Fabrice LEGGERI

Policy topics Fabrice LEGGERI is active on

What Fabrice LEGGERI has said (79)

• 2026-07-16 “(09:50:52 - 09:53:16): Thank you very much, chair. I will speak in in French. Thank you very much. Director from the, JRC team for your presentation. I think recently, we've become aware that there are military threats through drones. We've seen that over Romania, for example, in over the Port Of Condensa and another town, and we've had there's been victims and damage from drones. Also, in other Middle East countries have become victims of Iranian drones. And in the, U Ukrainian theater, we've seen the Russians using, Iranian drones then. So there are lots of lessons. I think your mission is more civil when it comes to these hybrid threats. Can you, nonetheless tell us in confidentially, of course, if you are working with or at the request of certain member states to have global protection against drones, which could be a military threat, which could be a criminal threat simply. In Poland, recently, I saw the, Belarus front border. Small drones have been used for trafficking cigarettes, so that's petty criminality using drones. But, also, there can be damage caused and also human life. So what is the cooperation or not or the interaction with military research in some member states? I'd like to know also if in the civil area, you're working with other agencies like Frontex, which is in charge of looking after the borders, and EASA, also aerial security. How are you working with those civilians civilian agencies? What about the budget also You envisage you said it's important for in the light of the MFF. So what is the, the sort of ballpark amount that you're thinking about in terms of a budget? Yes.”
  Cybersecurity investments for critical infrastructure
• 2026-07-13 “(16:23:15 - 16:25:59): You, chairman. Well, others of my colleagues who are part of the group weren't able to be here today, but they've shared their impressions. I'd like to begin by thanking Mrs. Vilmes for her work as chair. But our view is that working methods have been pretty partial. In reality, some member states were targeted, whereas others were dealt with rather too gently. When it came to horizontal issues raised, NGO rights, fundamental rights, etcetera, these are always issues that are pushed by the left. We have some clear evidence of this lack of impartiality. On May 28, our group asked for an exchange of views on Spain, on the worrying situation and the way in which socialists, in particular, the socialist party, is under investigation in Madrid because it's threatened judges and investigators from the Guardia Seville because they were independently investigating the prime minister Pedro Sanchez. We asked for that to be on the agenda. We also pointed out how serious the situation was with regard to the investigations on the role of the previous socialist prime minister, Mister Zapatero, but our request was denied. So we weren't able to talk about the problems with regard to the rule of law and the undermining of the justice system in Spain. Now on Hungary, well, there's a vote taking place today in Budapest to retroactively change the Hungarian constitution in order to change the constitution of the country, ad nominum, in order to put an end to the mandate of the president of the republic. This is something that is extremely serious. It's not something that ends every day in European Union countries. It doesn't actually happen anywhere very often. The president was properly elected in 2024. He has called for the Venice kind of mission to intervene in the matter. I think it's important to note that thus far, there has not been no repeal, no procedure used to try and get the president of Hungary to leave office, which shows that there's nothing that's really being held against him. So I think these are priority subjects that the group should be dealing with. Thank you.”
  Rule of law in Spain · Rule of law in Hungary
• 2026-07-13 “(16:01:16 - 16:02:45): Thank you, chair minister. European Commissioner, launched a new attack last week against the rights of European citizens. The last attack was in the last Monday with the DSA and digital entity identity. And last week, they did a trick with chat control 1.0, what or so called a new approach. Now there's a talk about, age verification on social media. I have 4 children myself, and I can tell you that the protection of children begins at home and maybe at the member state level, but not in the EU level. And these measures would mean that 450,000,000 people can no longer participate on social media or VPNs anonymously, and the commission pretends that the app will be privacy friendly. But the, app that the commission itself launched seems to be full of leaks. And it's also pointless because young people will find a way around it anyway. And if this infrastructure is rolled out, it'll be it just scoff at people who don't agree with Ursula, and it'll just gag them. So what will the Irish presidency do to protect free speech and privacy online and to, push back against this terrible initiative?”
  Age restrictions on children's access to social media
• 2026-07-13 “(15:31:10 - 15:33:46): Thank you very much, chair. I will speak in French. Thank you, minister, for having said that your road map for the presidency of the union. I'd 1st like to know in the area of asylum and migration, what is your view on the implementation of the asylum migration pact? We have heard that some member states aren't quite ready. We also hear criticism, also emanating from some political groups here who vote in favor of the migration pact and want to amend it now. So my question relates to the possibility under your presidency of moving towards an improvement, an amendment, perhaps a reorientation of the asylum migration pact? 2nd question then relates to the implementation of the returns regulation, which we adopted some weeks ago, which provides for the setting up of return hubs, centers outside the territory of the union. And my question is as to the possibility of funding from the EU budget, the creation of such centers when your member states wish to set them up. So as presidency for the next 6 months, do you are you going to encourage and use your political influence to promote a compromise which would allow the EU budget to be used to fund such return hubs? And finally, you mentioned the importance of the rule of law. I think the previous speakers also touched on that. Now, of course, I note others have that the rule of law is under threat in Spain is by a government which doesn't respect judicial independence, in France by Emmanuel Macron who closed down a TV stations some months ago, the 8th. And in Hungary, there's a vote, envisaged to strip the, to oust the president of the republic, which are rather unexpected developments, these retroactive the act of legislation? And what do you propose to do under your presidency to ensure that the new Hungarian press government respects the values of the European Union? Thank you.”
  Asylum & border control
• 2026-07-13 “(17:08:06 - 17:10:53): Thank you very much, chair. I will speak in French. Thank you, madam, for that presentation of the Europol report on terrorism. It's very interesting. You talked about jihadism being right at the top of threats to Europe. You said we've got the extreme left. And as a French citizen, I see that France is particularly threatened by jihadist terrorism. You also stressed that the lines are blurring between terrorism per se and other forms of violent acts. We see that recently with extreme left or anarchist groups that have been attacking the railway infrastructure or the electrical supply infrastructure, perhaps with the intention of having a political effect in certain European states. That leads me to two questions. My first question is about the evolution of Europol missions and the new legislative needs that Europol would have in order to adapt to this new situation of terrorism and violence as described by yourself. How can we help you with legislative acts to better combat Islamist terrorism in Europe? That's my first question. The second question, slightly more precise, in February 2026, the Iranian Islamic Guard was put on the list of terrorist organizations, the EU list. I wondered whether you have any stocktaking exercise of whether you've been able to see what effect that might have had in the center that you lead? I would also like to add a question about the Muslim Brothers and other similar organizations being put on that list. Could that help you in your fight against terrorism by approaching it further upstream? Thank you. **Anna Sjöberg (ECTC Europol): (17:10:53 - 17:12:57): Thank you for the question. I will try to provide a short answer to quite a lot of questions here. But indeed, just to explain, jihadism remains a key threat because it's also the most lethal form of terrorism. Right-wing extremism, as we also mentioned, remains a key concern. But the threat landscape is, as I described, diversified and has become increasingly unpredictable. This is why we need to have a broader perspective, also understanding this phenomenon where we have young people, diverse actors that can carry out attacks. Especially, what we are seeing now is that the gap between those steering the terrorism activities and those who are carrying out may be widening. This is something that we need to understand also to tackle the threat. Of course, it's very welcome, I would say, working at Europol and being responsible for counterterrorist work that we are doing, that any proposal that would support law enforcement cooperation in this area is extremely welcome. Since we are working with data and information, it's about efficient and secure systems to provide this data. We also need stronger operational support with the right expertise and the right tools. We need to use the latest and emerging technology, and we need to be innovative. Otherwise, we will totally be left behind. So it's all about making full use and access to the data and also being able to process big data. Again, it's also about expertise and resources. So absolutely, much welcome the proposal on the future of Europol with more mandate and more resources. Thank you. Thank you, Mister Gaminski.”
  EU policy on Islam
• 2026-07-08 “(15:04:27 - 15:05:39): If narco trafficking is thriving, it's because our, borders are letting them through and the EU continues to place obstacles in the way of those who are meant to protect us. Police officers, customs authorities, magistrates, they need enhanced cooperation, not additional bureaucracy. We need to, make the collection exchange of data between national authorities, Europol, Frontex, and Eurojustpa easier. Cartels are not waiting for authorities in Brussels to let them share information, but the European, data protection, control has suspended cooperation between Europol and Frontex. This is a decision which is completely removed from the reality on the ground. We need to improve operational effectiveness. Otherwise, the criminals will win. We also need to clarify the role of the future European customs authorities. We cannot set up a new institutional layer, will just make it harder for Europol and Frontex to work. Need to give the European ports alliances the way a way to exchange their intelligence with police and justice authorities. When faced with ever more powerful mafia, our answer needs to be simple, more cooperation, more intelligence, more effectiveness, and less ideology. Thank you.”
  EU law enforcement cooperation in criminal matters
• 2026-06-24 “Thank you. Chairman. My colleague from the Greens, Mrs. Camara, mentioned me by name, so I'd simply like to react and say I never said Heterophobia. You can look at the tapes, the recordings. I never used that word. Secondly, you say that there are supporters of Marine Le Pen in France who are shouting sordid things about taking people to the slaughterhouse. I don't know what you're talking about. I don't know who would have said that and where or when, for that matter. Then, as far as I'm concerned, and I think I speak on behalf of all of the members in my group, I don't remember having shouted anything in the hemicycle. I did applaud, which is customary when groups are satisfied with legislation that is voted through. But I would refute any suggestion that members from Rassemblement National or from our political group acted in the way you described?”
  EU political integration
• 2026-06-24 “Thank you. Chair. We have just heard insulting words against the police forces of our member States. That is undignified. Unacceptable. And I think that that should be in the minutes of the meeting. Representatives of the European Parliament stand against words like this which are undignified in our institution.”
  EU law enforcement cooperation in criminal matters
• 2026-06-24 “(10:49:28 – 10:51:49): Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you to the Director of FRA for the presentation. I listened attentively to what you summarized. I also, with my team, read your report. There are 2 points that I notice here. So we have state sovereignty and subsidiarity and the focus that you put on article 2 of the treaty and the weight that you give to NGOs often to the detriment of legitimate political debate by NAPs that represent people. I feel that the political debate is being taken taken over in this report and the division that you have for the agency. A 2nd point that struck me in particular was ideological bias, which we can see throughout the report, immigration is only looked through an immigrant's rights angle, but not the citizens of Europe, government, so on. And we have some selective choices being made. There are some minorities that are highlighted, and other types of persecution are a are not as much so things like anti Christian acts or antisemitism. There is a ideology. There's intersectionality coming through the whole report. So my questions are the following. 1st of all, madam director of FRA, what role do you see for your agency in setting the political agenda or ideological agenda in the EU? My 2nd question is on the interpretation of article 2 that you referred to on EU values. Do you think that this article, this text only applies when member states apply the treaties and the derived rights from the EU, or do you think that it should also apply to national rights including member states' constitutions?”
  Regulation of NGOs in Europe
• 2026-06-24 “(09:38:34 – 09:40:01): Thank you very much, madam chair. I'd like to raise a point of order. This afternoon, there's gonna be a workshop on, anti racism as presented by the commissioner, and it's under the aegis of Libbey. The trouble is with the workshop this afternoon is that it will make it possible for an organization to get into the parliament while it is considered to be an organized close to the Muslim Brotherhood, and that's the ENA, the European Network Against Racism. Now there are 4 political groups that have objected to this. That was done when we were told the organization was going to be present. Now this is based on a report that the French government published a few months ago. The French authorities came to the parliament to present it, and, Magnus Brunner, the commissioner responsible for security, home affairs, and migration, did himself mention the danger that the Muslim Brotherhood and organizations close to them posed. So my point of order is to point out that under article 10 of the rules of procedure of the European Parliament, members and the bodies of the parliament have to make sure that they do not harm the image of the parliament or the dignity of the parliament in their actions? Thank you.”
  Regulation of NGOs in Europe
• 2026-06-24 “(11:59:37 – 12:01:53): Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. I will speak in French. Thank you, Mr. Schmidt from Eurojust. Thank you for your work. I would applaud your work in judicial cooperation. Thanks to Eurojust. I had a few questions on online trade online commerce. So I think we had the 1st agreement between Korea and EU's, the digital trade agreement. You mentioned that and you said that you had an agreement with Korea incorporation. So on that topic, what do you expect through this cooperation with 3rd countries in digital trade and then a bit closer to home on cooperation within the EU. Can you say anything about a personal data storage during investigations between Europol, Eurojust, Frontex? I remember there was some agreement with Frontex at 1 time. And so on that note, on the EDPS, the digital prediction supervisor, does your activity suffer from some decisions that were taken over the past few months by the EDPS with respect to Europol? And maybe a final question. So on the cooperation program for justice, what do you think about a digital files for member states? So digitization when documents have to be shared so judicial documents have to be shared between member states and the European Union? Thank you.”
  EU law enforcement cooperation in criminal matters
• 2026-06-24 “(09:50:12 – 09:52:55): Thank you very much, chair. Let me begin by thanking the rapporteur, mister McNamara, for having organized our work very efficiently and having already met with the commission at technical level that's made us that made it possible to advance. Now the fight against fraud and counterfeiting of the euro is a priority, that our group supports. There are a number of amendments that we welcome from the rapporteur, and I will just underline amendment number 2, which talks about the importance of cash payment and the importance in amendment 6 of reacting to the, urgent threats that coming from AI and then amendment 4 from the rapporteur, which we also support. That amendment seeks to, tackle 3rd country counterfeiting workshops. There are a number of reservations that I have. Now the budget is rather limited, €7,000,000 for the whole period. As a result, we don't think it's realistic to include the fight against money laundering even if we support that fight. We just think that Pericles doesn't have the resources to do that. We think that Pericles need to maintain its focus on the fight against counterfeiting. We also have our dates doubts about the overuse of delegated acts in amendment 18. We can live with that for changing the annexes, but it seems to be a little bit disproportionate to be using it any more than that. There are amendments that I'll make that, are in line with the rapporteur's ideas, And I'd like to clarify as well the interface between Pericles and other players in, home affairs, justice, the agencies, and bodies of the EU. Thank you very much. And, I'm very happy of the constructive work that we've been able to do as Shadows together with the rapporteur. Thank you.”
  Anti-money laundering regulation
• 2026-06-24 “Thank you very much, chairman. This morning I raised a point of order to deplore the fact that despite the objectives of. For majority groups, we have in our. Here today and because of its close links with the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamist movements. And the French government has spoken on this. Uh, my questions, though, are for the representative of the commission. You talk about structural racism. Uh, in your presentation, but nothing in the treaties or in the Charter of Fundamental Rights or in any of the EU's legislation, defines what structural racism might be. So what I would ask is the following. Is the European Commission still the guardian of the treaties, or is the Commission now an accomplice to the denigration of the peoples of Europe and the way of life? And in this strategy, I think you've taken a very selective approach towards or about the victims of racism. Why do we never talk about anti white white racism? Why are we never talking about, uh, uh, Christian or phobia against Christians or the importance of combating that given the number of anti-Christian movements in Europe, why are we not talking about the real causes of the exponential rise in anti-Semitism since October in the EU. And then your strategy attaches a great deal of importance to the role of militant NGOs. Here, once again, what I would ask the European Commission is, do you think that as elected representatives of the European people, the European Union's people, do you think we are less legitimate than unelected NGOs which have been chosen depending on their ideology? They've been given lots and lots of funding. And I think, as recent scandals have shown, which we have pointed to in the Patriots groups, the way that they have obtained funds over decades, I think really needs to be called into question. They're peddling an ideological agenda.”
  EU policy on integration and ethnic, racial and religious discrimination
• 2026-06-23 “(09:56:17 – 09:57:53): Thank you very much, madam chair. Commissioner Brunner, you yourself underlined the risk risks of the Muslim brothers, now in Austria, a country which is said that the Muslim brotherhood was on the illicit terror organ terrorist organizations, gives rise to the following question. Europol's mandate is to be reformed, they're to be given greater tools. Do you think it would be useful to support the request that a number of different political groups have made in this house, namely that the Muslim Brotherhood to be put on the European list of terrorist organizations. And would that make it easier for financial investigations to be carried out? And would it allow Europol to have the wherewithal to do, prevention, activities to prevent terrorism and also influence? And then what about external state actors? Thinking particularly about Turkey. Back in 2020, they were the 1st to use illegal immigration instrumentalize it as a hybrid, method, and they're quite aligned to, some parts or to the Muslim brotherhood. So European legislation when it comes to the instrumentalization of immigration and hybrid threats, what do you think we should do? Should we go further? Bearing in mind the fact that we know what Russia and better Russia are doing in this regard. 9:57:53 – 09:57:56): And now Stefano Cavitania.”
  EU policy on Islam
• 2026-06-16 “(11:22:01 – 11:24:46): Thank you very much, madam president, high representative. Of course, any military de escalation is good news for the civilian population and then for our economies, which have already faced the consequences of region's civility when it comes to trade transport and energy prices. However, we should, be careful about our diagnostic here because de escalation is not peace. How can we believe in a sustainable peace when the fundamental causes of the conflict remain? The 1st threat to regional peace is the Iranian regime, a regime that oppresses its people, that finances Hamas and Hezbollah, that threatens Israel and is destabilizing, the whole of the Middle East. It is the main threat for the stability of, Lebanon in the form of Hezbollah. For decades, we've seen this threat to Lebanese, sovereignty, a threat to Lebanese people, Christians in The Middle East. The number 1, threat to maritime security is the risk of the closure of the Strait Of Hormuz. This would lead to a new surge in energy prices to the detriment of the European people. At the same time, in Paris, missus Calachan Noel Barreault and other European leaders are celebrating the 1st anniversary of the, Paris Appeal and committing to that even with the current instability. But what has actually been solved in a year? Hamas is still there. Hezbollah is still here there. The Iranian regime continues its policy of destabilization. The Christians in Lebanon still live under threat, and there are still tensions when it comes to energy security at a global level. The EU is celebrating a year of declarations when the profound causes of the conflict still exist. Other European leaders simply want to have symbolic, condemnation even though there's still a lot of regional instability. There seems to be a confusion between communication and strategy. If you listen to some European leaders, they simply just keep repeating 2 state solution and hope that the regime in Tehran will go away and the weapons of Hezbollah and the terrorism of Hamas. The diplomacy of the EU is not a magic solution. Peace means you have to deal with the causes of regional instability. If, if you only look at the consequences, you don't deal with the causes. To deal with this war, Islamic, terrorism, you have to look at peace and security, maritime security, deal with the situation in Lebanon. These are the prerequisites for real, peace. Thank you.”
  EU-Iran relations
• 2026-03-06 “Answer given by Mr Brunner on behalf of the European Commission 22.5.2026 Written question An EU-India memorandum of understanding on a comprehensive framework of cooperation on mobility (MoU) was signed on 27 January 2026 [1] . In this context, the European Legal Gateway Office pilot in India [2] will facilitate safe, legal, and well-informed mobility from India to Member States in the Information and Communications Technology (ICT) sector. Through a dedicated office in India, a support office in the EU and an accompanying digital tool, the European Legal Gateway Office pilot will provide clear and reliable information on mobility pathways and their various skills and qualification requirements in the EU to Indian students, researchers, and professionals in the ICT sector. It will also support EU-based employers and higher education institutions to engage with Indian talent. The European Legal Gateway Office pilot will not be issuing any type of visas, as this is a competence of the Member States. To obtain a visa, third-country nationals, including those benefiting from the services of the European Legal Gateway Office pilot, will need to undergo national immigration procedures, including security checks. There is no intention for the European Legal Gateway Office pilot in India to act as a visa office; it will instead provide information about visa requirements and procedures to interested Indian nationals. [1] https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-7308-2026-INIT/en/pdf. [2] https://www.eeas.europa.eu/delegations/india/launch-european-legal-gateway-office-pilot_en?s=167.”
  Legal migration
• 2026-03-05 “E-000925/2026 Answer given by Mr McGrath on behalf of the European Commission The Commission condemns all forms of political violence, which undermine the fundamental values of democracy, pluralism and the rule of law enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union. Violent acts demonstrate the need to protect the civic space and ensure that all citizens can participate in public debate without fear of intimidation or violence. It is important to highlight that Member States are solely competent for maintaining law and order and safeguarding internal security, including as regards the protection of citizens from politically motivated violence and attacks. A priority of the European Democracy Shield 1 is to strengthen the fairness and integrity of electoral and other democratic processes and, in this context, to better ensure the safety of political candidates and elected representatives, including through a dedicated Commission recommendation and a guide of best practices, which are under preparation in the framework of the European Cooperation Network on Elections. 1 https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/2539eb53-9485-4199-bfdc97166893ff45_en?filename=JUST_template_comingsoon_standard_1.pdf.”
  Regulation of NGOs in Europe · Rule of law and democracy in the EU (political compass)
• 2025-11-12 “E-004481/2025 Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Kallas on behalf of the European Commission The EU has not been made aware through official channels of the allegations by the Israeli authorities linking Hamas with the Global Sumud Flotilla. Any eventual corroboration of the documents, potential disciplinary action against Members of the European Parliament (EP) is a matter for the EP in accordance with its ethics rules. In line with the staff regulations 1 , EU civil servants are bound by a strict code of conduct and ethical standards designed to ensure independence, integrity, and impartiality in conducting EU foreign policy. The EU’s position regarding Hamas is very clear and consistent. The Hamas military wing was listed by the EU under its counterterrorism sanctions regime on 27 December 2001, while Hamas in its entirety has been on the EU terrorist list since 12 September 2003. Following the brutal and indiscriminate terrorist attack against Israel on 7 October 2023, the EU established a new and dedicated sanctions regime against Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad on 19 January 2024 2 . There are currently 11 individuals and three entities subject to restrictive measures under that framework. The EU has not listed the ‘Popular Conference for Palestinians Abroad.’ As regards flotillas, the EU respects the intention of those on board the flotilla ships to draw attention to the humanitarian plight of the population of Gaza. In the EU, everyone has the right to exercise activism and freedom of assembly, this is a core pillar of EU values. The freedom of navigation under international law must also be upheld. At the same time, the EU discourages flotillas. They risk the safety of their participants and carry the potential for escalation. The authorities responsible for ensuring consular protection are the states to which the citizens belong. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A01962R003120260101&qid=1771326223355. 2 https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/sanctions-against-terrorism/.”
  Foreign interference in Europe · Relations with Israel - Palestine
• 2025-10-22 “E-004162/2025 Answer given by Mr Brunner on behalf of the European Commission The Commission refers the Honourable Members to its replies to questions E-000584/2025 1 and P-003602/2025 2 . As explained in its replies, the Commission is determined to respond to acts of violence against Christian believers wherever these acts occur. The Commission is committed to pursue its action to address the safety of places of worship, to monitor hatred based on religion, and to address attacks or discrimination against persons because of their religion or belief, regardless of whether the victims belong to majority or minority religious groups. Freedom of religion or belief remains a priority of the EU’s external human rights policy. The EU raised its concerns regarding violations of freedom of religion or belief in several bilateral human rights dialogues with third countries, and during visits of the EU Special Representative for human rights. The EU’s commitment to protecting and promoting freedom of religion or belief is anchored in multilateralism and based on the principles of equality, non-discrimination and universality. In the United Nations (UN) human rights fora, the EU leads in presenting annual resolutions on freedom of religion or belief. The EU supports and cooperates with the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, and with like-minded countries within the International Contact Group on Freedom of Religion or Belief. As regards the appointment of a Special Envoy for the promotion of freedom of religion or belief, the Commission understands the urgency of filling and reinforcing this position as swiftly as possible. The Commission has decided to renew the position, and the process of selection of the Envoy is ongoing. The Envoy will ensure that the rights of all religious groups, including Christians, are upheld. 1 https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-10-2025-000584_EN.html. 2 https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/P-10-2025-003602-ASW_EN.html.”
  EU engagement with Christian communities inside and outside the EU
• 2025-10-16 “E-004094/2025 Answer given by Mr Serafin on behalf of the European Commission The 20-years recognition ceremony is the only official career recognition for EU officials. From 2022 to 2024, the overall cost was EUR 340,000 for a total of 4,500 participants, i.e. an average individual cost of around EUR 75. The prices for all aspects related to the ceremony are defined by open competition, such as the latest procedure 1 . The maximum estimated value for the next four years covered by this call is EUR 464,000 for an estimated number of 5,800 medallists. 1 https://ted.europa.eu/en/notice/-/detail/655123-2025.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget · Size of EU budget · Budget for EU politicians
• 2025-10-15 “E-004065/2025 Answer given by Mr McGrath on behalf of the European Commission According to Article 16(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 168/2007 establishing a European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, the Agency shall fulfil its tasks in complete independence. In accordance with Article 21(1), the Agency’s budget is implemented under the responsibility of its Director. The Agency transparently informed its Management Board, including the Commission represented therein, of its plans to establish a liaison office in Brussels, following the example of other EU Agencies. The post of the Liaison Officer (LO) has been filled by internal mobility within the Agency, reducing salary costs in view of the lower correction coefficient to be applied when compared to Austria. The LO will be supported by one stagiaire. The costs for running the office in Brussels are thus mainly related to the rental costs of the office space amounting to EUR 14 900 per year, which is located in premises available for the European Commission services. According to Article 2 of Council Regulation (EC) No 168/2007, the Agency’s objective is to provide the relevant EU institutions, bodies, offices and agencies and the Member States when implementing EU law with assistance and expertise relating to fundamental rights. The Commission expects the Agency to exercise its contacts with EU institutions and bodies – via the Brussels liaison office and otherwise – in full respect of its mandate.”
  EU engagement with civil society · Transparency requirements of EU institutions
• 2025-10-06 “E-003921/2025 Answer given by Mr McGrath on behalf of the European Commission Civil Society Europe is the beneficiary of an operating grant under the Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values (CERV) 1 funding programme that aims at protecting and promoting the rights and values enshrined in the EU Treaties and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union in particular by supporting civil society organisations active in the EU. The CERV Programme has been approved by Members States in the Council and by the European Parliament and is implemented through public calls for proposals. Proposals are evaluated by independent experts, the highest ranked are selected for funding. The funding is provided in full transparency and in line with the Financial Regulation 2 . Civil Society Europe has been awarded a Framework Partnership Agreement for the next three years and the specific grant agreement covering the first year is under preparation. The Commission regularly engages with stakeholders, including civil society organisations, through various mechanisms. These exchanges may take place on an ad hoc basis as needed. Information on meetings held by Commission Members, their Cabinet members, and Commission staff holding management functions with interest representatives is made publicly available 34 , including published minutes, in accordance with the applicable transparency rules 5 . The Commission applies the Staff Regulation 6 for recruitment of staff. The membership of a defined organisation is neither a selection criterion, nor in itself a reason to exclude a candidate. 1 Regulation (EU) 2021/692 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 April 2021 establishing the Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values Programme and repealing Regulation (EU) No 1381/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Council Regulation (EU) No 390/2014 ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/692/oj. 2 Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 September 2024 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the EU (recast) ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/2509/oj. 3 https://commission.europa.eu/about/service-standards-and-principles/transparency/transparency-register_en. 4 https://transparency-register.europa.eu/search-register-or-update/search-register_en. 5 See Commission Decision (EU) 2024/3082 of 4 December 2024 on transparency measures concerning meetings held between Commission staff holding management functions and interest representatives. 6 Regulation No 31 (EEC), 11 (EAEC), laying down the Staff Regulations of Officials and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Economic Community and the European Atomic Energy Community, (OJ P 045 14.6.1962, p. 1385) ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/1962/31(1)/2025-05-13.”
  Regulation of NGOs in Europe · Asylum & border control
• 2025-10-01 “P-003799/2025 Answer given by Ms Kos on behalf of the European Commission The Steering Committee of the Facility for Refugees in Turkey provides strategic guidance on the overall priorities, types of actions and instruments to be used. It also permanently monitors and assesses implementation of the EU-Turkey statement 1 . It last met on 23 May 2025. As noted in the report 2 , Türkiye continues to make very significant efforts in hosting and addressing the needs of refugees and migrants and the EU-Turkey statement continued to deliver concrete results in 2024. As per financial rules, the Commission is obliged to disburse funding once it has been contracted, except in cases of fraud or other serious infractions against the principle of sound financial management enshrined in the applicable legislation. According to the Statistical Office of the EU (Eurostat) data, from 1 January 2016 to 31 December 2024, 31 525 Turkish nationals were returned from the EU to Türkiye following an order to leave 3 . 1 EU-Turkey Statement, https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2016/03/18/eu-turkeystatement/. 2 Ninth Annual Report on the Facility for Refugees in Turkey, https://enlargement.ec.europa.eu/ninth-annualreport-facility-refugees-turkey_en. 3 Eurostat, https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/migr_eirtn__custom_18334598/default/table. No data is available for the number of third country nationals returned to Türkiye in Eurostat or in the Irregular Migration Management Application, and only data concerning the return of Turkish nationals is available.”
  EU-Turkey relations · EU development aid (migration conditionality)
• 2025-09-17 “E-003594/2025 Answer given by Mr Brunner on behalf of the European Commission Where internal border control has been reintroduced, Member States shall apply mutatis mutandis the rules applicable at the external borders based on Article 32 of the Schengen Borders Code 1 . Member States may issue a decision to refuse entry but remain fully bound by the provisions of the Return Directive 2 . An illegally staying third-country national can be turned back to another Member State under readmission agreements or arrangements, as per Article 6(3) of the Return Directive, or the transfer procedure provided for in Article 23a of the Schengen Borders Code. The Commission is in contact with the authorities of all Member States concerned to ensure full application of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 3 , which will be replaced as of 1 July 2026 pursuant to Article 83 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1351 4 . An effective management of the external borders remains a priority of this Commission. To this end, on 12 October 2025, the Entry-Exit System (EES) 5 became operational 6 , to be followed by the European Travel Information and Authorisation System (ETIAS) 7 in 2026 and the revised Visa Information System (VIS). Once applicable, the instruments of the Pact on Migration and Asylum, complemented by a new legal framework on returns 8 , will contribute to better securing the external borders. The forthcoming revision of the European 1 Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on a Union Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders (Schengen Borders Code); OJ L 77, 23.3.2016, pp. 1-52, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/399/oj, as recently amended by Regulation (EU) 2024/1717. 2 Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals; OJ L 348, 24.12.2008, pp. 98-107, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2008/115/oj. See judgement of 21 September 2023, ADDE and Others, Case C-143/22, ECLI:EU:C:2023:689. 3 Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 establishing the criteria and the mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person (recast); OJ L 180, 29.6.2013, pp. 31-59, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2013/604/oj. 4 Regulation (EU) 2024/1351 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 May 2024 on asylum and migration management, amending Regulations (EU) 2021/1147 and (EU) 2021/1060 and repealing Regulation (EU) No 604/2013, OJ L, 2024/1351, 22.5.2024, pp.1-71, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1351/oj. 5 Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2017 establishing an Entry/Exit System (EES) to register entry and exit data and refusal of entry data of third-country nationals crossing the external borders of the Member States and determining the conditions for access to the EES for law enforcement purposes, and amending the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement and Regulations (EC) No 767/2008 and (EU) No 1077/2011. OJ L 327, 9.12.2017, pp. 20–82, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2017/2226/oj. 6 Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2025/1544 of 30 July 2025 determining the date from which the Entry/Exit System is to start operations pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 of the European Parliament and of the Council. OJ L, 2025/1544, 31.7.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec_impl/2025/1544/oj. 7 Regulation (EU) 2018/1240 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 September 2018 establishing a European Travel Information and Authorisation System (ETIAS) and amending Regulations (EU) No 1077/2011, (EU) No 515/2014, (EU) 2016/399, (EU) 2016/1624 and (EU) 2017/2226. OJ L 236, 19.9.2018, pp. 1–71. 8 Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a common system for the return of third-country nationals staying illegally in the Union, and repealing Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and the Council, Council Directive 2001/40/EC and Council Decision 2004/191/EC. COM/2025/101 final.”
  Asylum & border control
• 2025-06-30 “P-002629/2025 Answer given by Mr Brunner on behalf of the European Commission 1. Search and Rescue (SAR) is regulated by international law 1 and its implementation is a primary responsibility of the Member States. In emergencies, the competent national authorities typically dispatch boats, including private vessels, that are either the closest or best equipped to engage in SAR. International law also applies to the maritime activities of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (Frontex). Frontex’s SAR responsibilities are moreover detailed in EU law, e.g. Regulation 656/2014 2 , and in the operational plans for joint operations in which Frontex is involved. 2. Beyond publicly available information, the Commission is not aware of additional details pertaining to the case referred to by the Honourable Member and is therefore not in a position to confirm or deny the accuracy of information reported. The Commission has requested Frontex to provide additional information with respect to the facts of the case in question. The Agency’s reply will be sent to the Honourable Member by the Commission as soon as possible. 3. The Commission calls on all actors involved in SAR operations, including Frontex, to prioritise saving lives at sea in accordance with their obligations under EU and international law. Moreover, in the Pact on Migration and Asylum 3 , the Commission also proposed a more coordinated and multi-pillar approach to SAR by reinforced information sharing, coordination and cooperation among all relevant stakeholders, including partner countries. 1 Such as the International Convention on the Law of the Sea, the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, and the International Convention on Maritime Search and Rescue. 2 Regulation 656/2014 on establishing rules for the surveillance of the external sea borders in the context of operational cooperation coordinated by Frontex. 3 Commission Recommendation 2020/1365 on cooperation among Member States concerning operations carried out by vessels owned or operated by private entities for the purpose of search and rescue activities.”
  Asylum & border control
• 2025-05-23 “E-002090/2025 Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Kallas on behalf of the European Commission Since its creation, the European External Action Service (EEAS) has regularly organised thematic courses on a wide range of geopolitical issues, fostering continuous learning, informed debate and critical reflection among its staff. Between 2015 and 2019, the EEAS, in cooperation with the European Institute for Public Administration (EIPA), offered the one-day course titled ‘Political Islam’ as a platform for learning, exchange, and open dialogue on a complex and multifaceted subject. All participations in the course are part of a broader effort to present a diversity of viewpoints - academic, political, and civil society - on the topic of political Islam. The inclusion of a range of speakers is essential to fostering critical thinking and equipping participants to engage with real-world complexities. The course was designed and organised in cooperation with the EIPA, under an interinstitutional framework contract 1 . The total cost of the training was EUR 14 350. 1 Framework contract number HR/R3/PR/2015/003/Lot 1, which the Commission, as lead contracting authority, had procured for the independent use of the contracting institutions, bodies and agencies.”
  Foreign interference in Europe · EU policy on Islam
• 2025-04-23 “E-001643/2025 Answer given by Ms Lahbib on behalf of the European Commission In line with President of the Commission’s Political Guidelines for 2024-2029 1 , the Commission initiated the preparatory works for a new anti-racism strategy that follows upon the EU anti-racism action plan 2020-2025. Building on the action plan, the Commission is determined to develop a strategy that addresses all forms of racism. The call for evidence to which the Honourable Members refer was launched on 15 April 2025 alongside an open public consultation on the new strategy. Both are still ongoing and will close on 8 July 2025. Any interested stakeholder can participate in the public consultation process. The Commission does not disburse any funding in the consultation process to stakeholders that provide a contribution and the strategy itself does not involve any costs. 1 https://commission.europa.eu/document/e6cd4328-673c-4e7a-8683-f63ffb2cf648_en.”
  EU policy on integration and ethnic, racial and religious discrimination · EU engagement with Christian communities inside and outside the EU
• 2025-04-13 “E-001515/2025 Answer given by Ms Zaharieva on behalf of the European Commission The European Research Council (ERC) has funded since 2007 more than 17 000 projects and over 10 000 researchers, across physical sciences and engineering, life sciences, social sciences and humanities 1 . This led to over 2 200 patents and other Intellectual Property Rights applications. More than 200 000 articles were published in scientific journals and the ERC grantees have been awarded with 14 Nobel Prizes, 7 Fields Medals, 11 Wolf Prizes and dozens of important prizes. The `EuQu` project received funding from the EU’s Horizon 2020 ERC’s Synergy Grant call in 2018. The ERC awards grants based solely on scientific excellence 2 . Evaluated by renowned international scientific experts on the subject matter, the application met all necessary criteria and was selected among 27 successful out of 295 submissions in a highly competitive call. To ensure that all funded actions adhere to the highest ethical standards and principles, the European Research Council Executive Agency (ERCEA) conducts an ethics appraisal process with the help of independent, highly qualified ethics experts 3 . The project received ethics clearance before the grant was signed. This project is a major scholarly undertaking by a consortium of recognised academic institutions 4 . The research conducted concerns the development of knowledge and does not support any group or ideology. The ERCEA oversees projects through regular monitoring, requiring periodic scientific and financial reports to ensure progress and compliance with all relevant legislation and ethical standards 5 . 1 Within the social sciences and humanities projects which represent around a fourth of ERC grants, topics span an extensive range of disciplines, including economics and finance, law and political science, sociology, psychology and linguistics, literature and philosophy, history and archaeology, geography and environmental studies, anthropology, arts and cultural and religious studies – the category in which falls the mentioned project. 2 ERC Work Programme 2018-2020, Commission C(2017) 5307 of 2 August 2017t: https://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/wp/2018_2020/erc/h2020-wp18-erc_en.pdf. 3 ‘Annex A: The ethics review process’, Commission Decision C(2017)4750 amending Decision C(2014)2454 on the ERC rules for submission of proposals and the related evaluation, selection and award procedures relevant to the specific programme of Horizon 2020: https://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/sgl/erc/h2020-erc-se-rules-amended2_en.pdf. 4 Led by the Spanish National Research Council, involving the University of Naples L’Orientale, University of Copenhagen, and University of Nantes, with additional academic partners across Europe and beyond. 5 Projects undergo rigorous initial peer-review evaluation and mid-term and final reviews. If a project fails to meet standards or breaches any of its obligations under the grant agreement, the grant may be suspended, terminated, or reduced and funds may be recovered, and other administrative sanctions may be adopted.”
  EU research funding · EU policy on Islam
• 2025-04-09 “P-001446/2025 Answer given by Mr Brunner on behalf of the European Commission The Commission adopted a decision to provide a total of EUR 3 billion from the thematic facility under the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) 1 and the thematic facility under the Instrument for Financial Support for Border Management and Visa Policy (BMVI) 2 . The purpose is to support Member States in the implementation of the Pact on Migration and Asylum and in hosting displaced persons from Ukraine. In addition, Member States eligible to receive additional mid-term allocations under the AMIF 3 and the BMVI 4 programmes may use those additional resources to address their specific needs, including in relation to the implementation of the Pact on Migration and Asylum. It is for the Member States to determine the co-financing rates for the EU contribution, which can vary from 75% to 100% across the different types of actions implemented under their programmes. The Commission will receive information on the level of co-financing from each Member State once the amended national programmes are approved. The Commission is supporting the Member States and is in close and continued dialogue with national authorities at various levels to translate the provisions of the Pact on Migration and Asylum into practice. 1 Commission Implementing Decision of 8.5.2025 amending Implementing Decision C(2022) 8340 final on the financing of components of the Thematic Facility under the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund and adoption of the Work Programme for 2023, 2024 and 2025, C(2025)2688 final, https://homeaffairs.ec.europa.eu/document/download/fd09746e-956c-4f67-81df-574fc127e4cd_en?filename=AMIF-eighthrevised-2023-2025-work-programme-substantial_en.pdf. 2 Commission Implementing Decision of 8.5.2025 amending Implementing Decision C(2022) 8993 final on the financing of the components of the Thematic Facility under the Integrated Border Management Fund, the Instrument for Financial Support for Border Management and Visa Policy, and adoption of the work programme for the years 2023, 2024 and 2025, C(2025)2696 final, https://homeaffairs.ec.europa.eu/document/download/536832ee-6088-4d79-97e4-e18be84f7360_en?filename=BMVI-sixthrevised-2023-2025-work-programme-substantial_en.pdf. 3 Commission Implementing Decision of 25.4.2025 on the mid-term allocations for 2025, 2026 and 2027 for Member States’ programmes under the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund established by Regulation (EU)2021/1147 of the European Parliament and the Council, C(2025)1750 final, https://homeaffairs.ec.europa.eu/document/download/62751ea0-57df-4f0d-ad0a-3b07d0bbc947_en?filename=AMIF-BMVIISF-mid-term-allocations-per-MS-for-2025-2026-2027_en.pdf. 4 Commission Implementing Decision of 25.4.2025 on the mid-term allocations for 2025, 2026 and 2027 for Member States' programmes under the Instrument for Financial Support for Border Management and Visa Policy, as part of the Integrated Border Management Fund established by Regulation (EU) 2021/1148 of the European Parliament and of the Council, C(2025)1800 final, DECISION on the mid-term allocations for 2025, 2026 and 2027 for Member States' programmes under the Instrument for Financial Support for Border Management and Visa Policy, as part of the Integrated Border Management Fund established by Regulation (EU) 2021/1148 of the European Parliament and of the Council.”
  Asylum & border control
• 2025-03-03 “E-000895/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Mînzatu on behalf of the European Commission The Commission implements 80% of the Erasmus+ 1 programme budget under indirect management, via national agencies designated by national authorities in each Member State or third country associated to the programme. Those agencies, including in Türkiye, are responsible for managing all phases of the project lifecycle. This includes maintaining communication with programme beneficiaries, monitoring project implementation and ensuring compliance with programme rules by the beneficiaries. Hence, the Turkish national agency is rightly placed to provide the Commission with all the information necessary for the assessment of the Gaziantep Islamic Science and Technology University (GISTU) case and its responsibilities include cooperating with the Commission in looking into the use of the EU budget. Meanwhile, the Commission is committed to its obligation to ensure that no one receives EU funding if they are involved in criminal or unethical practices, terrorism-related offences or in other activities incompatible with EU values. Therefore, the Commission is closely following the matter of GISTU and has been in contact with the Turkish national agency since October 2024. This included formal written communication and informal exchange of views on the national agency’s approach to the case. A legislative and contractual framework is in place for preventing and following up on alleged conflicts of interest in the national agency. Finally, based on the analysis of the information gathered, the Commission will take, if need be, the adequate measures towards GISTU University, in line with the applicable legal framework, such as suspension of contract or payments, contract termination, recovery of funds or exclusion from EU financing. 1 https://erasmus-plus.ec.europa.eu/”
  EU-Turkey relations
• 2025-01-24 “E-000314/2025 Answer given by Mr Brunner on behalf of the European Commission Article 59 of the Regulation governing the European Union Agency for Asylum (EUAA) 1 establishes that the Agency is independent as regards operational and technical matters. This independence includes communication activities, which are carried out on the own initiative of the Agency. The EUAA is informed of the Commission’s communication guidelines but the Agency does not consult the Commission on individual posts, reports or materials. The Commission promotes inclusion, diversity and unity in the EU – in line with the EU Treaties. The Commission’s communications reflect this. 1 Regulation (EU) 2021/2303 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 December 2021 on the European Union Agency for Asylum and repealing Regulation (EU) No 439/2010, OJ L 468, 30.12.2021, p. 1– 54, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/2303/oj.”
  EU policy on Islam · Asylum & border control
• 2025-01-24 “E-000313/2025 Answer given by Mr Brunner on behalf of the European Commission The Commission takes position on legal texts, not political statements nor interpretations thereof.”
  EU policy on Islam · Asylum & border control
• 2025-01-15 “E-000141/2025 Answer given by Ms Kos on behalf of the European Commission The Commission has an obligation to disburse funding under the contracts it signs with regard to the financial assistance provided under the Facility for Refugees in Türkiye, provided the terms and conditions of those contracts have been respected. Accordingly, the Commission can confirm that it has continued to disburse funding to support refugees in Türkiye within the framework of the 2016 EU-Turkey statement 1 since March 2020 2 . The conditionality of the statement is of a political nature. Since March 2020 the budgetary authority has allocated a further EUR 6 billion in assistance to refugees in Türkiye covering the period 2020-2027. The budgetary authority decided on this allocation after careful consideration of the implementation of the statement. The Commission has continued to programme, contract and disburse the additional refugee support as well, and continues to do so. Türkiye has sustained efforts to prevent irregular and dangerous crossings on the Eastern Mediterranean route to Europe. It also continues to host and support 3.6 million refugees from Syria and other countries (see Türkiye 2024 Report 3 ). The EU expects Türkiye to stand by its commitments and to deliver on all elements in the statement. This includes preventing irregular migration to all Member States, resuming without further delay readmission of returnees from the Greek islands and applying the statement in a non-discriminatory way. Progress in the implementation of the EU-Turkey statement will be on the agenda of the next Steering Committee for Refugees in Turkey in spring 2025. The meeting will be attended by Member States and representatives of the European Parliament. 1 https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2016/03/18/eu-turkey-statement/pdf 2 https://enlargement.ec.europa.eu/document/download/aebf392d-0c6b-4841-8234f9661d1cb4ec_en?filename=COM_2024_593_F1_COMMUNICATION_FROM_COMMISSION_TO_INST_E N_V3_P1_3789868.PDF 3 https://enlargement.ec.europa.eu/turkiye-report-2024_en”
  Asylum & border control
• 2025-01-14 “P-000127/2025 Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the European Commission The Commission is responsible for negotiating and concluding trade agreements with third countries on behalf of the EU, acting on the basis of a mandate of the Council. Member States are regularly informed about the state of play of negotiations through the Trade Policy Committee. This was also the case for the EU-Mercosur negotiations, at every stage of the process. The chief negotiators concluded the negotiations at the technical level during their last meeting in Brasília on 25-28 November 2024. In both private and public statements, including at leaders’ level, Mercosur countries indicated that the Mercosur Summit in Montevideo on 6 December 2024 would be the appropriate time and venue for a political conclusion. The College of Commissioners was informed about the announcement of the political conclusion of the EU-Mercosur negotiations.”
  Trade relations with Mercosur
• 2024-10-18 “E-002169/2024 Answer given by Mr Síkela on behalf of the European Commission 1. In response to the Court of Auditors’ (ECA) 2018 recommendations 1 , detailed operational frameworks were approved in 2019 by the Operational Committees for the three EU Trust Fund for Africa (EUTF) 2 windows, representing the basis for the identification and formulation of programmes. In addition, the voting members of the Operational Committees are the financial contributors of the EUTF (including Member States) and have approved the budgets that are included in the fund. The EUTF Operational Committees have regularly considered the prevailing challenges and provided strategic guidance to the Commission for the development of EUTF actions for the three regions. 2. The contributions to the EUTF from France can be found in the Annual report 3 and amounts to EUR 9 million. 3. The EUTF has financed projects aiming at countering smuggling of migrants and trafficking in human beings 4 . Moreover, the EUTF has funded projects providing tangible real alternatives to trafficking by offering technical assistance, skills development, and economic opportunities to population located along the migratory routes. 1 ECA special report 32/2018: https://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADocuments/SR18_32/SR_EUTF_AFRICA_EN.pdf 2 As per 2019 Operational Committee minutes. 3 Chapter 3, Table 4 of the Annual Report. The Annual Reports are available on the library section of the https://trust-fund-for-africa.europa.eu/library_en 4 Example of projects can be found in the EUTF Annual Report 2023: https://trust-fund-forafrica.europa.eu/document/download/2e5df06d-1998-4a5a-b2d8-b343fe8dc1b6_en?filename=EUTF-REPORT2023-EN-WEB.pdf”
  EU Development & Humanitarian Aid · EU development aid (migration conditionality)
• 2024-10-02 “P-001922/2024 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Mînzatu on behalf of the European Commission The Commission is determined to ensure that persons and entities involved in criminal, unethical practices, or other activities incompatible with EU values do not receive EU financial support. To safeguard proper use of EU funds, in line with the EU Financial Regulation 1 and relevant agreements concluded with recipients of EU funds, various mechanisms have been put in place. Entities implementing EU funds also need to comply with EU restrictive measures 2 . The EU Financial Regulation includes since September 2024, under the early detection and exclusion system, an exclusion ground in case of incitement to discrimination, hatred and violence against a group of persons or a member of a group or similar activities incompatible with EU values, where the conduct may negatively affect the performance of the contract. The Commission can thus take immediate action, should it become aware of any evidence in this respect by excluding these entities from EU financing. Gaziantep Islam Science and Technology University has been a beneficiary of the Erasmus+ programme 3 . The projects led by this university were selected by the national agency responsible for the implementation of the programme in Türkiye, in line with standard procedures (indirect management). The Commission is currently investigating allegations made in the press, in cooperation with the national agency in Türkiye. As a precautionary measure, pursuant to the newly introduced exclusion ground mentioned above and in accordance with Article 132 of the Financial Regulation, the Commission has asked the national agency to suspend the contracting process for the grant agreement on the recently selected cooperation project referred to in the Honourable Member’s written question until there is more clarity on the matter. 1 Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 September 2024 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union (recast), https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ%3AL_202402509 2 Article 215 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A12016E215 3 https://erasmus-plus.ec.europa.eu/”
  EU volunteering programs · EU policy on Islam · Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• 2024-08-17 “P-001517/2024 Answer given by Ms Johansson on behalf of the European Commission In June 2024, the European Council reiterated its strongest condemnation of the brutal terrorist attacks conducted by Hamas and other terrorist groups on 7 October 2023 1 . Hamas is listed under the EU terrorist list 2 . Additionally, the EU established restrictive measures against those who support, facilitate or enable violent actions by Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad in January 2024 3 . Concerning projects funded under the EU budget, if a project is not implemented in line with the grant agreement, including non-respect of EU values, the Commission and (in case of indirect management such as for Erasmus+) the national agencies can take appropriate measures, including financial corrections as appropriate. The Turkish organisation ‘Şark Forum Derneği’ 4 is currently not receiving funding from Erasmus+ anymore but has received funding in the past for youth projects now finalised. As coordinator of four projects, this organisation received EUR 85 173 (shared with their partner organisations) under the current Erasmus+ programme and EUR 18 755 under the previous programme 5 . The regular monitoring activities carried out during the project implementation period did not result in any issues being detected. As these projects have all been completed and this organisation has no longer contractual relations within the programme, there is no legal ground to take action vis-à-vis the projects in the specific context described. The Commission would like to refer the Honourable Member to the Commission’s reply to written question P-001524/2024, which addressed the same issue and complement this reply. 1 https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/qa3lblga/euco-conclusions-27062024-en.pdf 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A02001E0931-20240221 3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A02024D0385-20240119 4 https://www.sharqforum.org/ 5 These figures are those granted by the national agency to the entire consortium managing each project after finalisation.”
  EU policy on Islam · Regulation of NGOs in Europe · Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “Thank you chair. I will speak in in French. Merci beaucoup, commissaire Bruno. Thank you very much, Commissioner, for setting out our visa strategy. My questions will focus primarily on your various different competencies, your portfolio, if you like. I don't want to enter into an electoral approach as the socialists have been doing. My first question pertains to the link which you've established between the returns regulation and the use of use of visa strategy. Could you explain to us in a bit more detail how you might imagine using the visa strategy to exert pressure on third countries who refuse to issue laissez-passer to their nationals when EU member states want to expel those individuals? So both in practical terms but also in legislative terms, how do you intend to proceed? My second point pertains to what you said regarding economic attractivity. Increasingly, it appears that the difference we used to make between short term Schengen visas, which are issued a European level on the one hand and on the other hand, immigration visas. So it would appear that this differentiation is gradually disappearing. So this new strategy which you've just presented, is that an indication that we're moving towards a new common strategy in legal terms when it comes to European visa policy? And if you could focus on the legal aspect, that would interest me. My third point concerns the use of technology modernization, interoperability. So in talking about the visa strategy, you referred to digitalization. I think that comes under the heading Technical Modernization. Do you plan to roll out innovations to facilitate the work of our border forces and the police, so as to reinforce our member states. Security policy in terms of visa policy.”
  Legal migration
• “Thank you, Madam Chair. Commissioner. Yesterday, the European Commission launched the European Center for Democratic Resilience. We don't know yet what its competencies, budget, staff or legal base will be. Your center for Democratic Resilience is actually attacking the democracy that we represent in this European Parliament. The context is serious. In a report of the 3rd of February 2026, the House Judiciary Committee in the US accuses the EU of exerting pressure on digital platforms to restrict lawful political content, thus imperiling freedom of expression and in particular, the freedom of expression of conservative groups in Europe. We know we have ultra left violence, we have terrorist attacks, Islamist, jihadist, terrorist attacks. Will the Democrat, the democracy shield cover those? Will it be covering all terrorist violence? Where is your defence against the alleged anti-fascists? Where is your defence against the jihadists? Thank you.”
  Disinformation & online freedoms
• “Madam president, von der Leyen. Dear colleagues. Europe deserves better than silence. Better than opaque operations, better than bureaucratic authoritarianism. For six years now, you have been heading this commission, and it's a Jupiter vertical ism that you apply cut off from the people and all too often also cut off from the values that founded our continent. Fisa gate is not an administrative error. It is a question of abuse of power. €35 billion. The public denier negotiated by SMS without a call for tenders, without a mandate, without transparency. The Court of Justice of the European Union has upheld this. You acted alone outside of any kind of democratic framework. And therefore it's not just your error, Not your fault. It's not just your fault. It is actually symbolic of an even graver drift, namely the fact that Europe is being steered, disregarding the people under your authority. The Commission has become basically the extended arm of corporations, foreign entities, sometimes far removed from our civilisation. You talk about transition, but millions of Europeans are experiencing this as punishment. You call it a Green Deal. Our farmers are craftsmen and women are industrialists. See it as strangulation and what you call European values all too often look like censorship of the people. People who dare to think differently.”
  Transparency requirements of EU institutions
• “So is that the Europe that you're defending, madam? A Europe where decisions are taken without any debate? A European that would sign trade agreements like Mercosur behind the backs of our citizens. And that would therefore pave the way for unfair competition. So, no, no, I'm sorry, Mrs. von der Leyen. This Europe is not our Europe. Our Europe is the Europe of freedoms, the Europe that respects identities, sovereignties and democratic choices. The Europe that will protect, that will build, that listens, not the one that imposes today. Therefore, we shall be voting in favour of the motion of censure. It's not just an opposition gesture. It is an act of responsibility. We're not just talking about stepping aside from you. We're taking this opportunity to say that another way forward is available a Europe of promise, not just a system with the superposition, imposition of threats and standards. The people of Europe do not need an all powerful commission. What they need is a Europe that they can identify with in their image. So if we want to send a strong signal, let it be the following one The return of the political. The return of the people and the return of the reel. Thank you.”
  EU political integration
• “Thank you. Chair. And thank you, Miss Charles, for explaining to us how exactly WhatsApp functions. Now, my question is on cooperation between WhatsApp and law keeping forces, especially when it comes to a judicial or police investigation. Now, you've listed a number of good reasons as to why we need robust encryption when it comes to messaging. This is to protect privacy, but also to avoid, uh, spying. So my question is the following. In some member states, perhaps most member states. If a judge decrees it so it is possible to carry out investigations with telephone taps. So do you think your company would accept similar requests for wiretaps within a judicial investigation, as decreed by a law by a judge, rather something that would be the equivalent of a telephone wiretap. But for WhatsApp. You are an international company. Perhaps this has not already happened in the EU, but perhaps you have examples from other parts of the world, perhaps the US, where this has occurred and you have received such requests.”
  Privacy & law enforcement
• “Thank you very much. And welcome, Mr. D'arrigo. Um, how would you describe the current situation Europe is facing regarding drugs in in general? What I'm saying Europe is not necessarily limited to the European Union can be the European continent. Uh, you said, um, if you are appointed, you will cover the full spectrum from public health to, let's say, combating criminality related to drugs. But in case resources are scarce. So if there is a lack of budget, how would you prioritize? Um, and I'm asking this because EU member states have national legislation that often reflect their national priorities, which are conflicting on different issues. Some member states want to legalize some drug substance, while other member states have a very strict legislation. And I would like to ask you, what in our views are the challenges that the agency will face, let's say in the in the three, four, five next years. Um, and how would you address those challenges if you are appointed? And my my last question, um, is, uh, well, about your your own skills. Um, if you had to summarize, uh, very shortly, why, uh, you are the best suitable candidate for that job at this point of time. And if you could tell us where you feel that there's still some areas that you you need to develop and where you don't have all the skills or experience. So according, of course, to to your own assessment. Thank you very much.”
  Regulation of drug precursors in the EU
• “Thank you, Fabrice, for the Patriots finally. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. We knew that that Turkey interferes in the functioning of the European Union. I remember the Miss Johansson's administration that Turkey allowed to itself to protest against Frontex and fisheries missions in Cyprus. We've heard from our guests today that is interference and menaces threats by the Turkish government against members of the Turkish diaspora. So my question is this what are the advice that our Speakers would give us, what advice could they give us to the European Union institutions, but also to the national authorities and the member states. So that, first of all, that they can protect the citizens in our member States who are former Turkish citizens, who have been naturalized or who are our nationals today, how can we protect them and particularly within this European democracy? European democracy shield. How can we protect against these Turkish interference when it comes to national elections and the European elections, particularly to the Parliament? Are there any measures that can be taken in electoral periods in Turkey, so that members of the diaspora, and in particular those who are European Union nationals, are not used by the Mr. Erdogan's government? Thank you. I too would like to ask a question.”
  Foreign interference in Europe
• “Thank you very much, chair. I will speak in French. First of all, I would like to thank the rapporteur for the work on this file. Now, as we just heard from my colleague Deep Shadow, there are a number of concerns which my group also shares, as well as disagreements because the draft. Is goes beyond the framework sent out by set up by the Afco committee. And also the institutional. Intention behind the Charter of Fundamental Rights as intended by the Member States. I was surprised by the ideological nature of a number of aspects in the report. We would want to adhere more strictly to the Charter of Fundamental Rights. There are a number of rights that must, of course, be protected on the basis of this charter, but we don't see why. We would want to have. An extensive interpretation of new rights that should be hidden in the new Charter of Fundamental Rights. We have to respect the limitations of the treaties and also the intention behind the charter itself, which only applies to member states. When they're applying the rights, the law of the Union. My amendments are mainly deletions or corrections. The regarding the excessive presence of ideological elements. And EU meddling in the prerogatives of member states, especially when it comes to family policy. We also would like to see the mention of certain religious groups that are under threat by anti-Christian or anti-Semitic activities. This is very relevant to France, my country. On the basis of reports by intelligence services and the Ministry of the interior. These religious groups are the target of Islamist groups. There's been a huge increase in anti-Semitic attacks over the past two years. I think there are two approaches the Afco Committee or two approaches were seeing in the Afco committee. There are those who want to be true to the nature and the intention of the Charter of Fundamental Rights. This, I believe, is shared by the groups on the right, if I may say so. And then there are those who want to go beyond this, towards a very creative interpretation with ideological tendencies. And this is something I don't share. This is an approach we find more towards the left of the spectrum. Thank you very much.”
  EU competences on human rights
• “Merci, monsieur.Thank you very much, chairman. I'll be doing this in French. Thank you to all of the speakers we've heard from this morning. A few years ago, a journalist was murdered in Malta because she was working freely. She wanted to do investigative journalism. So my first question is for the European Commission. Can the European Commission put pressure on left wing governments, such as the left wing government in Malta, to shed light on what happened? Second event in France a couple of months ago, the C8 TV channel was arbitrarily closed by the public authorities, and that was because it was broadcasting content which were considered to be unpleasant for the anachronists in power, despite the fact that this was a very popular TV channel. My question is, can the Commission representative commit to examining this situation in the next rule of law report, and in all of the various studies that are carried out into media freedom in the Member States? And then finally, on the 15th of May, The Economist noted a backsliding on freedom of speech in Europe. It said Europeans are becoming less free to say what they think. That's the title of the article. I can also recall the words of Vice President Vance of the United States, who was also worried about, uh, Backsliding on freedom of speech in Europe. Of course, the European Commission is basically reciting the Catechism of Pravda.”
  EU Supervision of the Rule of Law
• “Thank you. Thank you. Chairman. I'd like to thank the four speakers who, gave us their point of view. We have a first question on the economic and financial model. The Commission representative raised and other speakers to mention that we should think about an economic model so that the press or media, the traditional media. Could develop without becoming victims of AI. So I wanted to know, which route are you considering? My second question regards what was said in English this pluralism by design. Now, if I've understood correctly, there could be technological solutions in order to make the implicit choices transparent. Whatever is done when selecting sources, for instance, or eliminating certain sources. Is that what you were talking about? So someone whoever wants to could find out the reasoning behind that. Ai had in suppressing certain sources. And why were those sources considered uninteresting? And then this leads to my third question. Now I'm a member of the committee. I don't see a lot of people from the committee present. However, this raises a question on education, on schools, on how on training young people who, I don't know the times before AI. So, for instance vocational training to all the generations who are present here so that they can use AI and the best possible way because it does exist. We won't. We can't go back. It's there. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Leghari.”
  EU support for traditional (non-digital) media
• “Thank you very much chair I will speak in in French thank you Commissioner thank you very much for your report and I too would like to congratulate you on your success on having it adopted by the LIBE committee. We've had two regulations on safe third countries safe countries of origin and that proves that where there is willingness to protect our borders that does then seem to translate into facts. On the subject of your report simplification is a a good start certainly this is welcomed by my political party generally speaking we support everything that moves in the direction of the omnibus regulation and so this is a good indicator firstly for our member states for our citizens but also when it comes to our businesses because we want to make sure that we can unleash European competitiveness and create jobs in Europe. And this brings me on to my question when it comes to markets and security your report talks about the need to have equipment and European companies actively working in security and I'd like to know what you're thinking about where public procurement is concerned do you intend to roll out a European preference for European companies? This means that when we have a state a national authority or an agency from the European Union which finds itself with a a need to acquire equipment or security services are you going to introduce any type of European preference? Then more broadly speaking I would also like to hear your point of view of what's your feeling among these stakeholders that you've met you've mentioned that you've had a number of meetings across the the EU member states what is your feeling about the economic stakeholders or or public stakeholders and perhaps even at a more local level do you feel that there's a great deal of movement there in the field of security to ensure that together we can be stronger collectively? One final point has to do with access to European funds I I believe I've read this in your report you didn't mention it today but you said you wanted to make it easier for member states to access European finance financing so that they can apply the migration pact I'd like to know what you have in mind are you also going to make it easier to be set up these could be centers or border posts etcetera or wherever there is a need there could be some physical barriers as required by the geography thank you very much”
  Asylum & border control
• “(16:33:37 – 16:35:49): Thank you, chairman. I'd like to thank our 3 guests. For a long time, Islamism has been looked at under the lens of the terrorist threat. But many reports, particularly in France, show that it's also something that attempts to influence education institutions, associations, and more widely the social norms in our society. So the challenge isn't only to prevent attacks anymore. The challenge is to preserve our fundamental freedoms, equality between men and women, the freedom of expression, national cohesion in our member states. At the end of the day, we're talking about our European way of life. This ideological influence has effects, effects in the form of cultural and intellectual terrorism. And let me recall that 2 professors 2 teachers, excuse me, were killed at their place of work by Islamists. So my questions are to our speakers, in particular, perhaps to the commission representative. Firstly, do you believe that current EU instruments are appropriate to respond to this nonviolent but highly political element of Islamism? Secondly, is the commission ready to examine the role played by certain organizations that benefit from privileged access to European institutions when there are serious questions on their positions and vis a vis political Islam? And my 3rd question, are you ready to extend the list of terrorist organizations of the EU in order to enable financial sanctions to be levied against them to prevent them being able to influence our society and to end the forbearance that they benefit from within national and European institutions as well as in certain media. We need to try and stop people being so forgiven forgiving vis a vis Islamic terrorism also in this parliament. Some people even decide to boycott today's session. Thank you.”
  EU policy on Islam
• “Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Mr.. Commissioner and Minister. Most Member States are not ready for practical reasons. We can see that Eurodac is not ready everywhere. Emmanuel Macron's France has avoided the debate in Parliament because they knew that there would not be a majority to vote on the pact. My question is straightforward will there be an evaluation of the implementation of the pact? And if the pact cannot be implemented, because in reality the pact will not be accepted by Europeans, will we be able to put in place an omnibus on the migration and asylum pact? Because we must not forget that this would legalize human trafficking on the other side of the world. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Apologies.”
  Asylum & border control
• “Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Madame, for your presentation. It's wonderful to see you here. Only a few months on from your hearing. And I see that you have already analyzed a lot of activities within Amla and your busy building. Thing. I have a question on combating drugs related money laundering and also terrorism related money laundering. Any news yet from your work? Have you identified any vulnerabilities of banking systems or financing systems in the EU? Are there any particular member States who strike you as being more vulnerable than others within the EU? You've already referred to cooperation with third countries, so I'd have the same question there. Are you building relationships with countries in certain areas, such as the Gulf states? What about the Maghreb region? Money laundering linked to drug trafficking. As a general issue and a follow up question to that, what about working with Europol on South America? Europol is currently engaged in signing cooperation agreements with South American countries. Could this play a role, too, in combating money laundering from drug trafficking? In terms of coordination work, you referred to the lengthy recruitment procedures. Have you been able to identify what's holding up recruitment? Why is it so complex? Is there something we could do to make your life easier there? Thanks.”
  Anti-money laundering regulation
• “Thank you. President. Commissioner 641 days now that Israeli hostages have been kept by Hamas, 641 days of waiting and suffering for them and their families have been abandoned by the international community. Negotiations are floundering in Doha, and now we see an Islamic coalition Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis, financed and armed by Iran. Facing Israel, this is strategic methodological. And it's Tehran's strategy to surround, weaken and in the long term destroy the only stable democracy in the region. It is not a local conflict. It is a hybrid war, a regional war and an ideological war. It is a war on the West. During this time, the EU has been trying to distribute humanitarian aid but are giving it too often into the wrong hands. Condemning violence without naming aggressors, saying that they were the victim of a pilgrim in Israel and the 7th of October, and then telling them to hold firm. But combating Islamic Islamists. And clearly condemning them is something they've not been brave enough to do. They've not been brave enough to see that this is a war of civilisations, and we should be on the side of democracy, firmness and ultimately freedom. Thank you president.”
  Relations with Israel - Palestine
• “For years, Brussels has been piling on rules for anti-discrimination without asking whether it protects Europeans. Rules observatories are piling up. It doesn't improve things. It doesn't improve the conflict. It holds it up from taking pragmatic steps. The Commission has. Withdrawn the Commission. The directive, blocked for years. The ideology is not being discussed, is being imposed. This has a cost. It's the taxpayers and companies have constant legal insecurity. But it's also a democratic thing. The militant machinery, which is disconnected from the real life. This there's a sorting of discrimination. Some people are ignored. The Christians, um, European identity is invisible. The the left and the woke in Brussels tell us what to defend. But that it divides things. It doesn't appease. It opposes people. Fighting discrimination shouldn't be ideological flag. It's a question of justice. Thank you very much, chairman.”
  EU policy on integration and ethnic, racial and religious discrimination
• “So how do you view that challenge, be it for private actors or public actors, how do you prevent them from actually damaging information integrity by means of funding? How do you prevent them from doing that? And then another question would be on neutrality and on independence. When it comes to the choice of actors or other parties. I understand you mentioned a panel, independent panel of scientists, and many of them, in fact, hail from the European Union. I was wondering, how do you select these members, the scientific members who sit on this panel? How are they selected? I understand they're supposed to be independent. How are they selected? And then a final question, if I may. You know, where do you place the cursor, so to speak? You know, you have the challenge of freedom of expression. We wish to have freedom of expression. Of course, that on the one hand. But then on the other hand, you do need some kind of scrutiny. You do need some kind of control. For instance, in order to fight crime, we've talked about the protection of minors online, but there are other types of criminality that we also need to fight against. So how do you address that balance? And then there are other risks, of course, that can also come into play. For instance, the legitimate objective of fighting crime. So how do you address that balance.”
  Disinformation & online freedoms
• “Thank you, Madam Chair. I would also like to express my thanks to both rapporteurs for econ and lib, for the work they've done and the contribution which they have made. I think that we are moving in the right direction. As my Patriot colleague in econ has said in Libe, we would like to see competitiveness for European companies above all. And if you look at the Draghi report, you'll see that excessive red tape is currently a hindrance to economic growth in Europe. So we want to unleash this energy in companies. So this approach to regulation is the right one. As for thresholds, as my colleague from the Econ committee has said, we could consider higher thresholds, for instance for staff or turnover. And in that spirit, I'll be making certain amendments in Lisbon.”
  Overall simplification of regulation in the EU
• “Mr. president Brussels announced fines on google to defend the freedom of the press. Well that's great but let's be honest. This is coming very late. They've been going on for 20 years. Our data has been going off to the US, but the commission rolled out the red carpet to Big Tech. Today. They want to appear as a knight in shining armor. But they're accomplices and have been since the beginning. You can't be going cap in hand to Silicon Valley. We have to create something of our own. This is tied in with public procurement, supporting actors and having rules that apply to international actors. This fine is a signal, but if actions don't follow, it's a mere spectacle. What we need now is to stop feeding these foreign giants and take back control of our data, our media, and our digital future. It would be a rude awakening because we're dependent on these giants. We've been dependent for years and it will be hard to take back control.”
  EU digital & tech sovereignty
• “Thank you, Madam President. Commissioner, sexual deepfakes and exploitation of minors on the internet are on platforms are absolutely criminal. They are often taking place in silence and the platforms are not reacting rapidly enough. The European Union's response is to expand the number of rules. The DSA. It has said, is not enough because criminal content can remain online. Sanctions are too late and perpetrators get off scot free. The truth is simple the protection of the victims victims is essential and it can't be done through technocracy. Technocracy or through self-regulation. It is the member states criminal law, and the member states identified accountable magistrates forces of law and order who are capable of creating a deterrent effect that we need. We in Europe should not be censuring opinion. We should be allowing the full respect of national authorities and national powers to intervene. It is only the national public authorities that are actually in a position to guarantee the necessary protection, dignity and justice. Thank you.”
  Privacy & detection of online child abuse
• “Thank you very much. And welcome, Mrs. Nolan. Um, my first question is to ask you to describe the current situation Europe is facing regarding drugs in general. And now a more specific question about the mandate and the work of the agency. Uh, in case you are appointed, how would you strike the balance between public health policies, on the one hand, and let's say, combating drugs related criminality on the other hand, in particular, if there is a lack of resources and you have to prioritize your your action. I also would like to hear from you how to cooperate with Member States in an area where national legislations reflect political priorities and political preferences, and we know that some member States want to have strict legislation on certain drugs and substances, while other member states prefer to legalise. How would you cooperate with member states in such a context? And then more specifically, what would be in your views, the challenges that the agency will have to face in the next years? And how would you, in your capacities, executive director, if you are appointed, how would you address political operational managerial challenges occurring in the next years? And the final question regarding your your own skills. So that's self-assessment. Could you shortly tell us, um, what, uh, why you are the best suitable candidate for this job right now in this point of time? And also, if there are some skills that you are still missing and how you would acquire them. Thank you very much.”
  Regulation of drug precursors in the EU
• “Thank you. Chairman, I'd just like to briefly thank the rapporteur for the high quality of her work. And I also wanted to join my voice to those of the colleagues who, like me, visited the ports of Antwerp and Rotterdam last week to say that fighting corruption in ports is essential. Corruption that affects public officials, but also those working in the private sector who are recruited by businesses and who have access to ports is a major problem. We visited Antwerp and Rotterdam, as I say, and we heard that it would be useful to have the possibility to exchange data on employee profiles in the different ports. So I think that's interesting, but nevertheless, I just wanted to join my voice to colleagues. I mean, there is a consensus on this. I'd say thank you.”
  Anti-money laundering regulation
• “(17:03:22 – 17:04:51): you very much, Mr. Chair, and thank you to the guest speakers. I have questions the representatives of the European Commission. As you have said, some member states are reticent when it comes to sharing sensitive data given the risk of dissemination of this information and given that this has to do with national security questions. My question is as follows. When it comes to hybrid threats and terrorist threats, would the solution not be to ensure that member states and national authorities who are competent, can communicate this information in real time when urgent measures must be implemented. Sometimes this is a matter of minutes. Otherwise, there is an imminent risk for human lives in two or more member states of the EU when there is an imminent risk of economic damages, especially when it comes to transport. So perhaps we should give the means for states to communicate sensitive data quickly rather than trying to build a hub that is centralized. Thank you.”
  EU law enforcement cooperation in criminal matters
• “You, Madam Chair, thank you, Commissioner. Well, having listened to the Commissioner's presentation, I think we can understand that the European Democracy Shield is the final stage of what the Commission has been trying to do to get hold once again on feelings and peoples in Europe and it's an extension of that logic. We saw through the instrumentalization of the rule of law and the annual report but also the conditionality on European funds and their use. Well, there's a lot of contradiction here. Let me just mention one to begin with. Apparently, there is the threat of foreign interference by third countries. It's something we've discussed several times here in relation to different subjects. But when EU member states submit certain foreign NGOs to control, the Commission thinks it's that affects the freedom of the NGOs and it affects the rule of law.”
  EU Supervision of the Rule of Law
• “Thank you, chairman. And thank you, Mr. Bruno. Three questions. Firstly. And this relates to returns. I mean, Commissioner, you said there's been a slight increase in the implementation of returns decisions, 25%. But you also said you want to do better. And I wanted to know whether cooperation with third countries has begun. So between your services, the commission and some third countries in order and some of the member states, in order to work to put pressure on third countries who don't accept their nationals when they're expelled from the European Union. So to try and get them to do that and our second question, the fight against drugs. We know that this is a very violent form of crime. Cocaine arrives in Europe via the ports on our external borders. And there's also criminality inside the European Union, which requires coordination between Member States with the coordination of Europol and Eurojust when it comes to investigations. Now my question relates to the creation of a new European Customs Agency. I mean, this customs agency. Is not part of your portfolio justice and internal affairs cooperation. So I wanted to know how the cooperation governance of that is going to work. So between Taxrate and DG home, for example. And also, what do you think about how good governance should work between this new agency and how it should cooperate with Frontex, Eurojust and Europol, existing agencies? And then finally, my third question, you talked about the governance of Schengen policy and you said this need you thought that this need to be boosted. Now you've been a commissioner in your role for a few months now. Could you now tell us a little bit more about the feeling that you have with regard to the political governance of Schengen? And, uh, what do you think could be improved at this stage so that we can have more robust political governance? So from you and the member States. Thank you.”
  Asylum & border control
• “Thank you very much, chairman. I'm going to speak French. When I listen to the speakers and my colleagues, I get the feeling that we might be able to say that online, as in real life, the police, under the oversight of a judge, should be able to search a house or a flat, a private home, under very specific, legally defined conditions. So police forces need to be able to listen in to telephone conversations, have access to people's correspondence. I understand that even though there are some delays and difficulties within the EU, we could get to police and judiciary cooperation. My question is. What should we do about companies who are not us based in the European Union, who are not subject to EU law? So how can we do this legally? Maybe this is a question for the European Commission. And then technically. Perhaps this is more of a question for Europol. Even if you do have the international agreements that allow us to exchange information. Are our systems technically compatible? Is the artificial intelligence that Europol uses able to get access to this data? Lastly, for the European Public Prosecutor. What do you need? Are most of your investigations in Europe, or are you mostly involved in investigations that require cooperation with non-EU countries?”
  Privacy & law enforcement
• “That's to say, imposing a minister of censorship in the form of the DSA. Could the different speakers tell me if they feel it is normal for the DSA to mix illegal criminal acts on the one hand, and information that simply displeases the authorities, but is not illegal? Secondly, what about the power of lobbies and NGOs, which are not transparent in some cases are financed by the Commission and they exert pressure on journalists to it's hard to speak these days without being attacked for hate speech to or on the basis of the principle of non-discrimination, discrimination, or simply attacked by wokest ideology simply because you criticise the Muslim brothers, as was brought out in a French report recently. So I'd just like to ask the various speakers if they are aware of the risk of self-censorship that's faced by journalists who simply don't dare to say or write what they think. They simply are not free to say what they want. And finally, can. States monitor information that threatens national security. I know this is a situation in Cyprus, so there are other countries that are affected, for example, where there are terrorist activities that are trying to get in touch with terrorists. That's a very practical question about how to interpret the anti-SLAPP legislation Population and the capacity of national authorities to maintain control of national security.”
  Disinformation & online freedoms
• “Thank you. Chair. I have a question for Europol and Olaf. Today we're talking about fighting financial interference and a threat to democracy in police investigations. In the case of Europol. Usually we've got remits that are set out by Europol rules, as well as the nation states laws when it comes to fighting financial interference or the threat to democracy. What's the practical implication there? And to what extent are the ambitions illusory? That's my question to Europol, then, for Olaf. Olaf doesn't engage in police investigation. They're more an operational branch of the commission to prepare investigations. So my question for Olaf is in your work. Are you using political, um, information rather than, uh, legal?”
  EU law enforcement cooperation in criminal matters
• “Thank you. Chairman. Will the. Board, chaired by Mrs. Tyler, if I'm not mistaken, is competent for the general application of data protection in Europe and the European Economic Area, but also for the implementation of the directive that relates to law enforcement agencies and the police. So my first question, Mrs. Taylor's, relates to police and judicial cooperation within the Schengen Area. So between national authorities of member states, does your board or has your board, uh, noted any level of how does it function or not function when it comes to judicial and police cooperation among national authorities? And also, would you have any recommendations for us on that? Now moving on to the second question. Will this relates to the protection of personal data in for businesses and in the labour market, in the private sector? A few days ago, together with other members of the Libe Committee, I had the opportunity to visit port infrastructure in Antwerp and Rotterdam. I mean, this is a practical example, but it's to try and give you a clear example of what I'm talking about. So the issue that arises is investigating Seeing stuff. So private sector employees who have access to sensitive infrastructure, and people who risked being corrupted, uh, by cocaine traffickers. I mean, private security guards, for example. There are other, uh, sensitive stuff that, uh, require investigations with regard to the profile of the staff concerned. And so I wanted a few comments from you on those kinds of subjects. So perhaps you could tell us with regard to, uh, current legislation or perhaps, uh, from a more strategic point of view, what you think about when you hear about that subject. Thank you.”
  Privacy & law enforcement
• “Thank you very much. And welcome, Mr. Germain. Could you say something about the situation in Europe with drugs at the moment? Europe? I mean, in the sense of the EU plus our neighboring countries on the same continent. And could you say something about if you become director, how you will strike a balance between public health policies and policies of fighting against drug related crimes in a context where, as you said, member states have different legislations or policies, sometimes even contradictory, with each with each other. Some states are in favor of legalizing certain drugs, whereas other member states prefer to have very stringent legislation. So if you become director. What would the list of main challenges be for you in your mind, for the agency over the next 4 or 5 years? I mean The political challenges, managerial operational challenges, and what kind of solutions or methods would you have in mind for facing those challenges? And then finally focusing on your personal skills. Could you very briefly summarize why you think you are the best candidate for this post at this point in time? How would you describe your main assets? And do you believe that you are lacking in any skills at this stage? So that would be your own self-assessment. Thank you.”
  Regulation of drug precursors in the EU
• “Thank you, chairman, and I'd like to thank the speaker for the explanations you've provided. It's sometimes a pretty technical, and it's not something I'm particularly familiar with, but thank you for your explanations. And I understand that you're concerned about espionage using Paragon, that, according to your information, has been carried out in several European member states. I think you've mentioned up to 14 of them. So my question is as follows. Who do you suspect of having carried out this espionage or tried to carry out this espionage on journalists and NGOs? So what was the purpose? Why did they do it and why did they use that system? So I'd like to know a little bit more about who you suspect in these 14 member states of carrying out these activities, because we're not just talking about Italy here.”
  Surveillance equipment & spyware
• “You very much Chairman and thank you to the three representatives of the Commission. I'll be speaking French. Europe's companies and particularly the smallest or medium sized companies are being smothered by bureaucracy so simplification in the areas that have been described would seem to be moving in the right direction. However I did want to ask the three representatives of the Commission to reassure us that this this simplification will be conducted in a simple manner that we're not going to end up with even more complexity and bureaucracy. So I wanted to know what are the safeguards what are the methods that you are using to ensure that we do not create a new administrative monster even though the ideas you presented do seem to be moving in the right direction. I listened carefully and I noted that simplification is linked to the definition of high risk personal data now I'm not sure if I fully understood you there who is going to define what counts as processing of high risk personal data. I wanted to know that because I wanted to be sure that there will be no distortion of competition between companies on the single market so I wanted to that's very important to me and I wanted to be clear about that. I also wanted to know if the Commission has carried out an impact assessment or some kind of study at least to understand what the position of European companies is with regard to their non European competitors. So once you have implemented your simplification measures will European companies or at least those companies situated geographically in the member states will they be on a level playing field with regard to their competitors outside the European Union in competition terms. And also I wanted to know that after this first stage of simplification do you think we could go even further to simplify yet further to try and create greater wealth in Europe and create jobs. The Draghi report is very clear about this for the last ten years it says that the EU has been going the wrong way on an economic growth. Thank you.”
  Overall simplification of regulation in the EU
• “Thank you, chairman. And thank you very much, Mr. Vorovsky, for your presentation. Now, I'd like to begin with a question on cooperation between Europol and Frontex. During my visits as a member of the European Parliament, I was told by Europol, but also by Frontex and also by border guards from various member states that cooperation and exchanges of data seem to be completely blocked between the two agencies. And I'm told that that's because the Edps opposed these exchanges. So I think it'd be important for Mr. Vengerovsky to be able to respond to that claim. In addition, and, uh, in more general terms during my visits, and I'm also thinking about, uh, economic actors, I'm told that, uh, the spirit of European legislation is, uh, very penalizing for business because, uh, the frame of mind seems to be too critical in terms of protecting personal data. So I wanted to know whether the role of the edps in those kinds of matters could perhaps be to give a bit of a different tone to what's being done, even though that's not the dps's remit. But, uh, in your role as a strategic or legislative adviser for the European Commission, could you perhaps play a role in helping to ease relations with the business world? And then in your 2024 annual report, you mentioned international cooperation and the fact that the European Union wants to have a specific voice when it comes to protecting personal data. In the light of the year 2024 and what happened then? Because we're talking about the annual report from 2024. I mean, would you say that the European Union is a bit stuck in its ivory tower, while other countries in the world Partners, allies or whatever take different approaches. Here I'm particularly thinking about, uh, relations with the United Kingdom in terms of personal data, very close to us geographically and also relations with the United States of America, of course. But this could be a more general question as well. I mean, should the European Union be stuck in its ivory tower, or should it find ways of cooperating with the rest of the world? Thank you very much.”
  Privacy & law enforcement
• “(15:46:16 – 15:49:06): Thank you very much, chair. I will speak in French. Thank you very much, Mrs. Thales, for your presentation. I have one question for you about the complexity of the legal framework that you presented to us. Could you tell us about the fines that were collected last year? As for the complexity of the legal framework, other colleagues have raised similar issues. And you get the impression that it's basically a pile up of legislation in the European Union, and the rules are often contradictory or overlapping. And in some cases, they could create a kind of competition between different authorities and agencies at the European and international level who have the job of implementing them. So my question, more precisely, is whether you would have a recommendation to make to the European Parliament, a recommendation you could make to us as co-legislators. What should we be doing to try and avoid or reduce this complexity? What can we do to ensure that European legislation is readable by companies that it's addressed to, but also readable to citizens who are supposed to be protected by it? The complexity of the law, well, is that an obstacle to economic activity or the competitiveness of European companies? Could you tell us about that on the basis of the information you've been able to collect as part of your job? Second question is on fines. Fines collected last year, if I've read your report correctly, euros 1,500,000,000 has been collected applying the GDPR legislation. So my first question to you about that is, do you know where do these fines go? What do member states do with the money that's collected? And secondly, apparently, 89% of the fines collected were collected in two member states, Ireland and France. Now that could be explained by the choice of certain large companies to situate their headquarters in certain places. But why two member states out of 27? Thanks. Thank”
  Overall simplification of regulation in the EU
• “Thank you very much, president. In 100 days, the new von der Leyen Commission has shown worrying inconsistency. They have promised to increase competitiveness, but they have seen no significant progress. This they are burdened in people in burden in Europe by significant red tape. But there is an increasing populist revolt against this and some of the green positions that were, you know, issued in the last mandate have now been weakened. But what about a long term vision? What's even worse is the commission is taking on a role in defence, even though this is not under its remit according to the treaties. Rather than correcting its mistakes, Brussels is persisting and is moving further and further away from citizens expectations. And under this presidency, the European Union is becoming inconsistent and it is completely disconnected from reality. Thank you.”
  EU competences on defence
• “Thank you very much, chairman. I'm going to speak French. When I listen to the speakers and my colleagues, I get the feeling that we might be able to say that online, as in real life, the police, under the oversight of a judge, should be able to search a house or a flat, a private home, under very specific, legally defined conditions. So police forces need to be able to listen in to telephone conversations, have access to people's correspondence. I understand that even though there are some delays and difficulties within the EU, we could get to police and judiciary cooperation. My question is. What should we do about companies who are not us based in the European Union, who are not subject to EU law? So how can we do this legally? Maybe this is a question for the European Commission. And then technically. Perhaps this is more of a question for Europol. Even if you do have the international agreements that allow us to exchange information. Are our systems technically compatible? Is the artificial intelligence that Europol uses able to get access to this data? Lastly, for the European Public Prosecutor. What do you need? Are most of your investigations in Europe, or are you mostly involved in investigations that require cooperation with non-EU countries?”
  EU law enforcement cooperation in criminal matters
• “(17:40:42 – 17:43:07): Thank you very much, chairman. Shadow rapporteur, Petrus Steiger, could not be present today, but she does have some comments, which I will pass on for her. 1st of all, she thanks the rapporteur for the quality of the work that has been done. She feels that the amendments are generally good. Shadow feels that across all of these different areas, what's missing most of all is primarily political will. So it's not just a question of financing. That is why our shadow, missus Steiger, feels that what is important is not so much the volume of the budgetary financing, but rather the results and the implementation in practice. So she feels that all of the new mechanisms for financing should be evaluated on the base of the results that they attain are not in the light of their size. Now following the same logic, according to our rapporteur, there should be objectives which are very clear, objectives which are measurable, and in particular, objectives that should lead to less illegal border crossings. There should also be many more effective returns of migrants in illegal in an illegal situation. We would like to see better cooperation with 3rd countries and a stronger EU border force. In line with our shadow, missus Steiger, we would stress the interest of the European taxpayer. Financing should not be increased for borders and visa security and operational costs, but rather we should be looking at the results delivered. So those are the general comments that our Shadow rapporteur, Petrus Deiger, would like to pass on.”
  Asylum & border control
• “Aim of the so-called Democracy Shield program on paper is to strengthen the defence against interventions. Let me touch upon a certain kind of intervention, namely political censorship on social media platforms. According to the report of the US House Judiciary Committee, the commission held about 100 meetings with big tech companies to push for more content moderation. Separate meetings were held before certain national elections. The procedure goes like this. The commission is sponsoring so-called fact checkers. At the same time, it demands tech companies to moderate content based on the proposals from these fact checkers. And you plan to ensure even more funding for them. I don't have to tell you, because you already know that almost all fact checker groups can be found around liberal and left wing media outlets. Surprise, surprise. So on the surface, the commission is talking about foreign intervention. In practice, a huge network of censorship is being built to silence right wing and patriotic voices. Commissioner, my question is simple. Is the Commission willing to publish the records of the meetings with big tech companies concerning the elections? Thank you.”
  Disinformation & online freedoms
• “Thank you very much, and, thank Thank you for explaining your vision of the democracy 2027, your action plan. And my question is about your mandate. You said you had, the mandate of the people, but I'm wondering because you're not elected. You say that we need to repair democracy, but that makes me think majorly, what are you wanting to repair? What has, damaged democracy in your opinion? And you talk about disinformation, but you don't say exactly what is correct information. You also talk a great deal about education, but you don't say what would be good to have in education. So very simple questions. Firstly, could you tell us what is your legitimacy? What and also you talk about independence, the fact that you're independent. Could you could you assure us that your independence is guaranteed and in particular that you are not dependent on specific funding or political affiliations or ideologies? This is important for us to have trust in democracy for citizens given all the different NGOs that exist out there.”
  EU engagement with citizens
• “Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you very much to the three speakers who have said some interesting, made some interesting comments that we'd like to react to. We understand that vis a vis European countries, China has a long term strategy. It's not just a question of making money. They're not just to be considered from an economic point of view, but there is actually the taking over of power and influence and influencing what we decide or what we will not be able to decide in a sovereign fashion in our countries whether this be economically, politically and so on. I believe also, if we listen to the first speech in particular, that China is not just a capitalist country like any other. It is a communist dictatorship, and there is a system there which incites its citizens to spy on behalf of China. I have three questions. My first question to each of the speakers. My first question then. Why does China seem to have changed attitude since the pandemic? And that's to the first speaker. I'd like to hear more about that. Why, after the pandemic, did China become more aggressive towards Europe and in particular? Uh uh uh, supportive of the Russian narrative. And secondly, uh, second question for the second speaker. How do we explain this European addiction for Chinese imports? Are we capitulating politically? And is this happening at state level, or is it supported and reinforced by the European institutions and in particular by the European Commission? And third question for the third speaker. We have to relearn the language of power. Could we hear more about that? Does that mean that we should be controlling our imports from China and block some imports, exports that China might need? Uh, or should we be acting at a customs and duties level?”
  EU-China relations
• “Thank you. Thank you. Chairman. I'd like to thank the four speakers who, gave us their point of view. We have a first question on the economic and financial model. The Commission representative raised and other speakers to mention that we should think about an economic model so that the press or media, the traditional media. Could develop without becoming victims of AI. So I wanted to know, which route are you considering? My second question regards what was said in English this pluralism by design. Now, if I've understood correctly, there could be technological solutions in order to make the implicit choices transparent. Whatever is done when selecting sources, for instance, or eliminating certain sources. Is that what you were talking about? So someone whoever wants to could find out the reasoning behind that. Ai had in suppressing certain sources. And why were those sources considered uninteresting? And then this leads to my third question. Now I'm a member of the committee. I don't see a lot of people from the committee present. However, this raises a question on education, on schools, on how on training young people who, I don't know the times before AI. So, for instance vocational training to all the generations who are present here so that they can use AI and the best possible way because it does exist. We won't. We can't go back. It's there. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Leghari.”
  EU support for traditional (non-digital) media
• “Thank you. Thank you. Chairman. I'd like to thank the four speakers who, gave us their point of view. We have a first question on the economic and financial model. The Commission representative raised and other speakers to mention that we should think about an economic model so that the press or media, the traditional media. Could develop without becoming victims of AI. So I wanted to know, which route are you considering? My second question regards what was said in English this pluralism by design. Now, if I've understood correctly, there could be technological solutions in order to make the implicit choices transparent. Whatever is done when selecting sources, for instance, or eliminating certain sources. Is that what you were talking about? So someone whoever wants to could find out the reasoning behind that. Ai had in suppressing certain sources. And why were those sources considered uninteresting? And then this leads to my third question. Now I'm a member of the committee. I don't see a lot of people from the committee present. However, this raises a question on education, on schools, on how on training young people who, I don't know the times before AI. So, for instance vocational training to all the generations who are present here so that they can use AI and the best possible way because it does exist. We won't. We can't go back. It's there. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Leghari.”
  Artificial Intelligence