regulations. So we have a wider challenge. So my questions would be like how can we better detect and address these guides political content. So when disguised political content. Um, so we don't have um, you know, for instance, the sponsored message appears to be like a normal, uh, video, entertainment video or like normal, uh, you know, influencer, uh, video. But in reality, there is the political message inside, um, quite clearly or it's insinuated we have seen this already, um, happening. But you know how to address this while, of course, maintaining the freedom of expression. The other question, um, would be should that consequently the definition of political advertising to be updated. What do you think? Uh, and whether you see room for manoeuvre for EU level cooperation mechanisms. So this would be I would focus on the political advertisement because that's, you know, is the most interesting for us for, for the time being, if you can shed light, um, on, on this.”
  Disinformation & online freedoms
• “Thank you very much. And thank you all for your insights. Uh, I would immediately start with the questions and a little bit what? Um, Lena has just said to pick up on, um, widening. Um, and I would address this to professor and professor, uh, leptin. Uh, you have said that there should be strong focus on widening. Professor Arthur said it. And what mechanisms would you recommend and how, uh, would you consider, for instance, and this is also to Professor Leptin mainstreaming, widening while respecting the excellence criteria within the entire framework program. So for instance, having a kind of budgetary mechanisms when excellent a ranked proposals would have a certain budgetary reserve. And that could go to widening actors. And also in the case of the ERC, how do you, generally speaking, see this approach as to widening? Um, the other question would go to um, doctor story. Um, we in the framework program, we are talking about more um, like priority, stronger priority setting, stronger focus. So I was just wondering, what is your take on smaller projects and the bottom up part? Uh, because this is something that we are also hearing from, uh, from the stakeholders, how we could combine this approach in your view. And also, uh, what do you think that are the components of the flourishing ecosystems and what are those incentives or framework conditions that could that would be needed to incentivize, uh, industrial actors to work together with widening actors and to all of you. But, um, um, also, I was thinking to address it to originally to, uh, Doctor Hendrikova it's, uh, because she mentioned expressly service that evaluation should be adopted. We have ai it is massively used um, everywhere already. What suggestions would you have in terms of process expertise? We have heard yesterday from, um, from experts that we have to pick the good companies. Um, for instance, uh, that would be the first and foremost important thing, for instance, in the case of the ECF and also heard from researchers that the good, the excellent, uh, group of researchers should be focused on. So what is your stake on how we could improve the evaluation? Thank you.”
  EU research funding
• “Members of the House. Democracy is not for free. We have to defend it every day. And we can see that because the Russian has accused the commission of trying to change the regime in Budapest and supporting opposition parties. A lot of disinformation online has been seen, and the Hungarian Press Agency even picked up that disinformation. What's happening in Hungary could happen anywhere in the future. That's why Europe we have to act together, be resolute against interference, fight against different information and make sure that online platforms respect their obligations and support free media. There are other problems in Hungary. Uh, for example, uh, there's a huge PR machine run by the government, and they're really waging an information war, which is causing a lot of problems. We have to the idea is that citizens no longer capable of rational discussion amongst one another. There are a lot of people who see that happening, but others who fall into the trap. We don't want citizens to base their actions on disinformation, but we want them to work with real facts before they take decisions.”
  Disinformation & online freedoms
• “Thank you very much. And thank you very much also to Minister that you came to present the priorities of the presidency of the Council of the EU. And I'm very happy to to hear that R&D is prominently on your agenda, in particular, that openness and inclusivity is very prominent in your R&D priorities. Um, I would like to focus my intervention on the framework programme, of course, because that will be the Big bang, uh, in this semester or later on a bit this year. And we have already several position papers coming from member states and saying, what are their views? And you are going to launch the discussions as well. Of course, you have your own constraints when the Commission is going to present the staff working document with the data so that to have evidence based discussions. Um, however, I think that, uh, the virtual declaration is a very important piece of document that will give guidance to the Commission to prepare the framework programme and also for the Council to have a strong position, uh, vis a vis also the other institutions. So I'm very much looking forward, uh, to, to this document, and I'm very hopeful that, uh, one of the outcomes will be to have a Standing Framework program, amongst other important elements. And I would like to come to my question now, and I think it won't be a surprise that it will be linked to inclusivity and widening. So how are you going to ensure inclusivity within the era and in particular, whether you have concrete plans? Uh, as to the widening measures, uh, and I was inspired also, uh, by your AI priorities and a question of mine, you mentioned AI in science. So basically ethical standards, how research is done, what have you would you want to enlarge the council conclusions eventually for AI, for science. So meaning when researchers are using AI for instance I'm thinking of SSH. Uh so if you if you have already the wide scope or, four or more. You are more focused. All the best for this semester.”
  EU Supervision of the Rule of Law
• “(16:05:30 – 16:08:16): Okay, thank you very much and thank you also for the inspiring speeches and the introduction for our work. I would have several questions. The first one maybe to Professor Ericsson and you mentioned that the clear intervention logic is missing from the ECF and we should have a better understanding what are the needs of the different countries and regions and what support they actually need. So this is missing as well. I would like to ask you how would you address this gap and myself and other MEPs are concerned with the incumbents. You have touched upon this and of course myself I'm also concerned with that the winner takes all ECF could be created so like this we would further increase the innovation gap and also Mister Lungu mentioned that the productivity gap that of course would be probably at the core of how we define competitiveness. So this would not help at all to compete at a global stage and would go against convergence in innovation. So I would ask you what measures would you recommend to ensure that the ECF delivers the support to innovative firms across the European Union and fosters innovation convergence while of course supporting the competitiveness. The other question I would go and I will speed up to Mister Janenbring on the ECF governance. You mentioned that the Commission enjoys a lot of flexibility. We see it in deciding the priorities and the work programs. And what do you think about the only expert driven priority setting and VP work program setting? And also where you think that member states should be in this process because you know they know the best their economies, their needs. So where would you insert them? And the last one again going back to Professor Ericsson that you mentioned how to select the beneficiaries and you mentioned that good companies that have the talent. This is something that actually I heard from researchers that won ERC and EIC grants as well in Horizon Europe. So go for the best group of researchers, you said go for the best companies. So what do you think what would be the conditions for the best company? If I want to turn it in another way, how would you define excellence within the ECF because we have this in Horizon not in the ECF yet so I would be extremely happy if you could shed some light on that. Thank you.”
  EU research funding
• “Madam president, Commissioner, dear colleagues, 25 years ago. Europe has launched an ambitious idea the European Research Area, a common space where researchers knowledge, technology and innovation could circulate freely across borders. Now take a moment and imagine a tree. Its trunk is research, strong and visible, feeding the crown where leaves grow and fruits appear. Innovation. But beneath the surface lies something that we rarely think about. The roots hidden underground. They anchored the tree, nourish it and allow it to grow and flourish. Those invisible roots are the European research Area. They quietly sustain the entire ecosystem, ensuring that research can thrive and that innovation can bear its fruit. Over the years, the European research area has evolved. But despite the progress, Europe's research and innovation landscape remains fragmented. Our researchers face administrative and structural barriers when moving between countries. Investments remain uneven, and we are far from the 3% GDP target, and too often, knowledge and innovation do not circulate across Europe as freely as they should. This is why today's debate on the ERA and the motion for resolution on the ERA act is so important. Once for all, we have an opportunity to address long standing challenges in Europe's research ecosystem, from fragmented frameworks and uneven R&D investment to barriers for research, careers and mobility. And we must do it right this time. As detailed in our resolution, it's imperative that the upcoming ERA act focuses on three fundamental aspects. First and foremost, we must put people at its very hard. Europe is home to more than 2 million researchers. Around a quarter of the world's scientific talent. Yet this talent is too often constrained by fragmentation and uneven framework conditions. We must end this precarity and persistent fragmentation. We need to support mobility, brain circulation between countries and sectors, and we have to make the entire Europe an attractive destination for the best talents around the world.”
  Research priorities within the EU
• “Secondly, we need to build the era on strong European values. Researchers must be free to explore ideas, challenge them, and pursue knowledge independently. Protecting academic freedom. Research integrity and openness in collaboration is essential not only for our democracies, but also for our global positioning and competitiveness. Last but not least, we need clearer and simpler framework conditions for research and innovation across Europe. At the same time, we should respect the diversity of national research systems and competences of member states. Europe has extraordinary talent, but talent needs the right environment to flourish. The European Research Area provides a unique opportunity to build a truly integrated European innovation ecosystem. It benefits the European Union as a whole, but it is particularly important for Central and Eastern European member states. It offers a pathway to unlock the potential of less research intensive countries where outstanding talent and innovative ideas remain too often underutilized. We are at a decisive moment and we need to make ERA happen. After more than 20 years, we have the opportunity to move from aspiration to real implementation of the era. And this House has a responsibility to support that ambition. We should encourage the Commission to come forward with an ambitious, yet realistic era. Act, one that strengthens framework conditions, empowers researchers, and helps to overcome fragmentation in Europe's research landscape and reinforce it at the global stage. We should also encourage all Member states to engage constructively and take this opportunity seriously. The European Research Area is our common European project. Our joint interest and aspiration and the benefit for all the moment is now, and we simply cannot miss it. Thank you. Herzlichen dank für den rat.”
  Governance of academic priorities within the EU
• “Uh, they will be also part of the ECF. Uh, but the resources at the disposal are so limited, that is difficult to think that they will be real game changers to the budget is quite, uh. Yeah, quite small. So do you think that the new defense research window that will be established within the ECF, uh, will support really the market, uh, uptake of these products substantially. And the other question, and the last question of mine would be not on market uptake but on dual use. So we have the EDF on defence research, we have the ECF for dual use. And my question is how to channel the dual use projects in the European Competitiveness Funds defence policy window. If you can elaborate on this. Apologies that I'm asking about the future, but, you know, at mid-term evaluation, uh, this is where we it brings us forward. Thank you very much.”
  Defence spending
• “Secondly, we need to build the era on strong European values. Researchers must be free to explore ideas, challenge them, and pursue knowledge independently. Protecting academic freedom. Research integrity and openness in collaboration is essential not only for our democracies, but also for our global positioning and competitiveness. Last but not least, we need clearer and simpler framework conditions for research and innovation across Europe. At the same time, we should respect the diversity of national research systems and competences of member states. Europe has extraordinary talent, but talent needs the right environment to flourish. The European Research Area provides a unique opportunity to build a truly integrated European innovation ecosystem. It benefits the European Union as a whole, but it is particularly important for Central and Eastern European member states. It offers a pathway to unlock the potential of less research intensive countries where outstanding talent and innovative ideas remain too often underutilized. We are at a decisive moment and we need to make ERA happen. After more than 20 years, we have the opportunity to move from aspiration to real implementation of the era. And this House has a responsibility to support that ambition. We should encourage the Commission to come forward with an ambitious, yet realistic era. Act, one that strengthens framework conditions, empowers researchers, and helps to overcome fragmentation in Europe's research landscape and reinforce it at the global stage. We should also encourage all Member states to engage constructively and take this opportunity seriously. The European Research Area is our common European project. Our joint interest and aspiration and the benefit for all the moment is now, and we simply cannot miss it. Thank you. Herzlichen dank für den rat.”
  Governance of academic priorities within the EU
• “Thank you. Technological competition obviously is important for the future of Europe, and we have to focus on the most important factors. For example, talent. This should be seen as a priority. For example, Stem subjects obviously have to be taught right from primary. And I don't think we should allow our talent to leave the continent. We have to ensure that we use our potential and our talent right across the European Union. We have to support innovation, and we have to provide opportunities for financing or simplify these opportunities so all of the capital has to be mobilized. Venture capital has to be made available. Which requires a research and innovation framework programme to provide support for research and innovation. Europe is leading the ranking of the race when it comes to patents and scientific publications. So what we have to do now is focus, perhaps a little more on quantum and blockchain technologies. Europe should not be following others. It should be followed by others and be a leader in technology.”
  Research priorities within the EU
• “Thank you very much. And thank you for the commissioner. Being here the second time this week. I speed up my question will be geared towards basic research. There is a growing concern amongst the community that basic research is somehow at risk. Um, within the framework programme, you know that the ERC, we know the collaborative parts, Marie Curie, etc.. Um, but nevertheless it's there. Uh, so, uh, and you made also your proposal and I was just wondering, um, how are you going to tackle, uh, the situation in order that it remains a very and, uh, it doesn't go further. And the second question is related to what some of you have already touched upon ECF, whereas in Europe, the governance issue, I would be happy if you could delve into that a little bit more. I know that the communication is coming up in November, but how will you ensure that basic collaborative research priorities will be considered. The transparency will be there, and also that there will be a balanced representation of research interests and stakeholders in the governance structure. If you can shed some hints with us. Thank you.”
  Governance of academic priorities within the EU
• “Thank you very much. And, um, I think we converge quite on several issues, and I agree as well that we have really a lot of, uh, things to do because, uh, the proposal has to be beefed up. Uh, we have to fill in the gaps. And the first and foremost important thing is, as has been said, I think by everybody is the governance issue between ECF and and Horizon Europe. It's important in terms of, uh, maintaining an independent budget. But also the FFP is a means of implementation of research and innovation, um, policy. So, um, it's important to grab it rightly and to preserve, as it has been said, the independence, uh, especially of the, um, second pillar in this, uh, current proposed structure. Um, in addition, of course, the ERC and EC's independence that should be reinforced. Um, I think that the IRC and Marie Curie should also focus more on young researchers. It has been done already to a certain extent, but it's important to retain and to attract talent also in the future. We have very good initiatives from the commission side, but it should be still a reinforced. And also, as Miss Galvez has said, us to also focus on research careers in in the future. Um, what I can also distill from my talks, and it's not with the stakeholders and it's often not said um, is to gear up a bit. Also the research and infrastructure, uh, side of the program and to reinforce the innovation ecosystems because of course, innovation. We know it's local and also there and bigger enterprises, but especially small and medium sized enterprises can have an important role.”
  EU research funding
• “Thank you very much, chair. Thank you, Commissioner, for coming here. Um, I would like to ask you two questions related to the European start up and scale up. I'm here. I'm here. You have recently launched the forum and also the public consultation in this domain, and we all are aware of the different issues, the hurdles that the startups and the scale ups are facing, starting from the capital risk capital and also the fragmentation. So my two questions are the following. The first one is what are your plans on de-risking investments in deep tech and high growth sectors such as AI, quantum computing, and clean tech and biotech? And you mentioned fragmentation, you know, as a barrier to growth. Uh, and here, um, and we know that the European uh, Innovation Council has programs to support deep tech research and high potential, uh, startups. I mean, this year with €1.4 billion, but also the EIB has different programs. The European tech champions, uh, for instance, to support the unicorns, you know, um, so, um, do you foresee any coordinated approach between these two to streamline the funding processes and also to reduce the bureaucratic hurdles? Thank you.”
  EU research funding
• “Thank you very much, Chair. Thank you, Commissioner. I would like to focus on information integrity and the EES. They launched over five hundred coordinated disinformation operations last year, mostly during elections. We are full of deepfakes, AI-generated content that undermine democracy and the UDS. We believe the UDS must provide shared tools for the member states so that they can better protect the elections and the institutions with confidence. For this, we need both long-term and short-term solutions. You have mentioned one long-term solution under the next MFF and the Agora program: media literacy and digital literacy, which is the best direction in the long run. In the short run, you had a public consultation on the UDS, and International IDEA put forward a proposal to create possibly temporary European support hubs to protect information integrity within the European Union. So, task forces could be created to monitor and report misconduct and the information landscape. My question is, do you consider this as a concrete plan, or would it be more multiplication compared to the already existing networks that we have mentioned? Although I believe that would be complementary, how would you do this in case you consider it seriously, respecting, of course, the competence of member states? Thank you.”
  Disinformation & online freedoms
• “Secondly, we need to build the era on strong European values. Researchers must be free to explore ideas, challenge them, and pursue knowledge independently. Protecting academic freedom. Research integrity and openness in collaboration is essential not only for our democracies, but also for our global positioning and competitiveness. Last but not least, we need clearer and simpler framework conditions for research and innovation across Europe. At the same time, we should respect the diversity of national research systems and competences of member states. Europe has extraordinary talent, but talent needs the right environment to flourish. The European Research Area provides a unique opportunity to build a truly integrated European innovation ecosystem. It benefits the European Union as a whole, but it is particularly important for Central and Eastern European member states. It offers a pathway to unlock the potential of less research intensive countries where outstanding talent and innovative ideas remain too often underutilized. We are at a decisive moment and we need to make ERA happen. After more than 20 years, we have the opportunity to move from aspiration to real implementation of the era. And this House has a responsibility to support that ambition. We should encourage the Commission to come forward with an ambitious, yet realistic era. Act, one that strengthens framework conditions, empowers researchers, and helps to overcome fragmentation in Europe's research landscape and reinforce it at the global stage. We should also encourage all Member states to engage constructively and take this opportunity seriously. The European Research Area is our common European project. Our joint interest and aspiration and the benefit for all the moment is now, and we simply cannot miss it. Thank you. Herzlichen dank für den rat.”
  Governance of academic priorities within the EU
• “But we don't forget neither the private because also we should aim to at inter Incentivizing the private participation as well. Then, um, we, um, go for streamlining the EU funding of instruments and ensuring synergies and complementarity between these private and public fundings. Of course, this is, uh, very much at the heart of the public private partnerships. The fourth priority is, uh, researchers, uh, free circulation of researchers, knowledge and technology. Uh, that we remove barriers to mobility, uh, mutual recognition of qualification. That would be quite a big step. And simpler visas as well. Uh, we suggest strengthening research careers, improving working conditions, gender equality and equal opportunities as well, and also to promote open, secure and responsible knowledge circulation. While we are protecting the IPR and research security. And the last part. The fourth one is the ecosystems and ecosystems. Here the core lies the cooperation between universities, research institutions, industry, SMEs and startups. And on the knowledge Valorisation. Um, then about the process, very briefly, we had talks, um, to um, different institutions, commission, committee of regions, but we also considered uh, other um papers and opinions. And then we also had stakeholder consultations, um, direct consultations with Jarun ARIN, uh, the um, the task force members and also the Eric Forum. And um, we, of course, sit down with the Secretariat and also with the legal service that I would like to thank for their work. And I look forward to your comments, suggestions and your priorities where we should boost the text further. Thank you.”
  EU research funding
• “Madam president, Commissioner, dear colleagues, 25 years ago. Europe has launched an ambitious idea the European Research Area, a common space where researchers knowledge, technology and innovation could circulate freely across borders. Now take a moment and imagine a tree. Its trunk is research, strong and visible, feeding the crown where leaves grow and fruits appear. Innovation. But beneath the surface lies something that we rarely think about. The roots hidden underground. They anchored the tree, nourish it and allow it to grow and flourish. Those invisible roots are the European research Area. They quietly sustain the entire ecosystem, ensuring that research can thrive and that innovation can bear its fruit. Over the years, the European research area has evolved. But despite the progress, Europe's research and innovation landscape remains fragmented. Our researchers face administrative and structural barriers when moving between countries. Investments remain uneven, and we are far from the 3% GDP target, and too often, knowledge and innovation do not circulate across Europe as freely as they should. This is why today's debate on the ERA and the motion for resolution on the ERA act is so important. Once for all, we have an opportunity to address long standing challenges in Europe's research ecosystem, from fragmented frameworks and uneven R&D investment to barriers for research, careers and mobility. And we must do it right this time. As detailed in our resolution, it's imperative that the upcoming ERA act focuses on three fundamental aspects. First and foremost, we must put people at its very hard. Europe is home to more than 2 million researchers. Around a quarter of the world's scientific talent. Yet this talent is too often constrained by fragmentation and uneven framework conditions. We must end this precarity and persistent fragmentation. We need to support mobility, brain circulation between countries and sectors, and we have to make the entire Europe an attractive destination for the best talents around the world.”
  EU-level coordination of research agendas
• “Thank you very much. Chair. And thank you also for the panelists, uh, for this very inspiring, um, presentations and your valuable contributions. We are grappling how to respond effectively to the disruptive impact and generative AI and on democratic processes in the context, context of elections and also, of course, the civic discourse. And what we understand that makes it particularly challenging and and urgent is the speed and the scale. As you have said, that AI is really fabricating very convincing text, images and videos and the tools that they spread the disinformation and construct entirely fictitious narratives. And unlike the past waves of disinformation, we are now facing the synthetic content that is increasingly Indistinguishable for authentic media. And being a Hungarian MEP who has witnessed firsthand how disinformation can undermine democratic processes in the central Eastern European countries, I believe that we should consider three possible approaches. Firstly, exploring mandatory content labeling requirements through, for instance, Enhanced Digital Services Act provisions. Secondly, evaluating increased investment in pan-European digital literacy programs that has been mentioned already and particularly targeting young people. And thirdly, examining strengthened cross-border enforcement mechanisms to ensure accountability from both European and non-European AI providers. So these raise several policy questions. And thank you very much for the recommendations. You you saved me one question. Um, but should we prioritize Upstream technological safeguards like watermarking or downstream social Telephus like digital literacy. And how can we ensure accountability across borders without fragmenting our digital single market? And we may need legislative proposals soon and coordinated implementation across member states because the cost of inaction is really too high. As this had been mentioned in conclusion, generative AI poses an unprecedented challenge to our democratic institutions. But through strategic evaluation of content labeling, digital literacy investment, and robust enforcement mechanisms, we can protect democracy while preserving innovation. And thank you very much for your reflections on this.”
  Transparency and oversight of AI-generated content