Wouter BEKE

Policy topics Wouter BEKE is active on

What Wouter BEKE has said (55)

• 2026-06-17 “Yes. That's wonderful. Let's work together to that end, an integrated defense union with all EU member states. But yes, let's start with the willing. You've heard me correctly. My proposal, and I'm the only one to come up with that, although the federal chancellor mentioned this, and we heard that from the defense commissioner as well. You heard mister Kubelius talk about the need for strength. We need to work together. We need a coalition of the willing.”
  EU competences on defence
• 2026-06-17 “(10:06:18 – 10:07:29): Thank you, president. Ladies and gentlemen, commissioner, our citizens must be our top priority. We can all agree on that. Over the last 5 years, our defense budget in Europe has doubled from 200 to 400,000,000,000. The bad news is that we don't have a European pillar within NATO, and we don't have progress on paragraph 7. We need more progress here. I know that the European Council will look at these matters, look at the Schengen treaty, and take an example there, come up with a defense treaty, include Ukraine, Norway, The UK. Let's make progress with a coalition of the willing. Priority has to be protection of citizens. Let's roll up our sleeves and get to work.”
  Relations with NATO
• 2026-06-16 “Vice president of the European Commission. President. Indeed, Europe is too dependent on cloud, on clouds, AI, microchips of foreign origin. And indeed, the U.S. is dominant in this particular field, particularly as far as cloud services. We need development. We need research on this particular front. Really a I is as strategic as energy. This is something that became very, very evident during the corona period. The importance of chips and also aviation, the most important elements of any aircraft are chip related. And we're speaking about a major industry which is dominated by others. The independence of Europe. We really have to do everything possible. Otherwise it will remain an illusion, an illusion that did technological sovereignty. And for this particular reason, we have to focus on research and innovation. I think which is the cornerstone of a good chip industry. This is where the focus has to exist. We have to have a Chip act, which is really robust and which does protect our industry and the development of it as well. So indeed, let's. Let's make our chips act stronger and more effective. These are the types of implements that we need to be able to move forward effectively.”
  EU digital & tech sovereignty
• 2026-06-16 “Vice president of the European Commission, president. Indeed, Europe is too dependent on cloud on the cloud's AI microchips of foreign origin. And indeed, The US is dominant in this particular field, particularly as far as cloud services. We need development. We need research on this particular front. Really, AI is a strategic as energy. This is something that became very, very evident during the corona period, the importance of chips and, also aviation. The most important elements of any aircraft are chip related, and we're speaking about a major industry which is dominated by others. The independence of Europe, we really have to do everything possible. Otherwise, it will remain an illusion an illusion that did technological sovereignty. And for this particular reason, we have to focus on research and innovation, IMEC, which is the cornerstone of a good chip industry. This is where the focus has to exist. We have to have a chip act, is really robust and which does protect our industry and the development of it as well. So, indeed, let's let's make our chips act stronger and more effective. These are the types of implements that we need to be able to move forward effectively.”
  EU digital & tech sovereignty
• 2026-04-15 “Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the European Commission 8.6.2026 Written question The existing anti-dumping measures on citric acid from China are in force since 2008. They are currently subject to an expiry review investigation initiated on 14 April 2026 [1] . The scope of an expiry review is to assess if there is a likelihood of continuation and/or recurrence of dumping and injury and therefore, if the measures need to be renewed for further five years. No amendment of the level and form of the measures is possible in this proceeding. Therefore, imports quotas or minimum import prices will not be considered in the proceeding. The Commission has no immediate plans to impose minimum content requirements for citric acid. Nonetheless, the Commission is exploring whether minimum content requirements for bio-based products, including citric acid, should be part of the ‘Biotech Act 2’ proposal, which is scheduled for publication by the end of 2026. [1] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:C_202602120.”
  Trade relations with China
• 2026-02-10 “P-000556/2026 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Séjourné on behalf of the European Commission The chemical industry is at the core of the Commission’s agenda to strengthen the EU’s competitiveness. The European Chemicals Industry Action Plan 1 underlines the strategic role of the sector. Several measures have been taken to support the industry in the short term. On energy, the Commission extended the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) State aid guidelines for indirect cost compensation to additional chemical sectors to address the carbon cost in electricity prices 2 . This complements the possibility for Member States to grant temporary electricity price relief under the Clean Industrial Deal State Aid Framework 3 , and other measures in the Affordable Energy Action Plan 4 and the European Grids Package 5 . On simplification, the Commission has proposed several Omnibuses, such as the Investment 6 , Chemical 7 and Environmental Omnibus 8 . On trade, a dedicated system was introduced in March 2025 to monitor import volumes of certain chemicals. Regarding unfair competition from imports, the Commission launched 25 trade defence investigations on chemicals in the last two years, representing 40% of all new initiations. The Commission also launched a Critical Chemicals Alliance 9 to work with Member States and industry on key priorities. These include lead markets for European Chemicals, as highlighted in the recent proposal for an Industrial Accelerator Act 10 , and identifying critical molecules and sites requiring urgent investments. Moreover, the Commission is reviewing the EU ETS with the view to ensure competitiveness, effective carbon leakage protection and increased financial support for investments in industrial transformation. 1 https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/publications/european-chemicals-industry-action-plan_en. 2 The newly eligible sectors can already receive compensation as from 2025. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=OJ:C_202600196. 3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=OJ:C_202503602. 4 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:52025DC0079. 5 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:52025DC1005. 6 https://commission.europa.eu/publications/omnibus-ii_en. 7 https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/publications/simplification-certain-requirements-and-procedureschemical-products_en. 8 https://environment.ec.europa.eu/publications/simplification-administrative-burdens-environmentallegislation_en. 9 https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/sectors/chemicals/critical-chemicals-alliance_en. 10 https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/publications/industrial-accelerator-act_en.”
  State Aid · Overall simplification of regulation in the EU · Carbon leakage support
• 2026-02-03 “E-000427/2026 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Ribera on behalf of the European Commission 1. Undertakings in difficulty within the meaning of the General Block Exemption Regulation (‘GBER’) 1 or the Rescue and Restructuring Guidelines (‘R&R Guidelines’) 2 are not simply in a situation of weakened solvency, but are instead either manifestly insolvent 3 or in a situation of severe distress nearing bankruptcy 4 . An undertaking in difficulty has structural difficulties irrespective of the economic sector or whether it is an energy-intensive user. The State aid rules include crisis indicators which, when they are met for a given company, are generally considered by creditors as high-risk and triggering restrictions on financing. Such companies are not excluded from State aid altogether: they can benefit from rescue and restructuring aid, as well as targeted categories of aid under the GBER (e.g. natural disasters and start-ups) 5 . Public support to failing companies – which would otherwise exit the market – is severely distortive of competition and is in any event ill-suited to achieve other public policy objectives. 2. The Commission is currently revising the GBER, with the main objective of simplifying it and reducing administrative burden for Member States and beneficiaries, with an emphasis on small and medium-sized enterprises. The GBER already enables Member States to provide support to energy-intensive users, for example through aid for decarbonisation or tax reductions under the Energy Taxation Directive. In addition, the existing State aid rules 6 have recently been amended to expand the possibilities for energy-intensive users to receive various types of public support, including compensation for indirect emission costs and temporary electricity price support. 1 Article 2(18) of 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 Point 20 of the Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty (OJ C 249, 31.7.2014, p. 1). 3 See Article 2(18)(c) GBER and point 20(c) of the R&R Guidelines. 4 See Article 2(18)(a), (b), (d) and (e) GBER and point 20(a), (b), (d) and (e) of the R&R Guidelines. 5 Article 1(4)(c) GBER. 6 Guidelines on State aid for climate, environmental protection and energy 2022 (OJ C 80, 18.2.2022, p. 1), Guidelines on certain State aid measures in the context of the system for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading post-2021 (OJ C 317, 25.9.2020, p. 4), and Framework for State Aid measures to support the Clean Industrial Deal (OJ C, C/2025/3602, 4.7.2025).”
  EU industrial funding · EU policy on sustainability criteria in public funding
• 2026-01-21 “E-000219/2026 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Séjourné on behalf of the European Commission Since its reply to written question E-001685/2025, the Commission has examined the French EGalim framework, including the ‘quality and sustainable products’ target in Article L.2305-1 of the Rural and Maritime Fisheries Code. That provision establishes several eligibility pathways, determined by reference to the categories and conditions expressly listed therein, and does not provide for a restructuring of the scheme or a temporal cut-off affecting eligibility. As regards the High Environmental Value level 3 certification, Article L.230-5-1 of the Rural and Maritime Fisheries Code introduces that certification as one possible compliance pathway and provides for the acceptance of products satisfying equivalent requirements. That article refers to the adoption of an implementing decree, after consultation of the Conseil d’État, specifying the conditions for demonstrating such equivalence. The absence, to date, of any foreign certification formally recognised as equivalent reflects the current state of pending implementation rather than the absence in law of an equivalence mechanism. In view of the absence to date of the implementing decree on equivalence, the Commission intends to pursue exchanges with the French authorities to clarify the content envisaged for that decree and its adoption timeline.”
  EU Single Market harmonisation · "Buy European" provisions
• 2025-10-08 “E-003933/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Séjourné on behalf of the European Commission The Joint Statement published on 21 August 2025 expresses the intention of the parties to reduce technical barriers to transatlantic trade in the automotive sector by considering the scope for mutual recognition. The details on the next steps to implement the commitments made in the Joint Statement will be discussed with the United States. However, the Commission considers that the implementation needs to be based on a comparison of the technical standards and requirements in the EU and the United States and without prejudice to the EU’s regulatory autonomy. A preliminary assessment shows that there are areas where standards are comparable, in particular where the EU has adopted United Nations Global Technical Regulations 1 . In other areas, including the protection of vulnerable road users, the EU and the United States have different approaches. 1 https://unece.org/transport/standards/transport/vehicle-regulations-wp29/global-technical-regulations-gtrs.”
  EU-US trade relations
• 2025-09-29 “E-003771/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Virkkunen on behalf of the European Commission Directive (EU) 2022/2555 1 (NIS2 Directive) sets out measures for a high common level of cybersecurity in the EU. It lays down cybersecurity risk-management and incident reporting obligations for entities in 18 critical sectors, including electricity. Pursuant to Article 2(1) in conjunction with Annex I, point (1)(a) dash 4, of the NIS 2 Directive, ‘[p]roducers as defined in Article 2, point (38), of Directive (EU) 2019/944’ are in scope where they qualify as medium-sized enterprises or exceed the ceilings for medium-sized enterprises. Therefore, where an entity operates solar panels, it could qualify as a producer and as an essential or important entity in scope of the NIS2 Directive provided that the other criteria as regards the size-cap are met. The Commission is dedicated to simplifying the compliance with cybersecurity legislation and therefore ensure easier compliance for businesses, while maintaining the cybersecurity objectives. The first major step in this regard will be the Digital Omnibus proposal, with targeted amendments on specific provisions of our digital acquis, including on data, cybersecurity and AI. Further, the upcoming revision of Regulation (EU) 2019/881 2 (Cybersecurity Act) will inter alia foresee provisions to simplify and streamline cybersecurity legislation. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2022/2555/oj/eng. 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A02019R0881-20250204.”
  Scope of EU cybersecurity obligations
• 2025-07-24 “E-003078/2025 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission The Competitiveness Compass for the EU 1 sets the target of cutting administrative burden by at least 25% for all companies and at least 35% for small and medium-sized enterprises without undermining the respective policy goals. Making rules easier and cheaper to implement also contributes to preserving environmental goals. As mentioned in its Single Market Strategy 2 , the Commission intends to present in autumn 2025 a proposal to reduce administrative burden linked to environmental laws. The Commission consulted stakeholders on the initiative, through a Call for Evidence 3 published on 22 July and with a feedback period until 10 September 2025. The specific content of the future proposal will be decided on after consideration of the responses to the consultation. In any event, the initiative aims to simplify and streamline administrative requirements related to the environment in the areas of waste, products, and industrial emissions. The initiative may also consider permitting challenges relating to environmental assessments. More generally, the Commission services are stress testing the EU environmental legislation to identify significant potential for simplifying administrative tasks and carry out evaluations under the Better Regulation rules 4 as applicable. Furthermore, the Commissioner for Environment, Water Resilience and a Competitive Circular Economy held an implementation dialogue on permitting and environmental assessments in April 2025. The Commission is fully committed to simplify EU laws so that they can be fully implemented. 1 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European council, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, COM (2025) 30 final: ‘A Competitiveness Compass for the EU’. 2 Communication for the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, COM (2025) 500 final: ‘The Single Market: our European home market in an uncertain world. A Strategy for making the Single Market simple, seamless and strong’. 3 https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/14794-Simplification-ofadministrative-burdens-in-environmental-legislation-_en. 4 https://commission.europa.eu/law/law-making-process/better-regulation_en.”
  Nature protection and restoration in the EU · EU policy on water management · Overall simplification of regulation in the EU
• 2025-06-04 “E-002253/2025 Answer given by Ms Zaharieva on behalf of the European Commission Under current Horizon Europe (HE) research related to dual-use products or technologies is not prohibited and it is not excluded that HE project results may potentially be developed outside the scope of the project, even if they were originally intended and funded for purely civil applications. This transition could happen beyond the lifetime of the project itself. At project level, a number of safeguards have been established under HE to ensure EU funds are not used for activities that violate international law 1 . Any measures would have to be based on the conduct of the beneficiary, not on the actions or behaviour of the State of Israel, which cannot be considered automatically attributable to its entities participating in HE grants. At programme level, in view of the State of Israel’s intervention in the Gaza Strip and the ensuing humanitarian catastrophe, the Commission considers that there is a case for a partial suspension of the Israeli’s association to the HE programme following the High Representative review that concluded that there are indications that Israel would be in breach of its human rights obligations under Article 2 of the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement 2 that forms the basis for the Agreement on the Association of Israel to HE. The partial suspension that the Commission has proposed to the Council 3 , via an appropriate and proportionate measure, specifically concerns the participation of entities established in Israel in activities funded under the Accelerator of the European Innovation Council (EIC) 4 . The High Representative is the Vice-President of the Commission. The work of the College of Commissioners is fully carried out in accordance with the principle of collegiality 5 . 1 Proposals to be funded are evaluated by external independent experts and are subject to a self-assessment and an ethics review which may result in rejection or specific additional ethics related obligations. During the implementation phase, checks or reviews may be initiated at any time if ethical or other concerns emerge, Noncompliance may lead to any of the measures provided for in the grant agreement, including termination of the project. 2 OJ L 147, 21.6.2000, p. 3, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/agree_internation/2000/384/oj. 3 COM(2025) 620 final. 4 This would imply that legal entities established in Israel would no longer be eligible to participate in calls for grant and investment support under the Horizon Europe EIC Accelerator. 5 Article 17(6) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU).”
  Relations with Israel - Palestine
• 2025-04-28 “E-001685/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Séjourné on behalf of the European Commission The Commission thanks the Honourable Member for drawing its attention to a potential infringement of EU Single Market principles linked to the implementation of the French EGalim law in the context of collective catering requirements due to a High Environmental Value (HVE3) and to a potential restriction of market access for non-French producers by failing to provide a mechanism for recognising equivalent foreign certifications. The Commission will look into the matter and determine whether any further steps are needed, given the potential impact on the Single Market. This assessment may include engaging with the French authorities to examine, if relevant, the objectives pursued by the measure and the possibility of establishing in this context an equivalence mechanism for HVE3 certification, with a view to ensuring that non-French producers can continue to participate in the French collective catering market beyond 2026 in full compliance with EU law.”
  EU framework for voluntary quality and sustainability terms in food marketing
• 2025-04-23 “P-001609/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Fitto on behalf of the European Commission The Commission agrees on the importance of EU-United Kingdom (UK) cooperation in the area of fisheries, a key element of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement. The first ever EU-United Kingdom Summit took place on 19 May 2025. The Commission and the United Kingdom agreed a ‘Common Understanding’ which identifies areas of future work for strengthening the bilateral relationship. Throughout the discussions with the United Kingdom to prepare the Summit and to agree on a renewed agenda for EU-United Kingdom cooperation, fisheries was a priority to the Commission. The Common Understanding notes the political agreement with the United Kingdom leading to full reciprocal access to waters to fish until 30 June 2038. This will protect the rights of EU fishers and ensure stability and predictability for a period of 12 years. During this period, the Parties will have full reciprocal access to fish quota and non-quota stocks in each other’s waters (Exclusive Economic Zone and territorial waters). The Commission and the UK have committed to take the necessary steps to formalise this political agreement in the coming weeks and work is ongoing to do this.”
  EU-US trade relations
• 2025-03-20 “E-001203/2025 Answer given by Mr Várhelyi on behalf of the European Commission 1. The Commission is in the preparatory phase of the Biotech Act 1 . The Commission will conduct extensive consultations with stakeholders to determine the most appropriate measures to translate innovation in the field of biotechnology into products which can be brought to the market and benefit citizens. The Act will cover different sectors of biotechnology, in particular health. Its actions on the health sector will indirectly also benefit patients suffering from autoimmune diseases. 2. The reform of the EU’s general pharmaceutical legislation 2 , currently being discussed by the co-legislators, includes many measures to streamline and modernise the regulatory framework to foster and facilitate innovation especially for breakthrough therapies. The Biotech Act could complement the pharmaceutical reform for example in facilitating the authorisation of clinical trials in the EU. 3. The pharmaceutical reform proposes incentives for research in areas of unmet medical needs through additional regulatory protection and pre-authorisation regulatory support. In particular, early advice in the framework of PRIME programme will facilitate timely access to medicines that bring significant innovation. It also introduces incentives in the field of repurposing existing medicines to new indications especially in case of unmet medical needs. 1 https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/14627-Biotech-Act_en. 2 COM/2023/193 final and COM/2023/192 final.”
  Pharma IPRs · Pharmaceuticals regulation in EU
• 2025-03-12 “E-001077/2025 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission 1. On 19 April 2024 the Commission published for public feedback 1 a draft Commission Directive amending Annex III of the Nitrates Directive 2 as regards the use of certain fertilising materials from livestock manure (RENURE). This draft act would allow the use of certain types of processed livestock manure above the limit for land application of livestock manure set out in the Nitrates Directive under certain limits and conditions, allowing them to replace chemical fertilisers. Discussions on the draft text are underway in the Nitrates Committee with the competent Member State authorities. 2. Already today, it is possible for farmers to apply raw and processed manure on grassland as well as arable land in line with the relevant national and EU rules. In nitrate vulnerable zones, these rules include the limitation of land application of livestock manure to the equivalent of 170 kg nitrogen per hectare per year. The Nitrates Directive provides for the possibility to derogate from this limit under strict conditions. 1 https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/14242-Nitrates-updated-rules-on-theuse-of-certain-fertilising-materials-from-livestock-manure-RENURE-_en 2 Council Directive of 12 December 1991 concerning the protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources (91/676/EEC).”
  Use of fertilisers · Water pollution
• 2025-03-06 “E-000953/2025 Answer given by Ms Zaharieva on behalf of the European Commission The Commission has no intention to terminate the key activities as referred to by the Honourable Member. Currently internal discussions are pending on how to continue to implement in the best possible way the obligations transferred to the Commission by the Directive 2012/18/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on the control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances.”
  Industrial emissions directive (IED)
• 2025-02-05 “E-000505/2025 Answer given by Mr Kubilius on behalf of the European Commission The President of the Commission tasked the High Representative and the Commissioner for Defence and Space to put forward a White Paper for European Defence Readiness 2030 within the first 100 days of the new mandate 1 . The College adopted it on 19 March 2025 2 . The White Paper frames a new approach to defence and defence industry and identifies related investment needs. It addresses closing critical capability gaps, ramping-up European defence production and mobilising additional funding for defence. For the EU to provide tailored support to ramp-up defence industrial production capacities, it is important to have a clear picture of Member States’ capability targets, to translate them into industrial ones. This approach is summarized as an industrial output plan. Following the publication of the White Paper, consultations with all key stakeholder’s kickedoff, including with Member States, the European Parliament and Defence Industry, but also partners such as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). The EU will also support Member States in defining projects to address the critical capability gaps, starting with the priorities identified by the European Council on 6 March 2025. The outcome of these consultations will determine the way forward implementation of the embedded in, including how to further support ramping-up defence industrial production capacities. EU and NATO are in contact and hold structured dialogues on topics including emerging disruptive technologies and defence industrial matters. Under this framework they have regularly exchanged information on relevant ongoing activities, including the Defence Innovation Accelerator for the North Atlantic and the NATO Support and Procurement Agency. 1 https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/1f8ec030-d018-41a2-9759c694d4d56d6c_en?filename=Mission%20letter%20-%20KUBILIUS.pdf 2 https://defence-industry-space.ec.europa.eu/document/download/30b50d2c-49aa-4250-9ca627a0347cf009_en?filename=White%20Paper.pdf”
  Defence spending · Relations with NATO
• 2025-01-10 “E-000073/2025 Answer given by Mr Kubilius on behalf of the European Commission The Commission cannot comment on a purported agreement between a Member State and a commercial satellite operator, nor can it speculate on the characteristics of a hypothetical procurement. Purchase of equipment by Member States falls within the full discretionary power of their competencies in the management of their sovereign secure communication systems. The rollout of the Infrastructure for Resilience, Interconnectivity and Security by Satellite (IRIS²) 1 is not impacted by such potential purchases by Member States. Its objectives are to ensure the provision of governmental services to Member States and to enable EU commercial services. They differ in terms of level of security, frequencies used by the system and protection of governmental users’ data. The IRIS 2 Regulation 2 provides for regulatory obligations to foster competition by ensuring the competitive subcontracting of at least 30% of the value of the contract, in particular to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), to stimulate innovation by promoting new entrants’ participation, and to prevent potential distortion of competition. A dedicated low Earth orbit layer of small satellites is proposed by the IRIS² concessionaire, to provide hosting services for innovative payloads from third parties. The concessionaire will promote startup, SME, and new entrant participation in competitive tenders with clear selection criteria. 1 https://defence-industry-space.ec.europa.eu/eu-space/iris2-secure-connectivity_en 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32023R0588”
  EU digital & tech sovereignty · Cybersecurity investments for critical infrastructure
• 2024-12-11 “P-002868/2024 Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the European Commission The Commission recognises that the EU steel sector is currently facing a challenging situation, given the contraction in EU demand for steel and growing global overcapacity. Against this background, the Commission has initiated a review of the EU steel safeguard measure on 17 December 2024, following a request from 13 Member States. The investigation will assess whether adjustments to the safeguard would be appropriate to bring short-term relief to EU steel industry in the current market reality. Any decision resulting from this investigation may become applicable as of 1 April 2025, at the start of a new quota quarter. The Commission will indeed consider various options for adjusting the measure. The precise adjustments that would be most effective in addressing specific challenges will be determined during the investigation. The steel safeguards will expire in mid-2026. The Commission is reflecting, together with stakeholders, on a follow-up solution to provide the necessary protection to the EU’s steel industry. As announced in the political guidelines 2024-2029 1 and in the Competitiveness Compass 2 , the Commission will adopt a Steel and Metals Action Plan, outlining actions on several policy areas, including trade related, which would also help improve the competitiveness of the EU steel industry. 1 https://commission.europa.eu/document/e6cd4328-673c-4e7a-8683-f63ffb2cf648_en 2 https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/10017eb1-4722-4333-add2-e0ed18105a34_en”
  EU policy on custom fee on non-EU imports
• 2024-12-11 “E-002869/2024 Answer given by Mr Hoekstra on behalf of the European Commission The Commission is committed to carry out a review and to assess the effectiveness of the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) in addressing the risk of carbon leakage. For this purpose, the Commission will present a report to the co-legislators in 2025 which will cover the possible extension to other goods and downstream products. This report will already look into the question of export carbon leakage, building on the Commission’s 2024 Carbon Market Report. The Commission is also strongly committed to simplifying CBAM, building on the lessons learnt in the transitional period. As regards the risk of circumvention, the CBAM Regulation, as agreed by the co-legislators, empowers the Commission to tackle practices of circumvention, including by cross-checking customs and other available data with the information provided by CBAM declarants. Where the evidence confirms the existence of circumvention, the Commission is empowered to add relevant slightly modified products to the scope of the Regulation. The Commission may also initiate investigations into claims of circumvention notified by either a Member State, or by an affected, benefited, or other interested party. In carrying out such investigations, the Commission will work closely with the competent authorities as well as the customs authorities.”
  Climate efforts
• 2024-10-21 “P-002187/2024 Answer given by Mr Hoekstra on behalf of the European Commission 1. Missing parts of the railway line of the Iron Rhine project are part of the comprehensive trans-European transport network (TEN-T). In accordance with the TEN-T regulation 1 , it must be completed by 2050. The Commission shares the opinion that, given the ambition to shift freight from road to more sustainable modes of transport, it would be beneficial to improve the rail hinterland connections to the North Sea ports before that deadline. While contacts have been established with the authorities of the three Member States concerned, the construction of this line requires their explicit agreement and the Commission alone, does not have the power to decide on implementation of the Iron Rhine project. 2. Since the section of the Iron Rhine is on the TEN-T, studies or investments could be eligible for co-funding from the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF), the main programme to finance cross-border projects on the TEN-T. However, the budget of the facility for the current multiannual financial period, including its part dedicated to projects of dual – military/civilian use, is nearly depleted. 3. Studies for the implementation of the Iron Rhine have already been co-financed from the Connecting Europe Facility 2 and presented in 2017. The Commission will continue cooperating with the Member States concerned and the interested parties. 1 Regulation (EU) 2024/1679. 2 https://ec.europa.eu/assets/cinea/project_fiches/cef/cef_transport/2014-EU-TM-0407-S.pdf”
  Energy (green transition)
• “Well, thank you to the rapporteur for his constructive proposal. And the draft opinion already touches on several important aspects. First of all, we must continue to stress the objectives of the Common Agricultural Policy as laid down in the treaty. That's ensuring a fair standard of living for farmers, market stability, increased productivity and food supply at fair prices. These goals remain as relevant today as ever. I also strongly support the emphasis on generational renewal and the need to support young farmers. This is the key to the long term sustainability of our agricultural sector. A third element I welcome is the attention given to the crisis reserve and the need for sufficient flexibility to support our farmers when needed. However, I would like to add the importance of ensuring that the allocation of these crisis reserve funds happens in an objective and transparent manner. I will also table a few amendments to further improve the text for my group and myself. It's essential to highlight that farmers are still facing real losses due to inflation, and current support mechanisms do not adequately compensate for this. I also regret that the recent budget cuts under the Multiannual Financial framework disproportionately affect market and promotion measures. While these are vital tools for supporting of farmers, especially in times of economic pressures and geopolitical instability, I will table amendments calling on the Commission to ensure financial capacity to mitigate and compensate for the significant impacts of new trade agreements on our agricultural sector. Lastly, I believe we must be bold enough to ask for an increase in the research budget for agriculture and food under Horizon Europe. Continuous innovation is crucial if we want to make our agriculture systems more robust and more resilient in the face of the many challenges ahead. Thank you.”
  Agricultural funding
• “Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Commissioner, colleagues. No. We are our citizens, wants us to protect their security and their well-being. But how many more indications we need that things aren't going well? Every time there's a crisis, geopolitical upheaval, we are forced to face the truth that the EU depends far too much on others for its energy and its security. Now, I was born in 1976 during the first energy crisis, and the. And then when we saw the, uh, Russian war of aggression in Ukraine and the attacks in the Middle East, every time there was a new energy crisis, did the citizens that pay the price. This isn't an ideology. The notion of energy, a sovereignty. It is a question of power, of independence, of our ability to stand up to those who are controlling our energy supply. We are too vulnerable. And article 72, paragraph seven of the treaty. It's not a throwaway line there. It is a commitment to a true commitment. We need a defence community as quickly as possible, because the EU needs to be a union that can defend itself and its values. Thank you.”
  EU approach to energy security (home-made vs import sources)
• “Yes, sir. Thank you very much. I have a very concrete, uh, question about the European pillar. We have since 2002 to Berlin plus agreements. What is the actual state of play of the Berlin plus agreements? Uh, can, in this, uh, perspective, can Europe use the NATO facilities when, according to the Berlin Plus agreements, they decide to come to action in one way or another?”
  Relations with NATO
• “Honourable members. I would. I attended an audience in the Vatican with the Pope, together with a number of colleagues. And on the wall and on the ceiling, I could see two words justice and mercy. Those should be the future by words for Ukraine, justice and mercy. And starting with justice for 500 citizens, innocent citizens. Murdered butcher makes me think of terrible crimes committed in France. Hundreds of citizens killed by soldiers. Russian soldiers arriving to colonize the land. Justice is required first. We saw that in Nuremberg, the Yugoslav tribunal. Only once you have justice can you plan for the future and move towards mercy and peace. The longer the war drags on, the more that Putin and Russia need to be held accountable. We need to start with justice, then move on to mercy.”
  Russia-Ukraine conflict (10th term)
• “Thank you professor. Thank you, Mr.. Professor and colleagues. As far as I'm concerned, there's absolutely no doubt that we've got to look at how we can help Ukraine through this difficult period. The question is whether the instrument that's being proposed is actually the right instrument, and whether it is sufficiently covered from a legal point of view. I've read this study with great interest and I have a number of specific questions. First of all, reading the study, you say that we've got to be creative in our use of new interpretations of international law. Do you think that gives us sufficient legal stability to take this step? Second question. Do you feel that this gives us sufficient stability to be covered for any claims of damages for arbitration courts? I'm not talking about international courts. I'm talking about courts of arbitration. Do you think this gives us sufficient stability? I heard Miss Callas referring to the Iraq and Kuwait case, but that was an entirely different situation. I don't think we should be comparing apples to pears, because that'll just confuse us. And then thirdly, in your study, you talk briefly about the role of the Europe and stability and on the system, but you don't really go into more detail about that. Can you say something about exactly how you see this? And then the fourth question has been asked by others. It's not just a matter of the Russian assets from Euroclear. There are billions and billions of Russian assets outwith Euroclear. And might they also be covered here? I'd like to have a specific clear cut answer to that. And I think that in supporting Ukraine, this one way forward that we should be looking at. But there are other ways forward which would be equally valuable for supporting Ukraine. 100% support from us.”
  Russia-Ukraine conflict (10th term)
• “President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, our electricity grid is the most integrated infrastructure in the world. However, despite that, we are realising that it's not up to the challenges facing us in the 21st century. In the past, it was based on fossil energy, centralised production. Today, however, we find ourselves in a new period, a new era where wind and solar energy are powering electric vehicles, digitalisation and wind pumps. Heat pumps. Sorry, if we don't do anything, we will fail to achieve our climate objectives, but we'll be exposing ourselves to new energy crises, undermining future economic growth. There are very real needs here. Businesses and consumers need reliable and cheap energy. It's very important, therefore, that we do three things. First of all, we have to commit major investment in energy networks with sufficient support for cross border projects. Secondly, we have to speed up permits, the granting of permits and ensure that European energy rules support the transition rather than blocking it. Thirdly, we should be supporting flexibility, and we should also ensure that citizens and businesses which invest in renewable energy be rewarded. Ladies and gentlemen, the electricity grid is not of secondary importance. It's the backbone for our future. Let's invest now so as to ensure that we don't risk decline in the future.”
  EU energy infrastructure integration
• “Commissioner, I think it's pretty clear that this committee is very disappointed and let me know. Move on to your commission on a daily basis. Scores of farmers are stopping activity. 1 in 5 dairy farms will stop in the next five years. Very few people are taking on existing farms. And what they want is some certainty. And with this 20% cut, I don't think you're giving them any certainty or prospects. If agriculture is to be a strategic or is to have strategic autonomy, you need to give them that. And I would say, please convey this message to your colleagues in the Commission. A lot of strategic levers have been given away by the EU. We're trying to take those back. Rest those back. Well, let's start with agriculture and take that sector seriously. Now, you wanted ring fencing. You fought for that for that 300 billion. Well, we need more of that. It needs broader. My cut.”
  Agricultural funding
• “Thank you. And first and foremost I would like to thank the ministers for your time here in the European Parliament. Um, dear ministers, I read in, um, your programme that, um, uh, about Egypt, uh, on the integration of the European defence industry and I fully agree what the principles that you have presented in, in, in your program. But I have a very concrete question because, however, to unlock the real potential of the European defence technological, technological, industrial base, we need a strong focus on the participation of SMEs throughout the value chain. And despite the imminent threats by Russia and the common belief that we need to ramp up our defense capabilities, some member states may be reluctant to do what is necessary to reinforce our common European defense industry. When to when the return for their national industry is too low. I believe that we should not only make the case for a stronger participation of SMEs throughout the supply chain, but also for a more united European cooperation on development, production and procurement of the necessary equipment. My question is thus how do you look to to this and do you will accomplish the focus on SMEs? And a genuine you focused on and cooperative spending in order to reinforce our European defence industry. Thank you.”
  Defence spending
• “President. Colleagues. Commissioner, it looks like there is going to be progress made in the negotiations on peace in Ukraine. Let's cross our fingers. And Mertz has made some progress there as well. And that is good. But there is one very difficult question as well. Why did it not happen under the leadership of the president of the commission? Well, I think it's a very clear reason, because the foreign policy is our Achilles heel in the EU. Let's be honest, we will not be able to depend on the US anymore. We're going to have to take responsibility for our own security. And that is what von der Leyen has just said. We're going to have to do it ourselves. And if we have article five in our treaties, we've got article 42 para seven, which is mutual assistance and the need to use all of the resources that we have. But the question here is what does that mean today? In practice today, that doesn't mean anything. It's just an empty it's an empty box. Why? Well, because we don't have a European defence Without defence, we are not really there at the table. We are on the menu instead. Colleagues, many comments have been said about financial support for Ukraine and we hope to find a solution over the next few days that will support Ukraine, guarantee our security, improve it and make sure that no one is going to be exposed to all of these risks. And that's possible, but it's going to require cooperation, European solidarity, instead of just pointing the finger at Belgium. Thank you.”
  EU competences on defence
• “Thank you very much. Madam president. Commissioner. Ladies and gentlemen. I was 13 when the Single European Act was signed in 1987 and lay the groundwork for the single market. I grew up dreaming of the goals of the single market, and in 1992 there was Jacques Delors when the single market became a reality. But the single market now seems like a chimera. Pie in the sky, an illusion. We have a single market, a taxation services. That's what we think about. But that's not how it works. If we want this to be affordable and accessible, we need to create higher economic growth. And we can only do that with a single market. And that means that the hurdles that are there are costing us millions of euro every year within the EU, plus the Uh, trade, uh, value with the United States. We have had endless debates on XI Jinping, Trump, and Putin, but we cannot lay the blame at their door. We've got to look at ourselves in the mirror. We've got to get rid of these internal walls. We need to give up our atavistic, uh, and national reflexes. The title of the debate is The Time has Come High time to deliver the single market. So it is not too late, but the time has come. As Paul-Henri Spaak said.”
  EU Single Market harmonisation
• “Madam president, commissioners, ladies and gentlemen, in this chamber, we talk about strategic autonomy. Quite often when we're talking about defence, when we're talking about food, when we're talking about medicines. And that's the message that we need to take the reins into our own hands a bit more, so that we can protect our own citizens better in the future. And that applies also for critical raw materials. Without some of these, as you can understand, we would not be able to keep the motor of our civilization going. No smartphones, no, uh, electricity, no wind power. And for those critical raw materials, we're extremely dependent on China 90% to the tune of 90%. And here we're not talking about an unbalanced imbalance in trade. We're talking about strategic weakness, one which China is exploiting because China decides whether and the way in which critical raw materials can be used and can be imported by Europe. But that is completely unacceptable. At the coming EU-China summit, we cannot pursue business as usual. Europe cannot become the toy of Beijing. We need to address critical raw materials and bang their hand on the table.”
  EU-China relations
• “Yes. Good morning. I'll be speaking Dutch, as Mr. Bentsen did, as Mr. Hoekstra understands it. So happy New year. A year of hope. And that's what I read in a Flemish newspaper this morning. In fact, there's a great deal of hope in you. The Flemish economy is putting a lot of faith in you in catching up Catching up on this industrial deal, especially when it comes to energy intensive sectors. We are seeing postponements of investment as they are waiting for future developments from the sector. There is a great deal of concern that I hear about hydrogen, and that's what my question is really drilling down on. The commission is only talking about green hydrogen, and here we need massive amounts of investments that aren't being considered and blue hydrogen as well. Now, Mr. Biden seemed to be against decarbonization, but was making the rules less stringent on green hydrogen. So what are you going to do to try and encourage investments, to make sure that hydrogen can be part and parcel of the European Union's mix, and you can give hope to these investors?”
  Low-carbon hydrogen
• “Thank you. President. Ladies and gentlemen, madam Commissioner, the European chemical sector is going through a tumultuous period, the worst since the financial crisis. To give you an idea of the extent of this, in the the port of Antwerp, my own country, the major chemicals cluster in Europe. Installations are working at 65% of capacity. That's the lowest level for 44 years. Production is falling. Investment is being transferred to the United States and Asia. In my own country, companies such as BASF, ExxonMobil or Total Energy have announced that they intend to either close or restructure plants. Nevertheless, the Chemical Secretary in Belgium provides for many, many jobs and a third of our exports. As a result, we have to support any proposal which makes life easier for our chemicals clusters. The proposals we are talking about today aren't a miracle cure, but they're a step in the right direction. They streamline procedures and security assessments. They cut red tape for businesses and provide for faster and more efficient decisions being taken on chemical substance with OS, with OSHA and a joint platform, we will be able to both strengthen protection of people and the environment while enhancing competitiveness for our industry. Less paperwork, more innovation. Faster procedures. This is what European industry and the chemical industry in particular need desperately. So we must.”
  Chemicals regulation
• “Yeah. Thank you. I just want to come back on my first question also after hearing what you answered, you said the Berlin Plus agreements are still on track. Okay, but what does it mean exactly? In the Berlin Plus, agreements stated that the US or that every country. But I take this case. The US has the right of first refusal. If that is the case hypothesis, there is an attack coming to one of the Baltic states coming from Russia. And the United States said, okay, we will use our right of first refusal. We will not intervene. What is the status of the Berlin Plus agreements? Does this mean that within the NATO that the European countries, the member states of the European countries, member of NATO can use the NATO capabilities, the planning, the communication, the headquarters and so on. Can they use the full backbone of the NATO also included the American backbone of the NATO? Because I think this is very important when we are talking about European pillar of NATO, then we have to be sure that this is the full pillar of the NATO, because I think that in Europe, we don't want to be dependent upon the president of the United States saying, I don't want to intervene, but you will also have not the backbone of NATO. Because if that is the case, then we have to organize ourselves in Europe in a totally different way than in the perspective of the European. So that's my question. Can we use all the NATO capabilities on behalf from the European side. If there is the right of first refusal of the United States.”
  Relations with NATO
• “Yes, thank you. Canada and the European Union have important relationships and exemplary relationships. CETA is one example of this, NATO is another example of this. And we share not only interest but like you mentioned values, values that are in common and more important than ever the rule of law, the importance of international agreements, the respecting and encouraging of multilateralism, the importance of democratic values and fundamental freedoms. Canada's stance on Ukraine is one example of this and I don't know whether we should invite you, invite Canada to become the twenty eighth member of the European Union as some suggest but what I do think is that we together with like minded countries we must defend the world order as we see it and perhaps look for alternatives to the G Twenty. I'm sure that countries like Switzerland, Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand feel it in the same way and in the past Europe has one big laugh and that was the United States. We shared the bet of security, the table of trades in house and in house of common values and occasionally we clashed. We clashed on defense, we clashed on the rules on governing the big tax but our belief in a shared value, in a shared future and shared values always prevailed. But today I doubt whether we still live in the same house. Perhaps we should consider building a larger house where we can create a new home with several countries and including Canada in a new and strengthened partnership. That is my deep belief. Thank you.”
  EU-US relations
• “Mr. president, Mr. Commissioner colleagues. The brand transatlantic. The world is on fire. Our transatlantic relations are suffering. And the fact is that both in the east and in the north, we're seeing problems with a war to the east. We cannot stand by and watch. Europe has to defend itself, and that requires effort. We need to speed these efforts up, though, to ensure our security and to defend our well-being. We cannot stand idle. Naturally, this places a number of demands on the European level. This is the only way that we can reduce costs and be a real dissuasive force. We need to stop talking about European defence and we need to act jointly.”
  EU competences on defence
• “Yes. Thank you. Um. Security first. That is the president's motto. Also on economic security. Uh, and an important part of that is the increasing competitiveness. Cutting red tape, deepening the internal market in Belgium, in Flanders, my region here, uh, European legislation has a major impact on licensing for companies, especially for energy intensive companies such as chemicals and Chemicals and steel. The procedure to issue licenses is often very complex, and the combination of ambitious legislation makes it very difficult to get another license. This would be addressed under the Commission's Decarbonisation Acceleration Act. My step. My question is what steps will the Polish presidency take to ease the permitting procedures so that we accelerate much needed investments in this transition? Thank you.”
  Overall simplification of regulation in the EU
• “Thank you. Well. Yes. Thank you. High representative, president of council. Ladies and gentlemen. Well. What is really at stake here is the question of using our strengths in economic constraints. Intimidation is what we're facing. Anyone who thought this was just a passing phase, they were wrong. You remember we talk about democracy and being strong and mutual respect with the UK and the rule of law. It's got to be our strategy, and it's got to be the very basis for the G8 of democracy. Colleagues, the European Union really must take a role of leadership. When we are talking about threats against one country, we should all react. Article five of NATO. But also, economically speaking, it's not escalation. It's looking for an alternative. The question is, are we ready? Are we strong enough to put all this into action? Let's hope we are.”
  EU-Russia relations (from March 2022)
• “I truly believe that this is of the utmost importance to safeguard our strategic economy. The draft report does bring the chance to table and is and is a good step forward in the right direction. But let me be clear. I believe that there are still some issues left. First, we still need a good balance between military and civil spending in those programs. It should be unfeasible to blindly put all our eggs in the same military basket. Second, we will have to adapt the definitions of eligible actions carefully and with precision in order to seek coherence with all the existing European defense and civil funding to avoid unwanted overlap or perverse consequences. And third, lost More coherence has to be found between the current proposal and all the other existing initiatives regarding defense related funding. As a supporter, a shadow rapporteur on this file, I'm looking forward to the fruitful discussions with the other colleagues on the omnibus with a major impact where our Parliament should take a leading role. Thank you.”
  Defence spending
• “Yes. Thank you. Thanks to the speakers, uh, we heard that we have a lot of talent. That's a good thing. We need more money. Um, that's another thing. But we doubled the budget for horizon. Uh, and it gives us a rare opportunity to close the European innovation gap, I think. But money alone is not enough. You said, uh, the governance is important. Do you have concrete suggestions about that. What do you mean with these governments? And another thing that is very important, I think, is the design. The design can make the real difference. And for me, I think three elements are quite, quite important. First, risen must continue to follow its proven principles. And these principles are excellence based evaluation and transparent, independent and selection process. Second element research and innovation must not become purely an industrial policy tool. Long term competitiveness depends on strong bottom research. That means safeguarding a fully independent ERC with excellence as the sole criterion and preserving the bottom up nature of msca. Third element 175 billion should be seen as a minimum. But of course we have not only the opinion, but there's also the money on research and development in the different member states. The average in in Europe, the European Union is 2%, 2.2%. In Belgium and Germany we have 3%, something like that. In Latvia it's 1%. Um, how can we guarantee stability and predictability? Um, uh, on, on on this and about that, my question is if we agree that innovation is the foundation of the European competitiveness, how can we concretely safeguard the bottom up and excellence based nature of programmes like ERC and MSI from increasing political or also industrial steering? Thank you.”
  Research priorities within the EU
• “Yes, thank you, Dear Commissioner, thank you for being here. You introduced yourself saying that this is a very crucial period for our security or defence, but also for our industry. And the Commission estimates a need of 584 billion this decade to invest in the electricity grid. And that is where my question is about not in the least for the cross-border infrastructure. If we really want to electrify, electrify as much as possible, accelerating the expansion, the modernisation and the digitalisation of our grids, that will be an essential to ensure efficient energy flows to areas of need, to mitigate the high peak prices and to guarantee affordable energy for both the industry and the households. The leaked version of the Action Plan on Affordable Energy introduces a European grid Package. My question is, could you explain in detail what this simplification entails and how it will be specifically affect key projects of common interest projects for the energy intensive industries, such as those involving hydrogen or the CSS? Thank you.”
  EU energy infrastructure integration
• “(15:56:27 – 15:58:14): Well first of all thank all the speakers for their valuable contributions, very inspiring, and I think that we all agree that the European Competitiveness Fund can be a real momentum for the European Union to strengthen our competitiveness but only on certain conditions. And I want to focus on these conditions. I think that for me three elements are quite crucial. The first element is excellence. Excellence must remain the core principle. Funding should be allocated through open competitive calls based on excellence and impact. Second element, you mentioned the value of death. I think that the ECF must help to bridge the value of death. It should focus on scale up and deployment, support industrial ecosystems and infrastructure, allow strong industrial clusters with strong participation of SMEs and dual use technologies. And third element, technology neutrality. Technology neutrality is, I think, quite essential. Calls should focus on sufficiently broad objectives, not on prescribing every specific used technology. My question to the speakers is very concrete: if we agree that competitiveness is the objective, do you also agree with me that excellence and not geographical distributions should remain the guiding principle of the ECF? And how can we ensure this? Thank you.”
  EU research funding
• “Thank you. President. Ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner. Protecting our democracy has to be the highest priority. Democracy is under pressure, and it's our task, our task to maintain protection. The threats that Europe needs to keep in its sights are coming from outwith Europe. The dangerous mix of populism and nationalism. Trumpism, if you like. And we can see this banging at the door of Europe. And there are attempts also from within to undermine this. And this is why this file is so important. This directive is doing something quite clear. It is bringing in transparency, transparency over lobbying activities being carried out on behalf of third countries. No more, no less. Not a witch hunt, no general obligation for a registration that will stifle us. Know who is speaking on behalf of whom. And a direct compromise is understandable to have an approach with minimum harmonisation so member States can go further and independent control. That's how we strengthen some democratic resilience without giving up on other democratic, democratic values of our society. And if you want to undermine democracy, you undermine confidence in democracy. So we need to have a first line of defence for democracy. Ladies and gentlemen, it doesn't die overnight, but it's after many attempts that that happens. And we have a task to avoid that.”
  Transparency requirements for interest groups
• “Yes. Thank you, dear ministers. And also thank you for being here today. Um, earlier this year, I was, um, I served as EPP negotiator on a key resolution about the, um, energy intensive industries and like, steel and the chemical sectors, which are under significant pressure here in, in Europe, they are struggling with high energy prices, lengthy permitting procedures. You already talked about that. And also the overly rigid EU regulations and unfair competition on third country. Also, my colleague mentioned about that and unfortunately I find very little reference about the energy intensive sectors in the Danish presidency programme, Grim, even though they formed the backbone of our industrial base and rear and are critical for jobs and prosperity across Europe. So my question addressed to both of you is quite straightforward. What concrete actions will you take in the coming months to support these industries, about the high energy prices, about the permitting procedures, and also about the unfair competition from countries like China? Thank you very much.”
  Overall simplification of regulation in the EU
• “Yes. Thank you. Thanks to the speakers, uh, we heard that we have a lot of talent. That's a good thing. We need more money. Um, that's another thing. But we doubled the budget for horizon. Uh, and it gives us a rare opportunity to close the European innovation gap, I think. But money alone is not enough. You said, uh, the governance is important. Do you have concrete suggestions about that. What do you mean with these governments? And another thing that is very important, I think, is the design. The design can make the real difference. And for me, I think three elements are quite, quite important. First, risen must continue to follow its proven principles. And these principles are excellence based evaluation and transparent, independent and selection process. Second element research and innovation must not become purely an industrial policy tool. Long term competitiveness depends on strong bottom research. That means safeguarding a fully independent ERC with excellence as the sole criterion and preserving the bottom up nature of msca. Third element 175 billion should be seen as a minimum. But of course we have not only the opinion, but there's also the money on research and development in the different member states. The average in in Europe, the European Union is 2%, 2.2%. In Belgium and Germany we have 3%, something like that. In Latvia it's 1%. Um, how can we guarantee stability and predictability? Um, uh, on, on on this and about that, my question is if we agree that innovation is the foundation of the European competitiveness, how can we concretely safeguard the bottom up and excellence based nature of programmes like ERC and MSI from increasing political or also industrial steering? Thank you.”
  Research priorities within the EU · EU research funding
• “Thank you, Mr. President. Dear Commissioner. We have two choices. Either we bury our heads in the sand. In the sand. Sorry, we don't listen to the signals from our industry. And we allow energy intensive industries to leave European shores. Or we do listen to them. We put our heads on the line and do what we can to ensure that tens of thousands of jobs remain here in Europe because all the signals we're getting are very clear. Ten years ago, the European Union exported 50 million tons of steel. Today we're importing 10 million tons. Basf. Arcelormittal. Big companies have put investments in these areas on hold. There is a risk to their basis in Europe, but also that the green transition will be possible. The port of Antwerp, which is the most important cluster in Europe production there, is at its lowest point since the 1980s. In Belgium alone, about 10,000 jobs were lost in energy intensive sectors. Without action Commissioner and colleagues, we will lose jobs. We'll lose our economic make power, will lose autonomy. And paradoxically, we're going to have to import goods that have a higher, um, carbon footprint than they would have if they were produced in Europe. And we're seeing there are sky high energy prices. Co2 prices are going up and there is unfair competition. Commissioner, we have a plan here. It's an action plan, um, for permits, for lower energy costs, to use Cbam as a genuine tool against CO2 emissions, to be competitive for critical materials and to protect our businesses against unfair competition. There is no time to waste, no time to lose. We have to get to work to lose.”
  Energy (green transition)
• “(11:04:17 – 11:05:58): much, madam president, commissioner. Ladies and gentlemen, I was 13 when the Single European Act was, signed in 1987 and lay the groundwork for the single market. I grew up dreaming of the, goals of the single market. And in 1992, there was Jack Delore, when the single market became a reality. But, the single market now seems like a chimera, a pie in the sky, an illusion. We have a single market, taxation, services. That's what we think about, but that's not how it works. If we want this to be affordable and accessible, we need to create higher economic growth. And we can only do that with a single market. And that means that the hurdles that are there are costing us millions of euro every year within the EU plus the, trade, value with The United States. We have had endless debates on Xi Jinping, Trump, and Putin, but we cannot lay the blame at their door. We've got to look at ourselves in the mirror. We've got to, get rid of these internal walls. We need to give up our atavistic, national reflexes. The title of the debate is the time has come high time to deliver the single market. So it is not too late, but the time has come as Paul Henri Spak said. Mister Debrani. Thank”
  EU Single Market harmonisation
• “Thank you. Chair. I will speak in Dutch. Colleagues, ladies and gentlemen. Arcelor Mittal has decided not to extend its its factory in Europe. One of five Flemish companies are having to restructure in this structure. This is in this sector. This is a sector suffering from the sky high energy prices, and that increases the pressure of competition from Asia. If we don't do anything, we're going to lose our energy intensive sector. We'll be completely dependent on steel and other fundamental products from Asia, with a massive amount of carbon leakage and the strategic dangers that go hand in glove with that. So what do we need to do? Well, as the rapporteur has already said, we need to look at the energy prices. We have to bring these down. These prices can't stay twice as high as they are in the US. Long term contracts such as PPAs and CFDs are important and smart networks have to be entertained as well. In here, it's important to maintain technology neutrality. We need to provide affordability and reliability. We can look at blue hydrogen and green hydrogen. We can avoid costs. And this is an essential sector. This is the only way in which we can generate a carbon neutral and cost effective energy mix.”
  EU approach to electricity market and prices
• “Yes. Thank you dear colleagues. Dear rapporteur, thank you. Uh, first of all, with, with your work, uh, that you already have done, uh, I think that we all agree that for years military mobility was very underestimated. And that unfortunately led to also to underinvestment in crucial infrastructures and the lack of a coherent and harmonised regulatory framework. And today, we see that it will be a crucial part of defending ourselves against the Russian aggression and in our support towards Ukraine. It is thus crucial that we give a clear and concrete message to the Commission in the light of the upcoming initiatives. I therefore welcomes a lot of the elements that were taken into account by the Co-rapporteurs. For example, the necessity to build a military Schengen, or the crucial cooperation with the NATO to align our efforts for the best practical solutions. As was already foreseen in the draft, in the first draft of the next MFF, I also welcome the pledge to substantially raise the funding of military mobility, while reassuring that our taxpayers money will be spent on those projects that are vital for our security. However, in my opinion, there are still some lacking as some crucial elements in the report in order to capture all the challenges ahead. First and foremost, we should include a clear strategy on the role of our ports in military mobility as one of the key starting points to transport equipment and troops towards our Or eastern borders. Dear colleagues, it's clear that military mobility will be one of the most important topics in the military domain in the coming years. That being said, I'm excited to work together on this important file as the shadow for my group in the most constructive way possible, because our citizens deserve a secure Europe. Thank you.”
  Defence spending
• “Thank you. President. Honourable members, critical raw materials are the backbone of a modern society. We have no defence production wind turbines or electric cars. Without these raw materials. Europe's futures hinge on substances used by others in a power play. China is using this. We need to look at the risk of export controls that could disseminate decimate an entire industry. Now the US has ensured a temporary pause in the export controls. We could end up doubly reliant on China for our imports and the US to keep China in check. So it is high time that Europe changes tack and comes up with its own policy new partnerships, its own refining and mining, its own production. Thank you.”
  Sourcing of critical raw materials
• “Thank you, Madam Commissioner. Colleagues. Well, those on the right seem to say that ETS needs to be thrown away. Well, they haven't understood anything, really, but some from the left say that ETS needs to continue without listening to industry. Well, they don't understand. They don't understand that this transition is tough for many sectors. Yes, we need to decarbonize. That is very important and not only for environmental reasons, but for economic reasons, for strategic autonomy to become independent. But we need to do this in a way that is achievable for certain sectors. At the moment, it is difficult, impossible because there is no alternative. So the truth lies in the middle. Ets has proven its usefulness. It actually helps us to green. But let us not throw away the baby with the bathwater. We need to be able to pay energy. An ETS is not going to be there for sustainability. Additional cost to be paid by the taxpayer because we're going to have more expensive building material, more expensive renovation and more costly homes. And that is going to affect homes and families. So in certain sectors where there are no alternatives, we need to dismantle the exceptions, the exemptions. But slowly, let us keep the ETS. But if the social economic impact is too heavy, citizens, industry and climate will suffer.”
  Extension of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme
• “Thank you. Mr. Commissioner. President. Colleagues. Every euro that is spent on Russian oil or gas is a euro that is feeding Putin's war. And today we're saying that's enough. By 2027, we're going to turn off that tap, not just because we need to, but it's because it's our conviction. This is a historical decision because it's not just about energy, it's about our moral responsibility and strategic autonomy. Europe is taking up this responsibility because it is about our values, peace and security. And I hope that the council will also take up its responsibility. But this choice does mean we need a vision Commissioner. The commission needs to diversify. We need to strengthen our partnerships so that we're not going to just move this dependency, but make sure that we become autonomous when it becomes a matter of energy. And we need to think that we have affordable energy for families. We need to have greater autonomy. Thank you.”
  EU approach to energy security (home-made vs import sources)
• “Secondly, permits have to go more smoothly the permitting process. Companies want to decarbonise. They want to innovate, but they're being prevented because of red tape. We're saying that decarbonisation should be a priority. Then we have to simplify permitting procedures to give the space that these companies need. Thirdly, we need to simplify the whole framework. The legislation at the moment is too complicated, too inconsistent. It restricts smart trade. We need to reduce the bureaucratic burden and have less complex rules so that we're not hindering economic growth. And thirdly, and finally, Europe is not an island. We can't have high compliance for environmental issues. And at the same time, uh, accept the dumping prices that are coming in from elsewhere. We have to use our protective box properly. Cbam is a useful tool to counter this. We need to find a genuine solution for the export sector. It's only through making the right choices. Now that we can maintain our position and have a sustainable future for Europe. Thank you.”
  Overall simplification of regulation in the EU