Kris VAN DIJCK

Policy topics Kris VAN DIJCK is active on

What Kris VAN DIJCK has said (29)

• 2026-06-17 “(15:31:22 – 15:32:37): Commissioner, electrification will play a key role in sustainable and energy secure future for Europe. But there are 2 points that we need to pay attention to, realism and technology neutrality. Because 1st of all, we need to be realistic. Our infrastructure, technology, and consumer wallets have to be able to keep up with our ambitions. If there are short shortages in electricity or currently overloaded grids, then at the moment, businesses are waiting even longer to be connected to the grid, and that makes growth impossible. And then secondly, technological neutrality in both word and deed. Nuclear energy is going to be necessary to meet our climate goals and also to ensure that energy is more affordable. We have to ensure that nuclear energy has equal access to support programs and granting of permits. The EU needs electrification, but it has to be clean, certain, and ensure a resilient future. Thank you. Thank You very much. Now, miss Verruckstrata, please.”
  Energy transition (state support)
• 2026-06-15 “President, commissioner. 1st of all, I would like to extend my thanks to everybody who's involved in the trial log. Colleagues, let me be clear. Trade with our most important strategic and economic partner is very important, but trading is not the same as utter naivety. And here, we have got to consider whether this agreement is going to strengthen our industry, our employees position, the competitiveness, and our open strategic autonomy. In uncertain times, it's very important that we come up with a feasible workable compromise predicated on stability, predictability, and legal certainty. Escalating tensions and confrontation is in nobody's interest, and this is why clear guarantees which enable us to take prompt action and respond effectively in cases of threat, must be protected. Colleagues, this is not the end of the road. We have got to continue commit our commitment to dialogue with The US. This is only 1 step along the path.”
  EU-US trade relations
• 2025-11-12 “P-004500/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Ribera on behalf of the European Commission Public funding can be used to steer investment towards specific policy objectives, such as the greening of transport, emission reductions, etc. The rationale for granting investment aid is not the same for infrastructure as for superstructure. The former is so costly, that investment costs mostly cannot be recouped over its lifetime and so relying on private funding would mean that vital elements of the European transport network are not built. Port superstructures are mainly productive assets of logistics and transport companies, which can be amortised with revenue from their exploitation. Having said that, various possibilities for supporting specific superstructures in ports exist. Decarbonisation aid can be granted under Article 36 of the General Block Exemption Regulation (GBER) EU No 651/2014 1 and the acquisition or up-grading of clean vehicles, including vessels, is eligible for support under Article 36b GBER respectively under the Commission’s Guidelines on State aid for Climate, Environmental Protection and Energy 2 (CEEAG). Moreover, proposals for supporting certain elements of inter-modality are included in the draft Land and Multimodal Transport Guidelines and Transport Block Exemption Regulation 3 . Shore-side electricity infrastructure as well as recharging and refuelling infrastructures are covered by the definition of port infrastructure of Article 2(157) of the GBER and are as such eligible for support under Articles 56b and 56c GBER. State aid rules are regularly reviewed and brought, where necessary, into line with developments. Citizens and stakeholders can contribute to this process through the various consultation activities accompanying the reviews. 1 Commission Regulation (EU) No 651/2014 of 17 June 2014 declaring certain categories of aid compatible with the internal market in application of Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty, OJ L 187, 26.6.2014, p. 1. 2 Communication from the Commission – Guidelines on State aid for climate, environmental protection and energy 2022, C/2022/481, OJ C 80, 18.2.2022, p. 1. 3 https://competition-policy.ec.europa.eu/public-consultations/2024-lmtg-and-tber_en.”
  State Aid · Energy (green transition)
• 2025-09-22 “E-003663/2025 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission Chemical recycling can play an important role in reducing reliance on virgin resources for plastic production and avoiding incineration. It is notably beneficial for hard-to-recycle waste plastics not suitable for mechanical recycling or where specific quality requirements need to be reached. It has the potential to help the EU to meet its ambitious targets for recycling plastic waste and increasing recycled content in plastics. It has the potential to lower environmental impacts, advancing EU’s circular economy objectives. Circularity means turning waste into materials. If waste is transformed into fuels, it serves the same purpose as incineration with energy recovery, and no circularity gains or environmental benefits can be expected. To foster the business case and provide investment security, the Commission is developing a clear, science-based and technologically neutral framework to ensure that chemical recycling technologies can play an important role in meeting these objectives. The first step will be under the Single-Use Plastics Directive 1 . The Commission has carried out a public consultation on the rules for calculating, verifying and reporting on recycled plastic content in single-use plastic beverage bottles 2 . It closed on 19 August 2025. All the submissions will be duly taken into account ahead of the final decision. 1 Directive (EU) 2019/904 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 June 2019 on the reduction of the impact of certain plastic products on the environment, OJ L 155, 12.6.2019, p. 1–19. 2 https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/13467-Single-use-plastic-beveragebottles-EU-rules-for-calculating-verifying-and-reporting-on-recycled-plastic-content_en.”
  Circular economy · EU policy towards plastics
• 2025-07-07 “P-002752/2025 Answer given by Mr Jørgensen on behalf of the European Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/1185 1 sets out a methodology for determining the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions savings achieved by renewable fuels of non-biological origin (RFNBO) and recycled carbon fuels (RCF) of individual projects and based on a lifecycle assessment. Individual efforts to reduce emissions are therefore considered. It provides several options for determining the emission intensity of electricity used to produce RFNBO and RCF, or to determine the emission impact of displacing rigid inputs. This includes the use of the annual average of the emission intensity of electricity in the country where the fuel is produced. Applying average values for the emission intensity of electricity in a country is justified given that it represents an approach that is commonly applied in life cycle assessment to assess the merits of individual projects. The Commission adopted a Delegated Regulation 2 on 8 July 2025, setting out a methodology for determining the greenhouse gas (GHG) savings of low-carbon fuels, which includes several changes to the way the emission intensity of electricity is considered and which are relevant for the consideration of the emission impact of displacing rigid inputs. The Delegated Regulation has been submitted to the European Parliament and the Council. These changes can be taken into account when Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/1185 is aligned with the revised Renewable Energy Directive (Directive (EU) 2018/2001 3 ). It is expected that the changes will facilitate the achievement of the greenhouse gas emission savings threshold for installations producing RCF from unavoidable industrial off gases such as the Steelanol facility. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2023/1185/oj/eng. 2 C(2025) 4674 final. 3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2018/2001/oj/eng.”
  Energy (green transition) · Biofuels (RED II)
• 2025-05-15 “P-001968/2025 Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the European Commission Before taking action against unfairly traded imports (i.e. dumped of subsidised), the Commission must first establish that these practices are taking place and that they are causing harm to the EU industry. This requires investigations which are complex and subject to a strict legal framework. In 2018, as part of the modernisation of the trade defence instruments, the length of antidumping investigations was shortened by one month. Since then, provisional measures are imposed eight, and in some cases seven months after initiation. Also, in October 2024, the Commission decided to register imports in all ongoing new investigations to facilitate the retroactive application of measures, i.e. before the date of provisional measures, if the legal conditions allow 1 . As regards citric acid, there are anti-dumping measures in place on imports of the product from China ranging between 16.3% and 42.7% since 2008. These measures were most recently extended for a further five years, in April 2021, following an expiry review 2 . These measures reflect the levels of dumping found in the context of an investigation conducted in line with World Trade Organization and EU legislation. Measures in place may be reviewed on request by interested parties where there are changed circumstances of a lasting nature. The Commission conducts such reviews where it receives evidence from the European industry that action is warranted and will assist any industry in using the instruments. 1 https://policy.trade.ec.europa.eu/news/commission-register-imports-all-products-under-trade-defenceinvestigations-bid-fight-unfair-2024-09-24_en. 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32021R0607&from=EN.”
  Trade relations with China · State Aid
• 2024-10-11 “P-002028/2024 Answer given by Ms Ivanova on behalf of the European Commission With the United Kingdom withdrawal from the EU, the Commission assessed options to extend the operation of the Joint European Torus (JET) to validate the latest International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) 1 design evolution. However, due to budget constraints it was not possible to finance the required JET upgrades 2 . A possible internationalisation of JET was also explored with some countries but the proposal did not garner the necessary support and Europe alone could not continue to provide the required funding. The EU nevertheless ensured financial support to JET until 31 October 2021 and technical support to JET exploitation until 2023 through EUROfusion 3 . In addition to ITER, the EU supports the construction of new facilities in Europe, namely International Fusion Materials Irradiation Facility - Demo Oriented Neutron Source (IFMIFDONES) 4 and Divertor Tokamak Test facility (DTT) 5 , and the scientific exploitation of newly collaborative fusion devices such as the Japan Tokamak 60 Super Advanced (JT60-SA) 6 inaugurated on 1 December 2023. The Commission has launched two calls to: i) design and implement a strategy to attract, train and retain the workforce in the EU to acquire the necessary fusion skills with a focus on cross-sector, cross-border mobility, skills transferability, and digital skills; and ii) further engage the private sector through the preparation for a Public-Private Partnership (PPP) on Fusion Energy 7 . The PPP could help bridge the gap between public research, academic institutions and industry, creating a pipeline for technological innovation and workforce development. 1 https://www.iter.org/ 2 ca. EUR 1 billion. 3 https://euro-fusion.org/ 4 https://ifmif-dones.es/ 5 https://www.dtt-project.it/, Divertor Tokamak Test facility in Frascati, Italy. 6 https://www.jt60sa.org/wp/ 7 https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/docs/2021-2027/euratom/wp-call/20232025/wp_euratom-2023-2025_en.pdf”
  Energy (green transition)
• “Thank you. President. Allow China to sleep because once it wakes up, the world will quake. That is what Napoleon Bonaparte said. Over 200 years ago. China, however, has now woken up and is using its dominant position to put pressure on our economies and keep a stranglehold on critical raw materials. The European Union needs to be more practical in its approach. We need to look at the trade instruments available internally and externally. We need to conclude new trade agreements with new countries. We need to push back against China's pressure across other continents. We need to use our trade policy to safeguard our own. Sovereignty. That is the only way that we can be a reliable partner and a real counterweight.”
  EU-China relations
• “Thank you, Madam President. Commissioners, colleagues, I welcome this agreement. Uh, if this is the, uh, largest trade agreement that the EU has ever signed, but it's also very important for three reasons. Uh, right now, President Trump. Wants to put tariffs on our steel and aluminium. Now is the time to look for new markets. We should not just allow China to have all the markets in the world. Secondly, uh, it. It's, uh, trade agreement based on rules. Thirdly, it also improves the working conditions and the fight against climate change. However, I also understand the concerns of of our farmers. There's obviously going to be an increase in competition. However, we need, uh, agreements. We urgently need agreements which. Ensure a sanitary and phytosanitary standards for our products. So yes, we can believe in the Mercosur agreement.”
  Trade relations with Mercosur
• “Yes. Uh, you know the football player from Liverpool, Van Dijk. Okay. Good. Thank you very much. Uh, briefly I would like to thank all the shadow rapporteurs and the commission for their assessment and the valuable remarks, also from my colleague Briquemont. More, but I trust that we will be able to handle this file smoothly. As a matter of fact, when I was a young politician, I've been very often in the Western Balkans with the human aid and relief supplies. There's a I'm very concerned about the situation there in that time. But also now, as I said in my in my first part, that it's a region with a with needs stability. And I think we have to have to do a lot of efforts to bring stability also in that region, also with trade. As I reiterate, reiterated during my first intervention, I'm convinced that by endorsing this extension, we will send a strong signal in support of the region's economic development and integration, demonstrating us as a reliable partner. But I'm aware of the fact that we have to, uh, that we have to check. Very good. The human rights, etc.. Thank you very much.”
  EU enlargement
• “Yes. Thank you. Thank you colleagues. Every day we hear more about concerns about competitiveness in industry. And in my country, for example, there was a substantial number of bankruptcies. I think probably the same is true in a number of other countries, especially our SMEs. One third of them have financial difficulties and they are not in a position to face the shocks which are coming from the market, determined by political or other decisions which are taken at a level way above them on which they have no influence. So, chairman, I think that there is a concern here amongst many of us about this compass. If it's going to be a compass, it has to set a clear direction of travel. And I'm not sure that this compass is doing that. We've already spent a lot of time on it, one might say not usefully spent time, and we're now short of time. We're under a lot of pressure. There are three principal points I would like to focus on here. First of all, technology. It must not be ideologically coloured or dictated by ideology. It has to be technology neutral policy that we're implementing, and that's one of our guiding principles. Secondly, fewer rules. But we've got to work on giving industry confidence so that they know that they can invest and that they will be able to compete. So we've got to have clear regulation and reliable regulation which is properly managed. We've also got to have a level playing field across the internal market for all participants. And then the third point, it's important for us to accelerate. But we've also got to respect diversity. Yes we need to invest in a single united more united market. I think it's important that we do this in energy, transport and capital markets. It's actually vital that we do there that we have more cohesion in a more integrated market. But we also need to remember that there's diversity across our member states, regions and local areas. And the situation, for example, in my country varies greatly, but it's very different from Eastern Europe. So we need to have, yes, a route planner, but also a effective engine to drive policy forward.”
  EU Single Market harmonisation
• “Thank you very much, chairman. Just FYI, I would like to speak Dutch. As I said at our previous meeting. My group is keen to look at this package with Switzerland because it's something that we welcome very warmly. We feel that it's it's progress towards modernisation, more predictable and stronger, more robust cooperation with one of our most strategically significant Partners. As Javier has indeed just said, the country is at the very heart of Europe. It's also very clear, through discussions we've had with the Commission, that the bilateral agreements that we've had hitherto are really superseded and out of date, and they actually have an adverse impact on some of the issues close to the heart of the citizens, for example, lack of recognition for certain pharmaceuticals in the EU. And so I'm happy that we've made the progress we've had. I feel that the ratification of this series of agreements is very serious matter, and we need to work to ensure that this is a success, because the network of bilateral agreements that we've had in the past, as I say, are now outdated. We've had really good meetings with the Swiss. We fully respect them. And we said this in Bern. We respect their sovereignty and their positions. So I think we've had very positive exchanges with them. And I've heard all the warnings that have been issued about the lack of agreement. I think this is an agreement which shows that the EU can, if it's practical, pragmatic and future orientated and looking at trade in the right way and willing to embrace diversification, it can conclude very positive agreements which are mutually beneficial. So my group is going to support the rapporteur in the recommendation of improving the council recommendation. Thank you.”
  EU-Switzerland relations
• “Thank you chair. I'll be speaking Dutch. See, people are putting their headphones on. Okay, chair. My group welcomes this long awaited signing of the broad ranging agreements between the EU and Switzerland, where we were making a clear step towards a modernized, streamlined and more efficient cooperation with one of our most important strategic partners and neighbors in Europe. These agreements don't just strengthen our economic ties, but they also make sure that we have predictable rules when it comes to origin, technical standards and mutual market access. The agreements show once again when the EU can be pragmatic and look to the future, then it can move away from, uh, high standards being decoupled. So we can get those high standards and we can get mutual respect. We welcome this draft opinion from our EPP rapporteur, Mr. Zovko. I think she's underscoring the right focus on trade. And we can encourage that with Switzerland. Just one thing that may be missing in this opinion, ladies and gentlemen, is respect for SMEs. They're the backbone of both economies. They're the catalyst for prosperity and progress. This agreement could be a very important springboard, springboard for the internationalization of our SMEs. And also we should have more attention for implementation and governance. I'm looking forward to a good cooperation with the other shadow rapporteurs and with the rapporteur herself, Miss Zovko. Thank you.”
  EU-Switzerland relations
• “Well thank you, president, Commissioner, for the time being. Our policy is not heading in a clear direction. I understand that. First of all, we're expected to recognise that a necessary transition is not something which can be done overnight. Copenhagen wasn't built in a day. At the same time, it's essential that we don't allow best to block the road to better. There's an excellent case, for example, to producing green hydrogen, but excessive rules mean this hasn't been done. Secondly, we should be pursuing technology and neutrality. This is something industry is insisting on. We need to ensure that we have a clear policy framework for nuclear energy. Investors need this. Thirdly, we have to ensure that we guarantee a level playing field in the internal market. We have to make state aid rules if they're made more flexible. This is dangerous for small for small states. The current promotion of decarbonisation is being made impossible because of excessive red tape. That's a shame because that costs nothing. So, Commissioner, I think it's important that we work on those four points for points so that we can ensure that we can support technology and investment in the clean tech sector.”
  Energy transition (state support)
• “Thank you very much, chairman. First and foremost, I wanted to take this opportunity to thank you and thank all those who have taken the floor in this debate. And thank you also to the people who drafted this report. It's a really important one. Chairman, I remember a discussion we had in this meeting room a while ago. We had an exchange with the commissioner, Commissioner Jurgensen, and we're talking about the future of energy. On that occasion, and some of our colleagues also raised the question of nuclear energy. And basically, what we were faced with was some people arguing that this was an energy from the past. Now, in Flanders, we tend to say a lot of water can flow under the bridge during time, over time. And if we want to, if we want decarbonisation for Europe, we can't just do that with wind energy or solar energy. You actually need to have nuclear energy in the mix. It is necessary, I'm afraid. In the recent past, we closed down a number of plants and I actually deplore that personally. We close them down not so much for technical reasons, but ideological reasons, political reasons.”
  Nuclear energy
• “Thank you. Madam president, Commissioner, we are discussing one single European market. But is there one? What's an internal market without a single capital market? Without a single energy market? Our entrepreneurs experience on a daily basis 27 different markets. Ladies and gentlemen, we can only recover our economic clout in these difficult times if we demolish all obstacles to a real internal market. So I call for us to speed up the integration of the single market, to speed up the completion of the market. And if we can't do it, if we can't move forward all 27 at once, then let a smaller group of the willing go go forward with this. The Benelux group could play a pioneering role here. It's possible under the EU treaty, to lead the way, to be a springboard to deepen the market and to make sure that we develop an economic dynamic that will draw in other member states as well. So let's take every opportunity, Commissioner, to complete our single market more unity, more decisiveness, and more future for our citizens and our entrepreneurs. Thank you.”
  EU Single Market harmonisation
• “Thank you. President, Commissioner. Ladies and gentlemen, Minister, the announcement from the US president regarding new trade tariffs have led to a massive wave of shock around the world, including the European Union. Within a very short period of time. We've gone from a rules based order to international trade on the slogan might is right, and that is being used to blackmail and pressure us. I would call on the commission to ensure that we negotiate in a constructive and sure way. We should work hard to get a zero tariff zone for industrial products and improved processing of exports. That's a win win situation for both sides. Above all, however, the European Union must not allow itself to be split or we should not be fall into temptation of erecting barriers around our market. President, we should ensure that we remember that both economically and historically speaking, tariffs always come back like a boomerang to hit the person who instated them. Let's avoid that happening.”
  EU-US trade relations
• “Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be speaking Dutch. First, I'd like to thank our guests for being here today and for their presentations on a hugely important topic. We're talking about the affordability of energy for companies and also for our fellow citizens. We're talking about our competitiveness here. However, unfortunately, we see that we are lagging behind. There are a couple of comments I want to make. I completely agree with you. First of all, any energy that we don't use is good energy. So insulation for example, all of that's important. The energy performance of buildings as well. But currently we are about to deploy a new energy cocktail with solar panels and wind. That's good, but we need sun and wind and we don't always have that. So we need to have backup solutions. And yet backup solutions are not free of charge either. In Europe, we. Opt for backups that are not CO2 neutral. When there's no sun or a wind. We look towards a gas power plants. So I have a question for you. Did you take all of this into account when you were looking at the the cost here? And are you taking into account our ambition, which is to have a carbon neutral economy? Secondly, I'd like to make an appeal here. Let's opt for technologically neutral solutions. I think we do have some barriers to overcome, but first and foremost, we need to opt for carbon neutral energies. And we need to allow industries the leeway that they need to be able to adapt. And third point. We spoke about the what happened in Spain recently, and I don't think that's by chance what happened there recently should not have happened. This is something we're not speaking about. Everyone is burying their heads in the sand. Why aren't we speaking about nuclear energy? Look at the energy prices in France, for example. And you'll see where actually in Europe we do have some capacity. It's much cheaper. We have the skills and the competencies and it's efficient. So I'd like to appeal to you okay. Yes. For prioritizing solar power and wind power. But don't forget nuclear.”
  Nuclear energy
• “Thank you very much, president. Commissioner. I am very happy to see that people are beginning to understand the importance of research and innovation investment. It is absolutely a prerequisite for our competitiveness. I am proud that Flanders is in the vanguard here. We are very ambitious. We aspire to increase from 3.5% to 5% of our GDP. The investment in research and innovation. The EU average is about 2%, which is way short of what we need. Our productivity is falling short and we cannot keep up with global competition as a result. We therefore are going to pay the price in terms of welfare and prosperity. Therefore, it is great that the Commission is taking action. I very much welcome this, but I have some important reservations that I want to put to you today. Fundamental research is of the essence. It is what drives competitiveness in the longer term and we must not endanger it. It is sacrosanct. Secondly, the bottom up approach in the Marie Curie funding is so important. We do not want political interference. And finally stop trying to regulate academic freedom. After all, it is freedom and we need to have protection for that. The whole protection lies in the fact that there is not a framework, and there are not rules and regulations burdening these people. So opting for research and innovation and science is opting for a positive future. Thank you. Thank you. The next speaker is Mr. Ratas.”
  Governance of academic priorities within the EU
• “Thank you, Mr. President. Commissioner, we've all paid the price of the lack of a genuine energy union. Citizens and businesses experience very painfully, uh, the lack of competitiveness. We need a stronger and better interconnected network in Europe. And this deserves our full support. But we also want to call on you to respect technology neutrality when it comes to generation power. And don't be ideological about this. Of course, renewables are an important part of our energy mix, but it's not the only solution. We should talk about the overall systemic costs of every technology and the effect of that on electricity bills. We need to massively invest in security of supply. I agree. But massive investment in capital intensive projects that we don't have transparency about the bill is something we can't go along with. Uh. We've invested a lot of time and energy, uh, in the past on this, but we need to be realistic and cost efficient in our planning in the future.”
  Energy (green transition)
• “Thank you president completing the European single market is crucial for growth and strategic resilience we need to ensure that we focus on energy capital digital services that they remain within the EU and are independent from external players and also the cost of a fragmented internal market is which is too high. We talk about the grid with the US but the EU says that the cost of barriers within the single market lead to an increase of forty five percent on goods and a hundred and ten percent increase on price on services. We have to be ambitious have to see structural reform and proper cooperation between member states in order to do away with obstacles but minister commissioner we need to have a reform that is done through national interest and that we ensure that we don't just focus on the needs of the biggest member states. So a single market completion has to work for everyone for companies and consumers.”
  EU Single Market harmonisation
• “Mr. president. Commissioner. Colleagues. Yes. Well the e EU needs to decarbonise but let it not be a d deindustrialisation where jobs are going to disappear. We need to face reality. The world has changed. The geopolitical context has changed. Talk to our companies and you can listen to their signals. Look at the war of aggression of Russia in Ukraine where energy prices have gone up. Look at the competition. Ruthless competition, war between China and the United States. Our industry is suffering seriously, because this is a system which is becoming impossible to pay. So revise the price of admission rights and stop the dismantling of these free of charge certificates. And lastly, let the money flow back to industry. Let me give you an example. In Flanders, under the present system, in 2030, €600 million will not go back to our industry to give our businesses a support to move away from CA to CO2 freeze.”
  Carbon leakage support
• “Do you want a trade agreement with India? That's what you said. But there are also concerns with human rights in this country. I'm thinking about the position of religious minorities like Christians. I'm thinking about the fact that there is talk of anti-circumcision legislation in India. Are you still in agreement with obtaining additional guarantees from India so that we can, for instance, guarantee the protection of Christians and work towards improvements. Thank you.”
  EU-India relations
• “President. Commissioner. Social dumping and unfair competition. This is a plague because companies, people and our single market suffers from this because basically the single market is based on mutual trust and a free circulation of people and services. And this can only be done if we take each other seriously as far as our rules are concerned. So that is why I want to call for the mutual recognition of professional bands. I mean, somebody who has worked in a given country and has a professional band, then goes to another country in the EU and can continue working without any problems. People who work in the trade unions are being treated badly, so we need to try and have free circulation. But at the same time, we need to make sure that these rules are applicable across the borders, because if not, as a society, we're paying a very high price. So please deal with it.”
  EU regulation of cross-border and posted workers
• “Dear colleagues, as chair of our Inter monitoring Group of the Western Balkans, I was assigned to prepare a report on the Commission's proposal to extend the European Union's autonomous trade measures for the Western Balkans until 2030. These trade measures, first established, as you already mentioned, nearly 25 years ago, have been essential in fostering our relations with the region and paving the way for the Stabilisation and Association agreements signed with all partners there. Although limited in scope, these autonomous trade measures continue to deliver two crucial benefits. First, the suspension of specific duties on fruits and vegetables subject to the entire price system, and secondly, access to the global tariff quota for wine one granted on a first come, first served basis. Once national quotas under the respective Stabilisation and Association agreements are exhausted, now between 2080 and 2020 for trade under these measures more than doubled, growing from 60.5 million to €137 million. This significant increase underlines the importance and effectiveness of these preferential agreements. The Commission's extension proposal largely maintains the current regulation with only two minor adjustments. As already explained by the Commission, first clarifying rules on the suspension and temporary suspension of benefits, and secondly, and removing an outdated reference to fisheries. It's also important to underline that this proposal contains no additional budgetary impact for the EU, as the autonomous trade measures have long been integrated into our system. The market access supports stability in a geopolitically sensitive region while ensuring legal certainty conditionally, and alignment with the Commission's growth path for the Western Balkans. By endorsing this extension. We reaffirmed the EU's commitment to the region's economic development and integration, showing ourselves as a reliable partner. This balanced approach responsibly combines contingency with accountability and legal clarity for the Western Balkan stakeholders and European operators alike. I therefore support the extension of the autonomous trade measures and the minor amendments proposed by the Commission, and recommend adopting this proposal without further changes. I look forward to a constructive collaboration with the colleagues. Thank you very much.”
  EU-Serbia relations
• “Thank you. President. Commissioner. The cost of energy in the EU is too high, and both our citizens and our companies suffer from that. So the question is, how can we make energy cheaper at a time when we need more and more electricity? And I agree with the Commission when it comes to having an energy union and better connection of the grid. But what am I missing? What do I miss? In this note, it's the use of nuclear energy which is safe, affordable, efficient and clean. Electricity prices are determined by the most expensive production, and that has to be replaced. And you don't do that by closing down nuclear power plant power plants. In February, a Belgian family, or SMEs, paid 50% more for their electricity than a French family on SMEs. What do you think the difference is? So I would urge the Commissioner to stop this prejudice, which is very expensive, and to look at the systemic costs of all technologies.”
  Nuclear energy
• “Thank you chair. Dear colleagues, first and foremost, a word of thanks to an appreciation to all my colleagues and all the staff involved for their hard work and the constructive cooperation during the negotiations. This trilogue agreement on implementing the Turnberry deal is a pragmatic compromise in the interest of our businesses, our workers and Europe's competitiveness in a time of economic uncertainty and rising geopolitical tensions. It is sensible for Europe to choose for stability, predictability and legal certainty. The European Union and the US remain each other's most important strategic and economic partners, and that is exactly why we need to approach this trade relationship in a calm and forward looking way. Escalating tensions further is in nobody's interest, and avoiding unnecessary confrontation between allies is in all our interests. For the ECR, trade policy must serve Europe's economic strength, not by driving by ideological reflexes. This agreement gives European companies the legal certainty they need to invest, to innovate and to protect jobs. At the same time, it is essential that the EU can defend its market if the US does not live up to the deal. That is why we welcome the clear conditions and the suspension mechanisms, including in the text. We also see the sunset clause until 2029 as sensible because it allows for a review once a new US administration takes office. That is not a sign of weakness, but of responsible governments. Colleagues, this agreement does not mark the end of the road. Let us make it our task to continuously engage with the US to deepen our trade cooperation. In short, Mr. Chair, this is not a perfect agreement, but it is a workable one. It puts stability, predictability and strategic realism as the centre. And that is exactly the approach the EU needs today. Thank you.”
  EU-US trade relations
• “The thank you, chair. Thank you also to the representatives of the commission colleagues. There is a simple truth. Strong safety rules do not weaken nuclear energy. They strengthen it. They enable public confidence, long term investment and technical leadership. So I welcome the proposal instrument for nuclear safety cooperation and decommissioning. It reinforces a clear and necessary message that nuclear energy, when offered responsibly, responsibly and transparency, is not only safe but essential to our shared future. As we know that nuclear power is one of the most reliable sources of low carbon energy available for us. But public trust and long term sustainability depends, of course, on the highest safety standards at every stage of the nuclear life cycle. By promoting effective nuclear safety and radiation protection, safe management of radioactive waste and decommissioning, we ensure that nuclear installations operate under the most advanced scientific and technical standards. Nuclear safety is indeed a global concern, but considering that the EU faces economic hardship and surging debt, I believe that we should limit funding for external outside EU programmes as much as possible. Next on decommissioning. Responsible decommissioning is not a burden. It is a demonstration of maturity and credibility. It goes without saying that ageing facilities should be dismantled safely, efficiently and transparently while protecting workers, communities and the environment. Decommissioning also supports innovation, skills development and high quality jobs in the nuclear sector, and financing and decommissioning of our own GRC installations is our responsibility. According to the law of the country where the GRC is located. But I do have one big concern. How do we make sure that funds are not used to shut down nuclear facilities, which are still in good shape? What guarantees do we have that certain ideological views will not influence decisions on decommissioning? Thank you.”
  Nuclear energy
• “President, Minister, Commissioner, our industries are becoming less competitive, and what we have on the table today, I think is not enough. It's too little, but hopefully it's not too late. So now we have to do something, but we need to be realistic. First of all, phasing out free carbon emissions allowances for our European industry is too big a risk now. We cannot afford this risk unless we have an effective system to tax, um, imports from outside of the EU. We need to implement the principle of technological neutrality in words and in deeds. An end to ideology. Market driven innovation must have a chance to work. Thirdly, um, we need protective measures, but no, uh, compulsory by European clause, because the consequence of this will be sky high prices for consumers and prices. And then finally, we have to work to improve a level playing field for the internal market. Um, this, uh, without that, we're going to see subsidies that will be harmful for our smaller member states.”
  Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM)