Benoit CASSART

Policy topics Benoit CASSART is active on

What Benoit CASSART has said (77)

• 2026-03-30 “Answer given by Mr Hoekstra on behalf of the European Commission 24.4.2026 Written question The Commission sees the offshore shipping sector as being of strategic importance for Europe, especially in the areas of energy, telecommunications and digital connectivity. Decarbonisation drives economic players, including the offshore maritime sector, to become independent of fossil fuels and thus strengthen competitiveness. It is in everyone’s interest to ensure legal certainty and a level playing field for the sector and a fair contribution towards EU climate goals. The Commission recognises the heterogeneity and specific nature of offshore activities, when it comes to Monitoring, Reporting and Verification (MRV) and Emissions Trading System (ETS) obligations. To address the issues that have been raised by offshore operators, the Commission has included additional clarifications in the guidance document [1] accompanying the MRV Regulation [2] and the EU ETS Directive [3] . Technical discussions on practical implementation matters pertaining to this sector with regards to MRV and ETS obligations continue to be held in the offshore workstream that meets under the auspices of the European Sustainable Shipping Forum (ESSF). This workstream brings together offshore shipping operators, Member States’ authorities and the Commission. In the context of the ongoing review of the ETS Directive, the Commission is also assessing what additional measures may be adopted to further facilitate compliance by offshore operators while ensuring a level playing field. [1] Guidance Document ‘The EU ETS and MRV Maritime — General guidance for shipping companies’; updated version, 18 November 2025. [2] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2015/757/oj/eng. [3] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/FR/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A02003L0087-20240301.”
  Extension of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme
• 2026-02-09 “Answer given by Mr Tzitzikostas on behalf of the European Commission 21.5.2026 Written question With the EU Ports Strategy [1] the Commission sets out a coherent framework to strengthen the competitiveness of EU ports and promote a level playing field with third country ports. Structured around five priorities, the strategy aims to balance environmental sustainability, energy transition, and resilience with economic growth and competitiveness. It calls for EU action to ensure fair competition, promote innovation and digitalisation, simplify regulatory burden while maintaining environmental protection and strengthening security and the role of ports for military mobility. Furthermore, the strategy presents a strategic approach to supporting EU ports through targeted priorities and principles for public funding from the EU and national budgets and leveraging private financing. This approach aims to address the needs of all EU ports, including small and medium-sized ports, and ports in inlands and outermost regions. The strategy also highlights simplification efforts undertaken by the Commission to facilitate and speed up investments in greening of infrastructure while enhancing port competitiveness. The EU Port strategy also invites port stakeholders to pursue forward-thinking strategies, integrate cutting edge technologies and innovative sustainable practices. These measures together provide a balanced approach to enhance competitiveness across EU maritime and inland ports which vary greatly in terms of size, location, market segments served, governance models, and stakeholders . [1] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52026DC0112&qid=1772790216221.”
  Decarbonisation of maritime transport
• 2026-01-20 “Answer given by Mr Várhelyi on behalf of the European Commission 23.3.2026 Written question The Commission considers that the evaluation of Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003 [1] published in 2024 showed that the legislation continues to meet its core objectives. However, it also identified several areas where efficiency of the authorisation system or of marketing rules could be improved. The opportunity of the food and feed safety simplification omnibus has been used to propose targeted amendments to Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003 which, while fitting within the omnibus’s scope and objective, address the main areas where need for improvement was identified by the evaluation. The Commission is confident that the proposed amendments can significantly help in solving the competitiveness and innovation issues encountered by the EU feed additives sector. In particular, the Commission considers that its proposal to remove the current ten-year renewal requirement for all additives except those belonging to the category of coccidiostats and histomonostats and the use of digital labelling will allow the sector to allocate significant additional resources to the development of new and innovative additives. This omnibus proposal does not prevent any future initiative from being taken by the Commission regarding the consideration of possible other modifications to Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003. [1] OJ L 268, 18.10.2003, p. 29, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2003/1831/oj.”
  EU policy on novel foods
• 2026-01-14 “E-000154/2026 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission The Commission is in the process of reviewing the Environmental Footprint (EF) Methods 1 to ensure that environmental impacts of different fibres are well reflected. It is based on wide stakeholder consultations and scientific inputs of the Joint Research Centre 2 and includes potential changes to updating land use indicator, covering soil organic carbon, a new indicator on biodiversity loss, or improvement of biogenic carbon accounting. Circularity aspects, like biodegradability, are already included in the EF methods. To support natural fibre production 3 the Commission introduced the 2025 Strategy for a Competitive and Sustainable EU Bioeconomy 4 . Efforts include boosting EU wool processing capacity, strengthening its value chain, optimising diversification and improving farmers’ income via the Programme for Research & Innovation 5 and the EU Common Agricultural Policy network Focus Groups 6 . EU countries may offer coupled income support for flax and hemp in their National Strategic Plans 7 , when justified, alongside direct payments. Cotton payments are available in Bulgaria, Greece, Spain, and Portugal, as well as eco-schemes promoting sustainable farming practices. A Strategy for Generation Renewal 8 seeks a 6% benchmark for young farmer support, including financial aid, training, and better investment prioritisation to encourage participation of the younger generation in farming. The Commission funds research for bio-based fibers in the 2026 CBE-JU Work Programme 9 and the ECOSYSTEX cluster 10 , and facilitates stakeholder engagement with the EU Textiles Ecosystem Platform 11 and knowledge exchange with the Knowledge Centre on Bioeconomy 12 . 1 https://green-forum.ec.europa.eu/green-business/environmental-footprint-methods_en. 2 https://joint-research-centre.ec.europa.eu/index_en. 3 Like cotton, flax, hemp, and wool. 4 https://environment.ec.europa.eu/strategy/bioeconomy-strategy_en. 5 HORIZON-CL6-2026-02-FARM2FORK-05: Boosting circularity and diversification strategies of terrestrial livestock production systems. 6 https://eu-cap-network.ec.europa.eu/focus-groups-innovation-knowledge-exchange-and-eip-agri/focus-groupinnovative-and-sustainable-ways-strengthen-role-farmers-revitalising-european-wool_en. 7 Under the Common Agricultural Policy. 8 https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/overview-vision-agriculture-food/generational-renewal_en#documents. 9 https://www.cbe.europa.eu/system/files/2025-12/CBE-JU-AWP-2026_0.pdf. 10 https://www.ecosystex.eu/. 11 https://transition-pathways.europa.eu/textiles/about-eu-textiles-ecosystem-platform. 12 https://knowledge4policy.ec.europa.eu/bio-based-textiles_en.”
  Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1)
• 2025-11-19 “E-004604/2025 Answer given by Mr Várhelyi on behalf of the European Commission In accordance with Article 64 of Regulation (EU) 2017/625 1 , the minimum requirements for border control posts (BCPs) include the obligation to have, among other elements, a sufficient number of suitably qualified staff, premises appropriate to the nature and volume of the animals and goods handled, and the technology and equipment necessary for the efficient operation of official controls. The Commission regularly audits Member States to verify the implementation of border controls, including the compliance of BCPs with minimum requirements. Audit reports are published on the Commission’s website 2 . In general, there have been no indications that the staffing levels at BCPs are insufficient to handle the volumes of animals and goods entering the EU. As part of the actions foreseen to strengthen import controls, the Commission has established a dedicated EU Task Force on Import Controls 3 to make the system more efficient, focusing in particular on pesticide residues, food and feed safety and animal welfare, and possible coordinated EU monitoring actions on specific imported products. The planned actions include an increase in audits of non-EU country and of EU border control posts over the next two years. The Commission has also strengthened its monitoring of noncompliant products, its technical support to Member States, and the training provided to staff of national authorities. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2017/625/oj/eng. 2 https://ec.europa.eu/food/audits-analysis/audit-report. 3 https://food.ec.europa.eu/horizontal-topics/official-controls-and-enforcement/import-controls-food-and-feedqas_en.”
  Import of agri-food products in the EU
• 2025-11-19 “E-004603/2025 Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the European Commission The political agreement reached by the President of the Commission and the President of the United States on 27 July 2025 1 and the ensuing Joint Statement 2 , do not affect the EU’s ability to regulate in the areas of animal welfare, the use of antibiotics or plant protection products. These matters remain within the scope of EU legislation. The Commission will continue to ensure that the relevant legislation is properly implemented and enforced. The Vision for Agriculture and Food 3 reaffirms that food and feed safety, as well as animal and plant health, are non-negotiable elements of the EU’s policy on imports. The Commission will also pursue a stronger alignment of production standards applied to imported products, notably on pesticides and animal welfare, and a strengthening of import controls, drawing on expertise from the Commission and all 27 Member States 4 . On 25 November 2025, the Commission launched a study as part of an impact assessment to strengthen alignment of the EU’s production standards on most hazardous pesticides with requirements applicable to imported products, which aims to ensure a level playing field. The food and feed safety omnibus package 5 that was presented on 16 December 2025 further confirms the goal of stronger alignment of production standards. The Joint Statement does not question or undermine EU sanitary and phytosanitary requirements or food safety standards. The EU and the United States have committed to work on both sides’ long standing concerns affecting trade in food and agricultural products, not to altering the substance of EU and United States standards. 1 https://commission.europa.eu/topics/trade/eu-us-trade-deal_en. 2 https://policy.trade.ec.europa.eu/news/joint-statement-united-states-european-union-framework-agreementreciprocal-fair-and-balanced-trade-2025-08-21_en. 3 https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/overview-vision-agriculture-food/vision-agriculture-and-food_en. 4 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_25_2979. 5 The relevant documents have been published on this website: https://food.ec.europa.eu/horizontaltopics/simplification-legislation_en.”
  GMOs
• 2025-11-10 “E-004445/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The 2026 Annual Work Programme for promotion of agricultural products provides for several dedicated amounts, one of which is to promote exclusively fresh fruit and vegetables. It amounts to EUR 15.6 million. Promotion campaigns are to highlight the benefits of consuming fresh fruit and vegetables in a balanced diet. Their objective is to increase the consumption of Union fresh fruit and vegetables by informing consumers about balanced and healthy dietary practices. The messages could notably focus on aiming at having at least five portions of a variety of fruit and vegetables each day; knowing the place of fruit and vegetables in the food pyramid and understanding the beneficial impact of fruit and vegetable consumption on health. This approach is based on ‘Diet, nutrition and the prevention of chronic diseases: Report of a Joint World Health Organization (WHO)/Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) Expert Consultation’ 1 , according to which fresh fruit and vegetables contribute to cardiovascular health through the variety of phytonutrients, potassium and fibre they contain. Consequently, WHO and FAO recommend a daily intake of fresh fruit and vegetables in an adequate quantity (400-500 g per day). The promotion of preparations of vegetables, fruit or other parts of plants is eligible within other dedicated amount of the 2026 Annual Work Programme, which amounts in total to EUR 144.4 million. They support the promotion of agri-food products with different objectives such as increasing the recognition of Union and national quality schemes or highlighting the sustainability of Union agriculture. 1 Page 89: https://iris.who.int/server/api/core/bitstreams/c4f12939-5f55-4b75-b6f9-283024956b3f/content.”
  EU measures on lifestyle-related behaviours (smoking, drinking, eating, etc.) · Nutrition
• 2025-10-20 “P-004116/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Mînzatu on behalf of the European Commission Articles 24 and 28 of Directive 2005/36/EC 1 regulate minimum training requirements for basic medical training and the ensuing specific training for general practitioners, respectively 2 . The Directive regulates elements such as the duration, the training institutions and the knowledge and skills to be acquired. However, it leaves it to the Member States to decide how the training will be provided, including in which geographic areas students or doctors would complete practical parts of their training 3 . Consequently, the Directive does not prevent Member States from carrying out training in geographic areas experiencing healthcare shortages. The EU4Health programme has promoted upskilling of health professionals in relation to the digital transformation of health systems. The Commission funds several projects aiming to improve access to healthcare, also in rural areas, including COMPASS-AI 4 that establishes a community of experts to advance the safe and effective use of artificial intelligence (AI) in healthcare. This is one of the flagship measures in the Commission’s recent Apply AI Strategy. 5 In addition, the Commission will establish European AI-powered advanced screening centres to accelerate the introduction of innovative tools for prevention and diagnosis, in particular for cancer and cardiovascular disease, with the aim of also alleviating the pressure created by the shortage of specialised staff in remote areas. Other EU funding opportunities have also been used in partnership with the Member States to address healthcare shortages, such as the Recovery and Resilience Facility, Cohesion Policy funds, or the Technical Support Instruments, in line with the respective policy objectives and eligibility rules. 1 Directive 2005/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 September 2005 on the recognition of professional qualifications - https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2005/36/oj/eng. 2 Including the specific rule referred to in the question. Article 28 of Directive 2005/36/EC requires three years of specific training in general medical practice. However, it envisages an exception: if the preceding basic medical training comprised practical training (satisfying certain conditions), the duration of such basic training may, up to a maximum of one year, be included in this three years period. 3 In line with Articles 165 and 168 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), the Union supports and complements the actions of Member States in the field of education and public health, respecting Member States' responsibility for the content and organisation of such services. Consequently, Member States are ultimately responsible for the organisation of education and healthcare services, including basic medical training for doctors and specific training for general practitioners. 4 https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/portal/screen/opportunities/projectsdetails/43332642/101233553. 5 https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/apply-ai/.”
  EU competences on health
• 2025-10-16 “E-004084/2025 Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the European Commission In February 2024, the Commission’s Joint Research Centre published the third version 1 of a study covering the expected cumulative effects of ten trade agreements on the EU agri-food sector by 2032, as well as a simulation of the effects of the United Kingdom’s trade policy on the EU agri-food sector. One of the agreements covered by the study was the modernised agreement with Mexico. The study includes trade results for the agricultural sector as a whole, as well as sectoral impacts in terms of bilateral trade, production, demand and price developments. The study confirms that the EU trade agenda has the potential to benefit the EU agri-food sector. As a result of the agreement, EU agri-food exports to Mexico are expected to increase by EUR 350 million (+26%), while imports by EUR 90 million (+11%). It is also important to note that the study was based on the agriculture concessions granted to Mexico at the time of the agreement in principle in 2018. However, in the final deal in January 2025 the EU withdrew some of its agricultural concessions to Mexico on beef, poultry and ethanol. Specifically on meat, the EU reduced the tariff rate quotas (TRQ) volumes granted to Mexico compared to the deal concluded in 2018 by 50% for beef (namely TRQ of 5 000 tonnes for beef and 5 000 tonnes for beef offals) and by one third (33%) for poultry (namely TRQ of 6 667 tonnes). Those volumes, which are minimal compared to the size of the EU market, represent some 0.15% of EU consumption for beef and 0.05% of EU consumption for poultry. 1 https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC135540.”
  Import of agri-food products in the EU · Free trade agreements (FTAs)
• 2025-10-15 “E-004030/2025 Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the European Commission China has initiated three investigations regarding agri-food products (brandy, pork and dairy) following the EU’s legitimate anti-subsidy investigation and fully World Trade Organization (WTO) compliant countervailing measures on imports of electric vehicles from China. While the Commission seriously doubts these investigations to be well founded, it is important to assess each of them on its merits and challenge them via the appropriate legal avenues. Any course of action in response to China’s investigations should ensure the continued effectiveness of the EU’s trade defence instruments, a very important tool against unfair trading practices. Indeed, of the over 200 EU measures currently in place, around two thirds concern imports from China and together protect more than 600 000 jobs. That said, the Commission has been following these investigations very closely from the start and intervened at technical level as well as in high-level meetings and through bilateral contacts. Definitive anti-dumping duties on imports of brandy, mostly in the form of price undertakings, were imposed in July 2025 and the Commission is currently analysing the next steps including a possible WTO challenge. On pork, provisional measures are in force since September 2025 and the Commission continues to closely follow the investigation, including during the hearing on 31 October 2025 where the head of the EU Delegation in Beijing intervened on behalf of the stakeholders concerned. As regards the anti-subsidy investigation concerning dairy products, the Commission has already challenged the initiation of the investigation at the WTO and will scrutinise any measures as to their WTO compatibility and challenge them as appropriate.”
  Trade relations with China · Chinese clean tech competition: trade barriers and investment caps vs. open market
• 2025-10-07 “E-003918/2025 Answer given by Mr Jørgensen on behalf of the European Commission The political agreement 1 between the EU and the United States (US) includes a mention of the intention to procure energy from the US. This includes oil, gas, and nuclear technologies, fuels, and services. These energy imports are expected to have a total value of around USD 750 billion (ca. EUR 700 billion) through 2028. The governments of EU Member States, the EU, and the US government themselves do not buy nor sell energy. The purchases are intentional estimates that would be the result of commercial decisions by private companies, also considering existing contracts they might have with suppliers in the US and elsewhere. 1 Further reflected in this Joint Statement issued on 21 August 2025: https://policy.trade.ec.europa.eu/news/jointstatement-united-states-european-union-framework-agreement-reciprocal-fair-and-balanced-trade-2025-0821_en.”
  EU-US trade relations
• 2025-10-07 “E-003919/2025 Answer given by Mr Kubilius on behalf of the European Commission Member States are and will remain sovereign for their national security and defence. They are responsible for defining the capability objectives required to ensure the readiness of their national armed forces so that they can fulfil their strategic-military missions, including those undertaken within the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. The Commission aims, with its regulatory and budgetary capacity, to support them in enhancing defence readiness by 2030. On this basis, the Commission has put forward the Readiness 2030 plan 1 , whose main pillars are the Security Action for Europe (SAFE) 2 instrument and the National Escape Clause (NEC) within the Stability and Growth Pact 3 . The SAFE instrument aims to support financially Member States to procure defence products and other products for defence purpose. In doing so, Member States should also aim to address critical capability gaps and strengthening the European Defence Technological and Industrial Base. Conditionality is attached to ensure a balance between immediate readiness and long-term industrial strength using EU budget to derisk loans. When it comes to the NEC, it can be activated by Member States to increase defence expenditures, with a maximum of 1.5% of their gross domestic product. The Commission supports Member States in ensuring a robust defence industrial base while gaining immediate operational readiness. 1 https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/e6d5db69-e0ab-4bec-9dc03867b4373019_en?filename=White%20paper%20for%20European%20defence%20%E2%80%93%20Readines s%202030.pdf. 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2025/1106/oj/eng. 3 https://defence-industry-space.ec.europa.eu/document/download/a57304ce-1a98-4a2c-aed536485884f1a0_en?filename=Communication-on-the-national-escape-clause.pdf.”
  EU-US relations · "Buy European" provisions
• 2025-10-06 “E-003917/2025 Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the European Commission In April 2025, the United States (U.S.) introduced a 10% duty (the so-called U.S. ‘reciprocal’ tariffs) on most EU exports including agricultural products, with the threat of raising this duty to 30%. This situation was highly damaging for the EU’s agricultural exports to the U.S., including fruit and vegetables. To this end, the EU and the U.S. reached a political agreement on tariffs and trade and issued a Joint Statement 1 establishing the key parameters of the transatlantic trade and investment relationship moving forward. This deal delivers confidence and predictability for European firms. The agreement also avoids the likely alternative of a harmful further tariff escalation on both sides. Notably, the agreement secures a single, all-inclusive 15% ceiling on U.S. tariffs for EU agricultural exports, including fruits and vegetables, while preventing further escalation. The agreement already includes exemptions for certain EU exports. In addition, the EU and the U.S. agreed to consider other items for inclusion in the list of exempted products. Regarding imports of U.S. agricultural products in the EU, the Commission’s proposals COM(2025)471 2 and COM(2025)472 3 open market access for certain seafood and nonsensitive agricultural products, including fresh and processed fruits and vegetables. However, EU proposals do not include any market access opening for sensitive agricultural products. Regarding the potential for the EU to adopt rebalancing tariffs vis-à-vis U.S. exports, the Commission launched two public consultations on 12 March 2025, as well as 8 May 2025. As part of this process, many EU stakeholders expressed concerns on the possibility to apply tariffs on U.S. exports 4 . 1 https://policy.trade.ec.europa.eu/news/joint-statement-united-states-european-union-framework-agreementreciprocal-fair-and-balanced-trade-2025-08-21_en. 2 https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/documents-register/detail?ref=COM(2025)471&lang=en. 3 https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/documents-register/detail?ref=COM(2025)472&lang=en. 4 https://policy.trade.ec.europa.eu/consultations/information-gathering-notice-under-regulation-eu-no-6542014new-us-tariffs-steel-and-aluminium_en.”
  EU-US trade relations · Export of EU agri-food products
• 2025-07-01 “P-002660/2025 Answer given by Mr Tzitzikostas on behalf of the European Commission The European aviation network is experiencing significant congestions, with delays due to air traffic control well above the EU level performance targets. Some air navigation service providers are significantly lagging behind in the recruitment of air traffic controllers and in modernising their air traffic management systems. This has resulted in serious capacity shortages, especially in some area control centres of the busiest areas of European airspace. The fourth reference period of the EU performance scheme prioritises addressing the capacity shortages faced by air navigation service providers and thus gradually restoring a good level of service quality for airspace users. It is crucial that air navigation service providers effectively implement the capacity-enhancement measures set out in their performance plans. The Network Manager set up at EU level will ensure the active coordination support and monitoring of operational activities to ensure the best possible performance of the aviation management network. The achievement of the performance targets is monitored both at EU level by the Commission and at national level by national supervisory authorities. Those authorities will take appropriate measures where the performance targets are not met, or risk not being met. The Commission will closely liaise with the national supervisory authorities and will be particularly attentive to the timely implementation of the planned capacity-enhancement measures.”
  EU policy on aviation safety
• 2025-06-28 “E-002614/2025 Answer given by Mr Várhelyi on behalf of the European Commission The provisions as regards advertising established in Article 72 of Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 on Biocidal Products 1 aim to guarantee that the necessary information on the risks of biocidal products and the necessary instructions or precautions of use are conveyed to the users, while avoiding misleading claims, in view to protect the health of citizens in particular vulnerable groups. The Commission is not aware of any evidence that these provisions do negatively impact the availability of repellent products for use by vulnerable groups. On the contrary, the provisions in Article 72 guarantee that those products are used safely. Therefore, at this stage the Commission sees no need for their amendment. The Commission plans to start an evaluation of the Regulation on Biocidal Products by the end of 2025. The results of the evaluation will be considered to decide whether amendments to current rules are needed. 1 Regulation (EU) No 528/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2012 concerning the making available on the market and use of biocidal products OJ L 167, 27.6.2012, p. 1.”
  EU policy on pesticides
• 2025-05-05 “E-001807/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Séjourné on behalf of the European Commission The European Multidisciplinary Platform Against Criminal Threats (EMPACT) has addressed intellectual property (IP) crime for 2022-2025 1 . Increased cooperation at national and European level led to 1.2 million counterfeit car parts seized in 2022/2023 2 . IP crime will remain a sub-priority in the 2026-2029 EMPACT cycle 3 . EU consumers are protected from counterfeit car parts through strict oversight by customs, consumer protection and market surveillance authorities. Furthermore, the Digital Services Act imposes due diligence obligations on providers of online platforms to address the dissemination of illegal content (e.g. counterfeits), ensure trader traceability and inform consumers that purchased illegal products through their services 4 . Moreover, consumers who unknowingly buy counterfeits, have the right to refund or compensation according to EU consumer laws. Awareness-raising campaigns about the danger of counterfeit car parts are run at national and EU level 5 . The Commission puts forward a comprehensive EU toolbox to address the risks brought by e-commerce imports of products, in particular unsafe, counterfeit or otherwise non-compliant products 6 . The Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on Counterfeiting 7 provides the framework for cooperation between IP rights holders and online platforms. A reflection is on-going to update the MoU to address notably the rise of counterfeits on social media platforms, whose providers are key actors in the counterfeiting distribution chain as stressed by the Commission Recommendation on measures to combat counterfeiting 8 . In 2024, the Commission and the 1 https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/internal-security/law-enforcement-cooperation/empact-fightingcrime-together_en. 2 https://www.euipo.europa.eu/en/publications/tackling-the-illicit-trade-of-counterfeit-automotive-spare-parts-inthe-eu. 3 According to the Council conclusions on the enhancement of EMPACT and on EU crime priorities for the next EMPACT cycle 2026-2029 adopted on the 13 of June 2025, Intellectual Property crime, counterfeiting of goods and currencies is a sub-priority under the 7 th EMPACT priority on Economic and Financial Crimes. More information available here: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2025/06/13/councildefines-eu-crime-fighting-priorities-for-next-years/. 4 Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 October 2022 on a Single Market For Digital Services and amending Directive 2000/31/EC (Digital Services Act), https://eurlex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2022/2065/oj/eng. 5 See for example https://euipo.europa.eu/tunnelweb/secure/webdav/guest/document_library/observatory/documents/reports/2024_Operation_Spare_off/2024_S pareOff_Flyer_en.pdf and https://inpi.justica.gov.pt/en-gb/INPI-News/Campaign-against-the-scourge-ofcounterfeiting-with-Filipe-de-Albuquerque. 6 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=COM:2025:37:FIN. 7 https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/industry/strategy/intellectual-property/enforcement-intellectualproperty-rights/memorandum-understanding-sale-counterfeit-goods-internet_en. 8 Commission recommendation of 19 March 2024 on measures to combat counterfeiting and enhance the enforcement of intellectual property rights, https://single-marketeconomy.ec.europa.eu/publications/commission-recommendation-measures-combat-counterfeiting-and-enhanceenforcement-intellectual_en.”
  EU law enforcement cooperation in criminal matters · EU policy on criminal justice
• 2025-04-30 “E-001736/2025 Answer given by Mr Várhelyi on behalf of the European Commission The EU Agri-Food Fraud Network (FFN) 1 works with law enforcement through the European Multidisciplinary Platform Against Criminal Threats (EMPACT), guided by the EU Serious and Organised Crime Threat Assessment Report. EMPACT connects Member States, EU bodies, and international partners to combat serious organised crime. For illegal pesticides, the FFN co-leads with Europol the Operational Action Plan ‘Environmental Crime’ and supports Europol’s Operation SILVER AXE, targeting intellectual property rights protected non-compliant products. Participants share related information via the Secure Information Exchange Network Application (SIENA), for secure exchange. The FFN contributes by data sharing, statistical analysis, and trend evaluation. The Commission audits Member States to assess controls on marketing and use of plant protection products, including detecting fraud. The European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) actively detects dangerous goods, as pesticides, and works closely with customs authorities to support cross-border investigations. OLAF has coordinated a joint customs operation on dangerous substances, including pesticides, in the context of the Asia-Europe Meeting 2 . Moreover, OLAF provided support and specialised intelligence for operations leading to the interception of a significant consignments of illegal pesticides in Bulgaria and Romania 34 . The Commission works with partner countries at the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development fighting illegal trade in pesticides and remains committed mitigating negative impacts of illegal pesticides on environment, thus ensuring the protection of European consumers. 1 https://food.ec.europa.eu/safety/agri-food-fraud/eu-food-fraud-network_en. 2 https://anti-fraud.ec.europa.eu/media-corner/news/operation-noxia-olaf-leads-operation-against-dangeroussubstances-2023-10-16_en. 3 https://anti-fraud.ec.europa.eu/media-corner/news/11-tonnes-pesticides-seized-thanks-olaf-and-bulgarianauthorities-2023-03-31_en. 4 https://anti-fraud.ec.europa.eu/media-corner/news/romanian-authorities-seize-1000-litres-counterfeitpesticides-valued-over-eu600-000-thanks-olafs-2024-10-03_en.”
  Pesticides & trade · EU policy on pesticides
• 2025-04-25 “E-001680/2025 Answer given by Mr Síkela on behalf of the European Commission The EU has shifted from traditional aid to partnerships of equals, including in least developed countries. Announced at the 2022 EU-African Union (AU) Summit, the Global Gateway Africa-Europe investment package 1 , aligned with the AU’s Agenda 2063 2 and taking EU interests into account, aims to mobilise EUR 150 billion of public and private investment in Africa by 2027. It is delivered in a Team Europe approach including the European Investment Bank and Member States development banks, thus optimising a coordinated use of resources and expertise. Together with its Member States, the EU is Africa's leading trading partner and first direct investor. The partnership based on mutual interests covers strategic areas such as the green transition, including energy, the digital transformation, infrastructure, while investing in health sovereignty, quality education and skills development for employability. Working hand in hand with the private sector and leveraging investment is central to Global Gateway. The strategy is implemented through innovative financing offering EUR 40 billion in risk-sharing instruments to attract private investment and create jobs and economic and social development on the ground in the partner countries. This approach enhances project impact by using private sector expertise and funds while supporting EU companies’ competitiveness. The EU-funded African Virtual Investment Platform 3 provides reliable data to reduce investment risk perceptions and boost investor confidence. Through targeted collaborations with African governments and institutions, the EU helps ensure impactful investments and sustainable growth. To effectively make a bridge between the development, financing and trade promotion, a ‘team nationals’ coordination format has been introduced in many Member States to further maximise the scale and impact of Global Gateway investments. 1 https://international-partnerships.ec.europa.eu/policies/global-gateway/initiatives-sub-saharan-africa/eu-africaglobal-gateway-investment-package_en. 2 https://au.int/en/agenda2063/overview. 3 https://www.oecd.org/en/about/programmes/african-virtual-investment-platform.html.”
  EU policy on social & environmental impact of foreign investments
• 2025-04-25 “E-001679/2025 Answer given by Mr Síkela on behalf of the European Commission The Global Gateway strategy 1 is delivering with impact in Africa based on the shared objective of sustainable prosperity for both continents. The report to the EU-African Union Ministerial of 21 May 2025 2 shows tangible and consequential progress in all the 11 priority areas of the Africa-Europe Investment Package announced at the 2022 Summit 3 and aligned with African Union’s Agenda 2063 4 . The very high participation on both sides at the Ministerial meeting testifies of the vitality and importance of the partnership. With the Global Gateway, the EU has shifted to a partnership-based model, moving beyond donor-recipient ties to foster economic and social development and creating sustainable job in the partner countries. While other international actors might promote different development models, Global Gateway aims to create links, not dependency but rather contribute to the development of the partner countries. It is the EU’s value-based offer for financially sustainable and quality projects implemented in a Team Europe approach 5 . In a challenging international context, the EU stands out as a reliable and trusted partner. In 2022, the EU’s Foreign Direct Investment stock in Africa was EUR 309 billion (compared to EUR 41 billion for China). Scaling up Global Gateway is a clear mandate of the Commissioner for International Partnerships. 1 https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/priorities-2019-2024/stronger-europe-world/globalgateway_en. 2 https://international-partnerships.ec.europa.eu/publications-library/preliminary-monitoring-report-consideredau-eu-ministerial-follow-committee_en. 3 https://international-partnerships.ec.europa.eu/policies/global-gateway/initiatives-sub-saharan-africa/eu-africaglobal-gateway-investment-package_en. 4 https://au.int/en/agenda2063/overview. 5 Including Member States, European Investment Bank, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, European Financial Institutions, Member States’ agencies and the private sector.”
  Global priorities for international development
• 2025-04-24 “E-001653/2025 Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the European Commission The Commission remains committed to its trade and sustainable development (TSD) policy as put forward in the 2022 Communication ‘The power of trade partnerships: together for green and just economic growth’ 1 . It is based on an engagement-based approach grounded in international frameworks and standards with strong implementation and enforcement. This includes the use of remedies for breaches of core TSD provisions. The final outcome of each agreement is country specific. The agreements with Kenya and Chile have strong TSD commitments, including provisions on labour matters, gender equality, environment and the fight against climate change. These commitments are binding and enforceable through specific dispute resolution mechanisms. In addition, a review clause in the agreements also allows for the possibility to further enhance the mechanism by agreeing on the application of the temporary suspension of trade preferences (i.e. remedies). The Commission is committed to engage with Kenya and Chile as part of this review mechanism. Trade agreements can serve the Sustainable Development Goals in various ways, with the enforcement mechanism of TSD provisions being one of the important aspects. The Commission regularly assesses the sustainable development impact of its trade agreements, through ex-ante impact assessments 2 as well as through ex-post evaluations 3 . The Commission is committed to follow up on their conclusions as appropriate to maximise the sustainable development potential of the agreements. 1 COM (2022) 409; https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52022DC0409. 2 https://policy.trade.ec.europa.eu/analysis-and-assessment/sustainability-impact-assessments_en. 3 https://policy.trade.ec.europa.eu/analysis-and-assessment/ex-post-evaluations_en.”
  Free trade agreements (FTAs)
• 2025-04-23 “E-001636/2025 Answer given by Ms Lahbib on behalf of the European Commission As a key humanitarian and development aid donor, the Commission is acutely aware that conflicts – particularly the war in Sudan – have generated significant protection needs for displaced populations, many of whom have fled to neighbouring countries, notably Egypt and Libya. The North Africa region remains a destination and transit point for migrants, refugees and asylum seekers, including unaccompanied children. As a result of their fragile legal status, displaced people are exposed to insecurity, threats, harassment, sexual and genderbased violence, and forced recruitment. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) receives EU funding across the whole North Africa region, with a primary focus on protection and refugee status determination. However, the agency faces alarming levels of underfunding in the region. In 2024, the United States alone accounted for approximately 38% of its funding in the region, with contributions reaching as high as 47% in the case of Egypt. The Commission remains strongly committed to supporting UNHCR in North Africa to ensure the continued delivery of critical life-saving assistance, such as food and water, sanitation and hygiene, as well as to strengthen the protection and resilience of vulnerable people. This includes efforts to enhance access to basic education and health services. The Commission will continue to support people in need in Egypt and Libya, working through UNHCR and other mandated United Nations agencies. In parallel, the Commission will also support the reinforcement of national asylum systems by providing technical assistance, capacity-building, and targeted training to local stakeholders.”
  EU Development & Humanitarian Aid · Support for international humanitarian organisations
• 2025-04-16 “E-001564/2025 Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Kallas on behalf of the European Commission The EU has been vocal about the nefarious influence and activities of the Wagner Group in the Central African Republic (CAR), including with the Government of CAR. Under its Global Human Rights Sanctions Regime 1 , the EU has listed the Wagner Group for committing serious human rights abuses and several individuals and entities (Sewa Security Services, Lobaye Invest SARLU, Diamville, and Radio Lengo Sengo) active in the CAR for their involvement in or association with the Group. These individuals and entities are subject to an asset freeze and the individuals to a travel ban to the EU. EU citizens and companies are forbidden from making funds or economic resources available to them. The EU’s humanitarian and development cooperation portfolio in the CAR includes activities that provide protection, legal assistance, psychosocial support and medical care to victims of human rights abuses. The EU has also been supporting accountability and transitional justice mechanisms through support to civil society organisations, human rights defenders, and the Special Criminal Court, whose mandate consist of investigating, prosecuting, and trying serious human rights violations and serious breaches of international humanitarian law committed in the territory of the CAR since 1 January 2003. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A02020D1999-20250220.”
  EU relations with Central African Republic · EU policy on African region
• 2025-04-10 “E-001490/2025 Answer given by Mr Tzitzikostas on behalf of the European Commission 1. According to the rules governing the performance of air navigation service providers, Member States must set out incentives of financial nature for the achievement of binding national performance targets for air traffic control capacity in an effective and proportional manner, both for services to overflights and for services at and around airports. Member States also have the obligation to implement penalties for infringements of the regulation by, amongst others, air navigation services providers. National supervisory authorities must enforce necessary corrective measures in the event of non-compliance. The Commission does not foresee further regulatory actions beyond those under the scope of Regulation (EU) 2024/2803 1 on the implementation of the Single Sky. The Commission nonetheless underlines that the Court of Justice of the European Union in Case C-353/20 Skeyes 2 has recognised a right for airspace users such as airlines to an effective remedy before the national courts against the air traffic services provider for any alleged failures by the latter in fulfilling its obligation to provide services. 2. The Commission is relaunching the review of the Air Services Regulation 3 . One of the issues being looked at during that review is how to mitigate the impact of disruptions to air traffic control, in particular regarding overflights on air carriers’ freedom to provide services. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/2803/oj/eng. 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:62020CJ0353. 3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2008/1008/oj/eng.”
  EU policy on aviation safety
• 2025-04-10 “E-001487/2025 Answer given by Mr Tzitzikostas on behalf of the European Commission The regulatory framework governing air traffic management in the EU includes performance and charging schemes for air navigation services and network functions. As part of those schemes, air traffic service providers are bound to implement binding national performance targets for air traffic control capacity, which is aimed at limiting the number of delays caused by air traffic control in Europe. Member States must also set out incentives of financial nature for the achievement of those performance targets by the service providers in the key performance area of capacity in an effective and proportional manner, both for services to overflights and for services at and around airports. The Commission will revise soon the detailed rules governing the performance and charging schemes for the next reference period of the Single European Sky performance and charging scheme starting in 2030 in order to implement the changes introduced by the Regulation on the implementation of the Single European Sky (Regulation (EU) 2024/2803 1 ). At this occasion, the Commission will review the relevance of the indicators used for the setting of performance targets, which may include the need to address specifically services to first-wave flights. The detailed rules governing the setting up of incentive schemes may also be further assessed. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/2803/oj/eng.”
  EU policy on aviation safety
• 2025-03-21 “E-001210/2025 Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Kallas on behalf of the European Commission The Commission has closely followed the discussions leading to the adoption, on 12 March 2025, of the law regulating the Peruvian Agency for International Cooperation in order to increase transparency and accountability. The law is now going through the subsequent stages of the legislative process. The Commission is assessing the practical implications of the law together with other international partners and civil society. The Commission continues to stress that an independent civil society plays a crucial role in protecting democracy, promoting transparency and ensuring accountability. The EU will continue to support civil society in Peru. To this end, it is crucial that civil society be able to operate in an enabling environment. The Commission will engage with the relevant authorities with a view to mitigating any possible negative impact of the law.”
  EU relations with left-wing Latin America
• 2024-11-29 “E-002700/2024 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Séjourné on behalf of the European Commission The Commission acknowledges the importance of recycling of lithium-ion batteries. It has approved two Important Projects of Common European Interest 1 (IPCEI) on batteries, with one of the workstreams fully dedicated to repurposing, recycling and refining. These IPCEIs have secured EUR 6.1 billion in funding and will unlock up to EUR 14 billion of additional private investments. The Commission has also established the co-programmed partnership on battery research and innovation called ‘BATT4EU’ under Horizon Europe 2 , which covers the full value chain and, so far, EUR 115 million 3 are going into innovative recycling and circularity projects. The latest Innovation Fund 4 call launched in December 2024 supports with EUR 1 billion electric vehicle battery cell manufacturing projects. Recycling activities can be integrated into projects eligible under this call. The Commission is committed to ensuring a skilled workforce for the recycling industry. The Battery Academy 5 , established in 2022 by EIT InnoEnergy 6 with the support of the Commission, is providing training for the battery industry, and the planned EU Academies under the Net-Zero Industry Act 7 will provide reskilling and upskilling opportunities. The Batteries Regulation 8 provides incentives for the development of the recycling industry by introducing targets on recycling, material recovery and recycled content. Under the Critical Raw Materials Act 9 , the Commission will identify as strategic projects those which will enhance the European raw material value chain, including recycling, and contributing to reaching the benchmark of 25% EU recycling capacity. The Commission with Member States and financial institutions will work on providing additional support measures. 1 A two-part IPCEI has been implemented to promote battery production: the IPCEI on Batteries and the IPCEI European Battery Innovation (EuBatIn). https://www.ipcei-batteries.eu/ 2 https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-opencalls/horizon-europe_en 3 This is around 19% of the presently allocated budget. 4 https://climate.ec.europa.eu/eu-action/eu-funding-climate-action/innovation-fund_en 5 https://www.eba250.com/eba-academy/?cn-reloaded=1 6 EIT InnoEnergy is part of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT). 7 Regulation (EU) 2024/1735 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 on establishing a framework of measures for strengthening Europe’s net-zero technology manufacturing ecosystem and amending Regulation (EU) 2018/1724, OJ L, 2024/1735, 28.6.2024, p. 1. 8 Regulation (EU) 2023/1542 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 2023 concerning batteries and waste batteries, amending Directive 2008/98/EC and Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 and repealing Directive 2006/66/EC, OJ L 191, 28.7.2023, p. 1. 9 Regulation (EU) 2024/1252 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 April 2024 establishing a framework for ensuring a secure and sustainable supply of critical raw materials and amending Regulations (EU) No 168/2013, (EU) 2018/858, (EU) 2018/1724 and (EU) 2019/1020, OJ L, 2024/1252, 3.5.2024, p. 1.”
  Energy (green transition)
• 2024-11-26 “E-002661/2024 Answer given by Mr Síkela on behalf of the European Commission Through the Bêkou Trust Fund 1 , the EU has supported extensive health interventions across 15 districts in the Central African Republic, encompassing 167 health facilities primarily in rural and underserved areas, improving access to healthcare for approximately 35% of the population. Key outcomes include expanded access to healthcare, the provision of free healthcare services and improved availability of free medicines provided to vulnerable groups, including pregnant women, children under five, victims of sexual violence and the indigent population. The fund also contributed to the construction and rehabilitation of pharmaceutical warehouses in underserved areas, strengthening storage capacity and the availability of medicines. These efforts significantly enhanced the availability of essential medicines in targeted health facilities. The supply and the distribution of essential medicines was an integral part of the health programme. For instance, the fund allocated EUR 7.3 million to medicine supplies, transport and storage. Medicines were procured and distributed by implementing partners, adhering to the EU's quality standards for pharmaceuticals, to ensure safety and proper distribution. All this work was implemented in close cooperation with the Ministry of Health, through performance-based financing to empower local health structures, enhance accountability in medicine distribution, and increase service utilisation rates. To assess the efforts made under the fund, including in supplying and distributing medicines fairly and free of charge, the EU established a dedicated monitoring and learning system. It enabled the fund to monitor all actions and outputs financed by the interventions. 1 https://international-partnerships.ec.europa.eu/policies/programming/programmes/bekou-trust-fund_en”
  Global priorities for international development · EU Development & Humanitarian Aid
• 2024-11-21 “E-002613/2024 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The concessions on agricultural products within the EU-Mercosur Partnership Agreement are carefully calibrated to protect the interest of EU farmers and the EU agri-food sector. For the most sensitive sectors such as beef, poultry, sugar and ethanol, the agreement provides for import quotas at reduced import duties for volumes that are only a very small fraction of the EU market (e.g. for beef the Tariff Rate Quotas with a reduced in-bound tariff granted to four Mercosur countries corresponds to about 1.5% of current beef consumption in the EU), and which will be phased-in over long periods to give EU stakeholders time to adapt. Furthermore, the agreement includes a bilateral safeguard applicable as well to products within quotas so that tariff preferences can be temporarily withdrawn in case imports of those products cause, or risk causing, serious injury to the sector concerned. For the unlikely event that the agricultural sector in the EU is negatively impacted following the implementation of the new agreement, the Commission intend to set up a reserve worth at least one billion EUR under the next Multiannual Financial Framework. This provides an additional safety net and insurance for the sector. Close cooperation between the Commissioner for Trade and Economic Security, Interinstitutional Relations and Transparency and the Commissioner for Agriculture and Food is secured through the Commission working arrangements with the purpose of continuing supporting the strong international dimension of the EU agriculture and food sectors.”
  GMOs
• 2024-11-21 “E-002614/2024 Answer given by Mr Várhelyi on behalf of the Commission As the only member organisation of the Codex Alimentarius Commission, the EU is actively involved in the development of the standards of Codex Alimentarius with the main objective of promoting coherence between Codex standards and the EU legislation. The primary purpose of Codex Alimentarius is protecting the health of the consumers and ensuring fair practices in the food trade. In this context, the EU advocates for the inclusion of sustainability considerations, including environmental aspects, in the development of Codex standards. For more information on the EU position regarding the role of Codex Alimentarius, the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its Report to the Parliament and the Council on the application of EU health and environmental standards to imported agricultural and agri-food products 1 , and in particular to its section on International standard-setting bodies. 1 COM(2022) 226 final: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52022DC0226”
  Free trade agreements (FTAs) · Pesticides & trade
• 2024-11-06 “E-002456/2024 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission With increasing uncertainties for EU farmers, risk and crisis management are essential aspects of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). Alleviating farmers’ vulnerability requires a resilient, competitive and sustainable farm sector capable to absorb the shocks. EU agriculture is engaged in a transition to reduce risks and become more resilient and sustainable, adapt further to climate change, reduce its impact on the environment while continuing to contribute to the EU and global food security. The CAP aims at accompanying farmers in this transition and creating the right enabling environment to let farmers in the EU to find their best business model according to their reality on the field. An efficient and effective policy approach to risk management in agriculture must consider interactions and trade-offs between different risks, on-farm strategies, market and supply chain solutions, and government policies. While crisis response tools as the exceptional market measures funded through the agricultural reserve are needed to address catastrophic events in the short term, they should not replace risk prevention, nor discourage transformational change and farmers' uptake of longer-term solutions. Policy coherence between crisis response measures and measures aimed at preventing crises and managing risks for farmers should be promoted to build a resilient, competitive and sustainable EU agricultural sector. These principles will guide the future development of the CAP toolbox, including the agricultural reserve.”
  Agriculture (green) · Agricultural funding
• 2024-11-06 “E-002457/2024 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission As set out in the Political Guidelines for the next Commission 2024-2029 1 , the objective is to have a new long-term budget that is more focussed, simpler and more impactful. For the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), the Commission aims to ensure that it is targeted and finds the right balance between incentives, investments and regulation. The report of the Strategic Dialogue on the future of EU agriculture 2 provides for a basis to move this work forward. The priority is to strengthen the competitiveness, resilience and sustainability of the agricultural sector. The Commission’s goal is to enable farmers to work their land without excessive bureaucracy, ensure that farmers have a fair and sufficient income and are rewarded for working with nature, preserving biodiversity and natural ecosystems. New own resources would help to ensure sufficient and sustainable funding for the common priorities. It is with this in mind that the Interinstitutional Agreement of 2020 called for the introduction of new own resources. To this effect, in June 2023 the Commission presented the adjusted package on the next generation of own resources 3 , which is estimated to provide total revenues of around EUR 36 billion 4 per year from 2028 onwards. The State aid framework in place allows for targeted support to the agriculture sector, which will help in its transition, while safeguarding fair competition. Compatible State aid is a useful tool to support the sector. On 10 December 2024, the Commission adopted an amendment 5 of the 'de minimis' Regulation for the agricultural sector that increases the maximum de minimis ceiling per company over three years, from EUR 25 000 to EUR 50 000. Compatible State aid and de minimis aid is however not meant to replace the support under the CAP. 1 https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/e6cd4328-673c-4e7a-8683f63ffb2cf648_en?filename=Political%20Guidelines%202024-2029_EN.pdf 2 https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/priorities-2019-2024/european-green-deal/agriculture-andgreen-deal/strategic-dialogue-future-eu-agriculture_en 3 https://commission.europa.eu/publications/own-resources-legal-texts_en 4 2018 prices. 5 https://competition-policy.ec.europa.eu/sectors/agriculture/legislation_en”
  Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1) · Agricultural funding
• 2024-11-05 “E-002407/2024 Answer given by Mr Tzitzikostas on behalf of the European Commission The Commission has launched and is launching numerous initiatives to meet the objectives set out in the Sustainable and Smart Mobility Strategy. To give a few examples, the trans-European transport network (TEN-T) revision 1 has reinforced the multimodal connections across the EU’s main transport network, including through a stronger role for multimodal hubs and urban nodes; the Greening Freight package also included measures for a more efficient use of rail capacity. The Commission also intends to bring forward a plan for an ambitious European high-speed rail network, which will help connect EU capitals, including through night trains, and accelerate rail freight. The multimodal and more sustainable options need to become more convenient and attractive. As set out in the Commission President’s Political Guidelines, to this end the Commission will present a proposal for a Single Digital Booking and Ticketing Regulation for rail. It intends to accompany this proposal by a proposal on Multimodal Digital Mobility Services. This initiative will help travellers find, compare and purchase tickets in a single place, without having to navigate through various sites and miss-out on relevant information and convenient offers, and benefit from passenger rights protection for their whole trip. The Commission will also promote a greater role for public transport and active modes through our continued support to sustainable urban mobility planning, as well as by closely following up on the European Declaration on Cycling 2 . More broadly, transport sustainability will be supported through the Sustainable Transport Investment Plan that the Commission will bring forward to scale up and prioritise investments in sustainable transport solutions. 1 https://transport.ec.europa.eu/transport-themes/infrastructure-and-investment/trans-european-transportnetwork-ten-t_en 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32024C02377”
  Road transport environmental policy
• 2024-11-05 “E-002408/2024 Answer given by Mr Tzitzikostas on behalf of the European Commission The Sustainable and Smart Mobility Strategy 1 sets out as a milestone an increase by 25% by 2030 and by 50% by 2050 in transportation by inland waterways and short sea shipping. Several challenges affecting such increase were identified in the Commission’s NAIADES III action plan 2 . It notably highlights the need to ensure coherent infrastructure and good navigation status of the fairway. In the framework of the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) 3 , the Commission is providing substantial financial support for projects aimed at completing and upgrading the inland waterway along the trans-European transport network (TEN-T). Since 2014, CEF has supported 121 inland navigation projects for amounts of around EUR 2.7 billion. 1 COM(2020) 789 : https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52020DC0789 2 COM(2021) 324 : https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52021DC0324 3 Regulation (EU) 2021/1153 : https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32021R1153”
  Energy (green transition)
• 2024-11-05 “E-002414/2024 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The EU's Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) is a critical component of the EU’s food security policy as it helps to ensure an attractive and sustainable agricultural sector. Member States recognise that the old farmer population is a challenge for long-term food security and rural livelihoods and support generational renewal through a combination of tools, dedicated resources and prioritisation of support. In the period 2023-2027, the CAP Strategic Plans support about 377 000 young farmers in setting up an agricultural activity. This represents an increase in most Member States. In 2025, the Commission will develop a strategy for generational renewal and is also planning to support the development of a land observatory. Promoting transparency and accountability in the land market, can contribute to improving access to land for young farmers. The EU-Mercosur offers real market access for EU exporters. It will also protect 355 traditional EU food products from imitation by recognising Geographical Indications. Exporters of high value-added exports will benefit significantly from the removal of tariffs. The Sustainability Impact Assessment (SIA) 1 on the potential impact of the trade agreement demonstrated that it will have a positive impact on the economies of both the EU and the Mercosur. At the same time, it identified a limited impact on sensitive agri-food sectors in the EU. The agreement contains instruments to alleviate pressure on sensitive sectors. Improving the position of farmers in the agri-food supply chain and supporting their income are important objectives of the CAP, as evidenced by the recently proposed new measures to strengthen farmers' position in the agri-food supply chain. 1 https://policy.trade.ec.europa.eu/analysis-and-assessment/sustainability-impact-assessments_en”
  Agricultural funding · Trade relations with Mercosur
• 2024-11-04 “E-002403/2024 Answer given by Mr Tzitzikostas on behalf of the European Commission 1. The Commission is aware that the summer 2024 was particularly problematic in terms of flight delays, which were caused by two factors of comparable magnitude: adverse weather conditions and Air Traffic Control staffing and capacity 1 . While the Commission is looking at ways of improving the situation, it will first focus on the implementation of the Single European Sky (SES2+) Regulation that entered into force on 1 December 2024 2 . This reform will bring improvements notably in terms of performance of monopolistic Air Navigation Service Providers, through the new permanent and independent Performance Review Board, and in terms of reducing the environmental footprint of aviation by environment and climate performance targets, and through modulated charges for airlines. 2. In addition, as longer-term solution would require the cooperation of all relevant stakeholders, including the EU level social partners 3 , the Commission has announced its intention to engage in a comprehensive dialogue with stakeholders and Member States to address inefficiencies in air traffic management and overcome remaining barriers within the Single European Sky. The Commission is aware of the issue of national Air Traffic Control strikes and of their impacts on flights and passengers in the entire network. The Commission is looking into possible remedies, which could include legislative solutions, to promote a consistent balance across the EU of the right to provide services (including overflights), while respecting national competences with regard to the right to strike 4 , the provisions of the Charter of Fundamental rights 5 and take full account of the national sovereignty of airspace. 1 https://www.eurocontrol.int/publication/summer-2024performance#:~:text=Summer%202024%20was%20a%20very,per%20flight%20(all%20causes) 2 https://transport.ec.europa.eu/news-events/news/single-european-sky-regulation-enters-force-aiming-moreefficient-and-sustainable-airspace-2024-12-02_en https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ%3AL_202402803 3 At EU level, the Commission facilitates the functioning of the Civil Aviation Sectoral Social Dialogue Committee, https://employment-social-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies-and-activities/european-employmentstrategy/social-dialogue/cross-industry-and-sectoral-social-dialogue/civil-aviation-sectoral-socialdialogue_en?prefLang=sk 4 Article 153(5) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). 5 In particular Article 28 on the right of collective bargaining and action.”
  Energy (green transition)
• 2024-11-04 “P-002410/2024 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission Like with previous EU framework programmes for research and innovation, the Commission continues, under Horizon Europe 1 , to fund research to support the control of bluetongue, including the development of vaccines, as appropriate, notably through the co-funded partnership on animal health and welfare 2 . One of its projects aims to develop tools such as vaccine platforms and expression systems, immunological toolboxes and delivery systems. It targets different pathogens including bluetongue viruses and aims to develop and test mRNA 3 and DNA 4 vaccines compatible with a multivalent approach. As mentioned in reply to written questions E-001819/2024 and E-002019/2024, financial support can be provided under the Common Market Organisation, rural development programmes, Common Agricultural Policy national strategic plans and State aid. Regulation (EU) 2019/6 5 establishes the rules for the placing on the market, manufacturing, import, export, supply, distribution, pharmacovigilance, control and use of veterinary medicines. Products authorised at national level can only be marketed in the Member State(s) in which they have been authorised. Only the centralised procedure results in a marketing authorisation valid across the EU. That procedure is mandatory only for certain products; bluetongue vaccines currently available do not fall within its scope. This means that companies can choose which Member States to seek marketing authorisation from and where to market their products. 1 https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-opencalls/horizon-europe_en 2 https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/101136346 ; https://www.eupahw.eu/index.html 3 Messenger ribonucleic acid. 4 Deoxyribonucleic acid. 5 Regulation (EU) 2019/6 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 on veterinary medicinal products and repealing Directive 2001/82/EC (OJ L 4, 7.1.2019, p. 43, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2019/6/oj).”
  GMOs
• 2024-10-04 “E-001955/2024 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Šefčovič on behalf of the European Commission Recreational fisheries have an important role to play in coastal and rural areas. Recreational fishing on marine fisheries resources is considered in the overall Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), as they can have a significant impact on fish resources. For marine waters, Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013 1 on the CFP obliges Member States to ensure that recreational fishing is conducted in a manner that is compatible with the objectives of the CFP, namely ensuring that fishing activities are environmentally sustainable and consistent with achieving economic, social and employment benefits. The management of fresh water recreational fishing is under Member State competence and subject to the environmental legislation and standards, such as for example those set out in the Water Framework Directive 2 and the newly adopted Nature Restoration Regulation 3 . In addition to the horizontal frameworks in place, a specific regulation exists for the management of the stock of European eel under which Member States are required to develop their national Eel Management Plans, including for recreation fishing 4 . At this stage, the Commission is not considering setting up a specific instrument to regulate recreational fishing. The Commission launched an extensive evaluation of the CFP Regulation which will look at all aspects of the Regulation including recreational fishing. This evaluation will be the basis to see how the CFP has performed and is working and why it is working as it does. It will also provide the elements to consider how its implementation can be improved and what other actions may be needed including for what concerns the contribution of the CFP to rural and coastal development. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32013R1380 2 OJ L 327, 22.12.2000, Eli: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2000/60/2014-11-20 3 OJ L, 2024/1991, 29.7.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1991/oj 4 https://oceans-and-fisheries.ec.europa.eu/ocean/marine-biodiversity/eel_en”
  GMOs
• 2024-09-26 “E-001845/2024 Answer given by Ms Kyriakides on behalf of the European Commission 1. Infection with bluetongue virus (BTV) is a disease regulated by Regulation (EU) 2016/429 on transmissible animal diseases 1 . Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/1882 2 categorises BTV as a category C disease, and hence, it is subject to optional eradication by Member States. The decision to eradicate the disease and vaccinate may vary by Member State; therefore, the Commission is not planning to launch an EU vaccination campaign. As a disease subject to optional eradication, EU funding for BTV, including vaccination, is not envisaged for 2024 nor for 2025 to 2027 for BTV eradication programmes in accordance with EU rules 3 , neither for BTV emergency measures given that financial resources are allocated to the control and eradication of other major priority animal diseases. 2. Outbreaks of BTV are notifiable through the EU Animal Disease Information System 4 making the Commission and competent authorities aware of the disease situation in order to take the relevant measures to prevent the spread of the disease. The situation is also regularly discussed, including in the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed 5 . All these actions ensure coordination between the Commission and the Member States. 3. There is a Union legal framework to control BTV, including measures applicable to the movement of animals within the EU 6 . Movements to other Member States must be safe and the animals must either come from free zones or comply with risk mitigation measures (vaccination and others) and certification providing for safe movement. Adequate implementation of the legal framework is the responsibility of the competent authorities of the Member States that may be subject to audits conducted by the Commission. 1 http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/429/oj 2 http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2018/1882/oj 3 Regulation (EU) 2021/690 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 April 2021 establishing a programme for the internal market, competitiveness of enterprises, including small and medium-sized enterprises, the area of plants, animals, food and feed, and European statistics (Single Market Programme) and the work programmes (adopted as Commission Implementing Decision C(2022) 3467 of 2.6.2022 for 20232024) and Commission Implementing Decision C(2024) 2098 of 2.8.2024 for 2025-2027). 4 https://food.ec.europa.eu/animals/animal-diseases/animal-disease-information-system-adis_en 5 https://food.ec.europa.eu/horizontal-topics/committees/paff-committees_en 6 https://food.ec.europa.eu/animals/animal-diseases/surveillance-eradication-programmes-and-disease-freestatus/bluetongue_en”
  Animal diseases prevention and management in the EU
• “Mr. Commissioner, colleagues. Investing in defence. Yes. But farming is our main line of defence. No soldier can fight on an empty stomach. Therefore, we have to have a solid farming policy and avoid nationalisation of said policy. We must maintain a common policy so as to not weaken the internal market and our competitiveness. If we want to be able to motivate our young people to take up our farms, we need to have more income with more consistency amongst our farm policies and our trade policies. European standards are the highest in the world. Let us protect them and let us avoid unfair competition like environmental dumping. Reciprocity of our standards in free trade agreements is a non-negotiable. Let us come back to the community preference of the founding of fathers so that we have an efficient farming system.”
  Agriculture (green)
• “Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Ladies and gentlemen. The Multiannual Financial Framework for 2028 to 2034 isn't just. About the budget. It is it. There is so much at stake for the future of the EU, including transport. Transport is the backbone of the EU to unite our citizens, regions and economies. The transport sector has to be resilient, sustainable, safe and secure. That is why we need a strong and ambitious budget that can underpin a European transport policy that will be effective. The renew group would like to emphasize the need for developing infrastructure, especially through the tent. Without efficient and effective transport, we cannot have a proper single market, we cannot have a green transition and there cannot be a seamless military mobility. But to invest in infrastructure is not enough. Our networks need the means to function safely and securely and sustainably. So we have to bolster the budgets of three agencies the ERA, Emsa, and the third relevant one. They are vital for sustainability, interoperability and the overhaul of our transport system. We need to if we give them more responsibilities, but we don't put money where our mouth is, then I think our expectations are unrealistic. Now the Connecting Europe facility has to have funding because they finance European added value projects, especially strategic corridors and Trans-European corridors. If this isn't done, this would fragment investment and this wouldn't help us complete the tent. Last but not least, we need European coordination, which is centralised. The European transport networks go beyond our borders, obviously, and it's only if we have we bolster European governance that we can then make the most of our projects, and we can give more clout to every penny we spend. We need an ambitious project, and if we were to do that, we would really be investing in social and regional cohesion as well as Europe's strategic autonomy. It is our responsibility to defend this point with great ambition.”
  EU funding for transportation
• “Thank you very much, madam chair. At the outset, I'd like to thank the commission for this proposal, which aims to promote simplification in response to the demands coming from the automotive industry and will facilitate the arrival of e vehicles on our market. We note the fact that it's possible to publish a draft report, and so we need to sit down around the table so we can come to an agreement about this very important file, which is essential for the competitiveness of our industry. The proposals put together by the commission seem to be ones that have drawn consensus. So I do think it will be possible to reach an agreement if we don't move too far from the commission's text. I'd also like to express my full support for the commission's proposal to set up a new category for small, affordable electric vehicles. This responds to a need from households where it's quite difficult to access e vehicles. Finally, I'd add an amendment about 1 issue. You can see this in cars that have been set up recently. These are a security risk because they can actually get stuck in the cars and lead to the body being weakened. China and The US are working on this type of handle, and we need to focus on it. I hope that you will be able to support me on this point.”
  Overall simplification of regulation in the EU
• “Oui. Bonjour. Merci beaucoup. Thank you very much for the study. I really think it does clarify things with the categorization of the different products and the different challenges and stakes. A couple of comments. Firstly, when you classify sugar, chicken and beef in products that are quite protected, I wanted to draw your attention to this and sound the alarm because for poultry and sugar, and then you have Mercosur agreements and future agreements with Ukraine. I think that we really are not any longer in a protectionist scheme. Sugar and poultry in particular. A second point I wanted to raise. Often raised by those who support trade and I support trade, but those who don't see the limits of the system. I think that we need to protect the health of our consumers. Sanitary protection, if you like, and products entering Europe. I don't contest that. But where we have a big problem in terms of competitivity, in terms of our European agriculture, our standards that go beyond that animal welfare. For instance, we talk a lot about this and it represents a large cost to US and environment biodiversity issues. When you look at what happens, um, what's happened to protect our. Bees. Um, and then we have residues from sugar coming in from Brazil, giving, um, a considerable advantage to Brazilian producers over our producers. So I think that we have to have the courage to make a political choice. Either we lower European standards or we impose these standards beyond the health, um, standards to products that come from third countries. Now, my question, you said that the fact that we have higher standards than in Europe, than in third countries, means that our products are better value of a higher value on the international market. And I would be in favor of standard products that are going to be sold at a higher price because they come from Europe. I think that the niche markets, it's not really going to be able to answer that question. Thank you.”
  Import of agri-food products in the EU
• “Thank you. Thank you very much indeed. Valerie Devaugh, I'm talking on her behalf. She'd like to thank the commission for this proposal. This is in line with our aim to simplify, and it's just common sense. It exempts some N2 vehicles from this obligation to have an SLD. This aims to facilitate these vehicles' take up on the market. And so as the rapporteur, Valerie Devoe, will not table any amendments vis a vis this commission proposal. Thank you.”
  Road transport environmental policy
• “Yes, yes. Good morning everybody. I speak in the name of Karin Chesbro or President. Thank you to the Commission for the excellent briefing. And congratulations on finally reaching the finish line with these negotiations from Europe. We, of course, welcome the fact that we appear to be able to conclude yet another free trade agreement during this term, and I don't think I need to convince anyone. When it comes to how significant this is economically, geopolitically and for relations between the EU and Australia. I am also very pleased that we have an agreement in place with a proper sustainability chapter include. I think it is important that we do not lose sight of that aspect when we conclude new agreements. Thank you.”
  Free trade agreements (FTAs)
• “You were very enthusiastic to mention the doubling of the crisis reserve with six over 6 million over seven years now. 6 billion. Do you think that this is going to compensate for the drops in prices, which is linked to the commercial clause of the trade clauses that we have with that clause, such as those with Mercosur and Ukraine? Now, I believe that at the same time as doing all of this, you're opening our markets to unfair competition. Do you think that's the best way to make sure that our young people no longer want to move into agricultural activity and to to undermine our autonomy in food matters and food supply?”
  Trade relations with Mercosur
• “Commissioner, given that there's been a significant and disappointing reduction to the Cap budget, have you at least from your colleague, commissioners obtained the support for your wish to have reciprocity in international trade for European standards? This community preference could lead to better prices for EU producers. So what do you make of that? Shouldn't you, as a matter of urgency, become consistent with the current budgetary climate?”
  Free trade agreements (FTAs)
• “Dear colleagues, my comment actually spans both panels. I'm very pleased to see that there is a require a desire to improve the income of farmers by improving our appreciation of their products. However, sadly neither the crisis reserve nor the ICM proposals were going to be of any use if we are not able to better protect the European market by asking for or demanding mirror clauses in our trade agreements. It's a simple economic reality that the prices cannot increase if the market is open to unfair competition where there is environmental dumping. And yet despite the numerous declarations from the Commission in this direction, we have not seen a single text which would ensure that we could guarantee this positive evolution of income. In particular with the Mercosur agreement, the defending reciprocity in our trade agreements, my dear colleagues, is the best way for us to defend agriculture and our food autonomy and I would ask you to be very vigilant on this regard. Thank you.”
  Trade relations with Mercosur
• “We share. A few minutes ago, I talked about intellectual honesty, and you mentioned the fact that the Paris Agreement, uh, was included in the agreement, and that was a guarantee. And I think unless you're deaf, blind or living on Mars, human rights are currently in jeopardy in Gaza. It's evident. My question. Article two of the agreement is that agreement for human rights or all of these clauses, are they smoke and mirrors when it comes to human rights? Thank you very much.”
  Relations with Israel - Palestine
• “Thank you, Madam Chair. Well, I think that the the premium particularly high right now and all ideas that lead to a reduction of our energy dependence, I think, have a clear raison d'etre. Biofuels have a role for several reasons. Firstly, food fuel competition has now become food fuel complementarity because using the same biomass you can make a food feed and fuel technology is developing further on a daily basis. Secondly, intercultural crops, which are unanimously recognized as being a useful environmentally speaking, also have an energy mass which could be used. Thirdly, food crops produce Co products which could be used for energy purposes. And fourthly, agricultural income is dropping and the challenges of generational renewal are enormous. So energy production is a new avenue which should be developed. Thank you.”
  Biofuels (RED II)
• “Colleagues, do you really think that China is going to actually sacrifice its agricultural sovereignty to conquer South America. They're not stupid. So putting forward amendments to this amendment, to this, to this agreement, well, what has been put forward as a miraculous solution really doesn't give us any guarantees at all today. On the one hand, it's a transitional mechanism. It doesn't offer any structural long term remedy. It doesn't actually provide a reciprocity either, for standards. That doesn't give us a guarantee of our standards in, um, environmental, social or animal welfare areas being being taken on board. Also, the cumulative requirement for the safeguard clause to be to be triggered, this is actually stricter than the than the usual rules, neither the international rules or the American or the Canadian or the Australian. Uh FTA establishes a double requirement Condition for triggering, so the area is much too vague. It's not harmonized. Opening the path for a number of complaints. So I think that clearly these safeguard clauses really are nothing more than hot air. The European Union could actually be questioned by the Mercosur through the rebalancing mechanism. Their own safeguard clause, however, is actually ineffective. We really want to protect our farmers. Thank you.”
  Trade relations with Mercosur
• “Yes, miss. Thank you very much for your presentation. You mentioned a number of interesting barriers that prevent young farmers from taking over farms today. But I am sorry to say that in my opinion, you omitted the main barrier. What young farmers need today is a long term vision and a consistent vision. However, over the past few months we have announced at the same time a reduction of the Cap budget for farmer income, as well as a reduction in the prices that they are paid in the context of the Mercosur agreement. So at the time where we have these two mechanisms leading to a reduction in income, we shouldn't be surprised that last week in Belgium, a study showed that 70% of young farmers and farmers overall have mental health problems. It is high time that today we establish not a five year strategy, but a 30 or 40 year plan for young farmers with clear messages.”
  Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1)
• “Yes. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Colleagues, European stock breeders have already made considerable efforts in order to reduce the use of antimicrobials in stock breeding. Thanks to their commitment, we see that the sales of antibiotics in the animal sector has gone down by more than 50% between 2007 and 2022. And so much so. That IT consumption has actually gone down fully by 20, will go down to 30% by 2028. So we have to look at the the situation. However, it's crucial to not complicate the toolbox for breeders because we have to absolutely protect animal health and stop disease in order to do that effectively. Therefore, it's necessary to to actually look at effective alternatives and in particular vaccines. Having enough vaccines is not enough. However, we also have to have incitements and an initiatives in order to persuade farmers to vaccinate their animals and give them optimal protection. Uh. An example. The, uh, IBR bovine infection has already caused a great number of problems in Belgium and in the Netherlands and in Ireland. A vaccine for that is available, but our stock breeders are hesitating to use it because it actually produces a different health rating at European level. This vaccine is a new generation vaccine, and it allows us to distinguish between those animals which have been vaccinated and those who have been infected by the disease. This is a policy which should be able to give us a clean sheet, a clean status for those animals where the disease has been eradicated. In conclusion, the reduction of the use of antimicrobials is a common objective of ours. However, the health legislation has to actually follow science and the evolution of science so that we can preserve our animals and our competitiveness as well as preventing infection. Thank you.”
  Antimicrobial resistance
• “Thank you very much. Two brief comments. I think we mustn't mix all of this up. Yes, there's a problem with the US. But to say that we're going to solve the farmers issue through an agreement with Mexico that is an agri food net importer, and in the same breath, saying that Mercosur can also be an agreement is difficult. We know that our trade balance when it comes to our trade balance and agri food, it is Mercosur that has the edge over us. So we're not being intellectually honest here. We see that there's a problem with the US because we've got Trump in the administration. He's unpredictable and he's not trustworthy, unlike the EU. But when we talk about a Mercosur solution, do we have any guarantee that millet is more reliable than Trump is? So I think that we have to be very careful and make sure we don't become dependent on individuals who are not reliable.”
  Trade relations with Mercosur
• “Commissioner. Well, we've several times warned of the impact of the Mercosur agreement on deforestation, the loss of biodiversity and. Phytosanitary risks. Let's now look at the impact of the agreement on our strategic autonomy. The Draghi report highlighted the effectiveness of the United States and China when compared to Europe. But nevertheless, both of these powers have decided to protect their markets and their farmers to ensure that they have food sovereignty. Let's recall that the world population continues to increase. That's more mouths to feed, and being able to produce your own food is a key pillar of strategic autonomy. However, only 6% of farmers are less than 35 years old in the European Union. Commissioner, is it really reasonable to open the door to less sustainable products from Latin, from South America, particularly at a time when young people do not want to become farmers? This agreement Is nothing like CETA, which was a good agreement. Thank you.”
  Trade relations with Mercosur
• “Commissioner, you're saying that we need more energy, autonomy and more trade agreements. But let me put a specific question to you. Ethanol not used as a fuel as a basis for European industry, but the EU Mercosur agreement requires there to be a 600 uh Or, uh, thousand tons. 540 million for chemical uses and 200 million tons for all uses, including. That is for fuel. Now, with the lack of definition of what chemical usage is, the European uh, uh, nomenclature, uh, means that there would be a deviation to industrial usage, which is going to, uh, pull the rug out from underneath a lot of European ethanol producers, of which many are small and medium sized companies. So given that pharmaceuticals, biocides, defense and cosmetics have a requirements, we need to think about how to aid um, producers in Baku and Brazil, for example. Sorry, by favoring them. Would the EU not end up, uh, flying in the face of its own plans for industrial resilience and for strategic independence. Thank you.”
  Trade relations with Mercosur
• “Chairman, we know what the problem is. The fact that the income for farmers is too low, and we really want to get to work on that. But I fear that this, again, will be a bureaucratic talking shop. This observatory, the market is no longer operating as it should, and the margins are not being regulated. Apart from a couple of niche sectors and market speculation, global market speculation, do you have any specific information where the margins are fully disproportionate within the chain? Isn't the problem because of the excessive strain on the farmers, because it's at the international level that there is unfair competition before stigmatizing all of the intermediaries in the chain. Have you looked at the increase in labor and the bureaucracy affecting the entire chain and so on.”
  EU policy on farmer–buyer relations in the agri-food supply chain
• “Mr. Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, Donald Trump's return to the white House has undermined multilateralism, overthrown the rules of international trade, and destabilized supply chains. Tariffs have become an economic weapon. Globalization. Modernization, which used to be a source of prosperity, is now proven to be the opposite. It's now the power rules, and certain political leaders are showing a lack of reliability in the face of these changes. We have to strengthen our trade agreements to make them more balanced, balanced, protecting our vital interests and our values, while at the same time securing strategic autonomy. International trade is more than just volumes, quotas and tariffs. We have to better understand once again the need for comparative advantage to make trade meaningful. Trade should be a value, a form of stability enabling human beings to progress and find better prosperity.”
  EU-US trade relations
• “Commissioner. Colleagues. Europe has to stop contradicting itself. While we're asking our farmers to produce more sustainably, we are allowing the livestock sector to die off slowly. And yet that is the main provider of Natural fertilisers, while Europe opens its doors to low cost products, which push agricultural prices downwards. We tax fertiliser through cbam, which increases the production costs of our farmers. These inconsistencies are becoming unacceptable and require courageous political choices to be made. Then again, the nitrates directive is more than 25 years old and needs to be modernised to incorporate agricultural innovations, starting with the digestate. That's the result of mechanisation, which is an effective and sustainable alternative to chemical fertilisers. Commissioner. Commissioner. The situation is urgent. The action plan needs to have figures allocated to it. If it is to be able to help us with the agricultural energy and geopolitical challenges we're facing.”
  Use of fertilisers
• “Thank you very much. You are defending vaccination and the idea of reducing reducing the use of antibiotics in animals. However, as far as, uh, the, uh, Canadian bovine disease, a cow which has been vaccinated and doesn't have the Z cannot actually have the, uh, cannot have the right status in Europe, whereas in fact, the science allows us to make a distinction between an animal and a vaccinated animal. We have been raising this problem over many years and we haven't yet had a response to it. So do you have any news on this matter? And on the question of the lumpy skin disease, which is extending in France right now? Isn't it an urgent matter for us today to ensure that we no longer have a policy for total, uh. Slaughtering so that we are able to actually carry on with our livestock in Europe? Thank you.”
  Animal diseases prevention and management in the EU
• “Thank you, chairman. First of all, I'd like to congratulate the negotiators who've managed to try to improve an agreement that was a very bad one, including by starting with the inclusion of a suspension clause. However, I have very specific cases. Donald Trump said the 4th of July as the deadline for the agreements. If the EU did not respect the agreement taken last year, do you have any idea what is going to happen as the agreement changed? What's the real margin for manoeuvre for the EU? Will the EU actually use its toolbox? Basically the anti coercion tool. Is it going to complain at the WTO? If yes, with what type of result and what is plan B? So we don't penalize our own companies. These are concrete questions. Thank you.”
  EU-US trade relations
• “They sell their wine often to, directly to, to clients. And therefore it's important that we remember what a multiplicity of different production patterns there are. And we also need to support people engaging with the with society as a whole and trying to market their own produce directly. So there are a lot of ways in which we need to be supporting wine producers, making life more simple for them, and encouraging tourism, for example, bed and breakfast. Parking along the main routes would help. And of course, this is an issue which affects certain countries more than others. In areas where vineyards have been abandoned, parasites can flourish and there are too many wine producers who haven't done what they should have done, and too many member states which haven't done what they should have done to make sure that vines affected by parasites are being are grubbed up. We need to make sure that the health of vineyards is recognised as being of paramount importance. That it is. I'll conclude by saying that of course, we need to have enough funding on the line to be able to fund the wine sector as we would wish. Thank you to colleagues for the spirit of compromise. And thank you to the rapporteurs for the excellent the rapporteur for the excellent work.”
  Agricultural funding
• “(10:55:33 – 10:55:35): Thank you very much, madam chair. And thank you, mister Tube, for the excellent work you've done. Now as you rightly said, this is about technical and legal standardization. There's no new political content, no new political implications. This proposal would update the legal framework for the Euro Mediterranean aviation agreement with Morocco to bear in mind Croatia's accession to the EU. Pursuant to the Accession Act of Croatia, new member states need to accede to existing international agreements that the EU has already entered into. Against this backdrop, the EU has signed protocols with partners, in this case Morocco, to ensure that Croatia can now be part of the Euro Mediterranean aviation agreement without modifying the content thereof. This file is adopted based on the consensus procedure, and the European Parliament's power simply is about adopting or rejecting the agreement without touching the content. We've already had international negotiations on this, so I support the rapporteur's proposal to adopt the protocol. Thank you very much.”
  EU policy on aviation safety
• “Mr. president, Mr. president. Commissioner the European Union is on its knees. It's giving in to Donald Trump. There's this is undeniable but there's absolutely no point crying over spilt milk. Instead, I think we should ask ourselves why. And even more importantly, let us learn a lesson from this. How can we negotiate on an equal footing with Washington or Beijing when we need them to protect our borders, heat our homes, and make sure that our factories keep running. Our strategic dependence means that we are prey. And you want to sign an agreement with the Mercosur with no mirror clauses, and that will threaten our food sovereignty. Food is a geopolitical weapon. Ukraine has illustrated this, and Gaza is a cruel reminder every day to continue signing free trade agreements that aren't balanced. And sacrificing our agriculture on the altar of this is a serious and irreversible political error. Thank you.”
  Trade relations with Mercosur
• “(11:54:39 – 11:57:17): much. I'm over here. Colleagues. This delegated act is based on trying to eradicate BTV, but it causes serious problems for our breeders, but also for the correct functioning of the internal market. As things stand, the conditions if you are to move animals between member states is based basically on 3 different options. Holdings that are protected against vectors, there is a seasonal exempt period and or vaccination. Now in reality, these options are not applicable. What happens is that the so called protected establishments basically don't exist in reality because of technical requirements that cannot be met. The exempt vector period is becoming ever rarer because of this effect of climate change, and vaccines are not always available, approved, authorized across all of the European territory. So what we need to do is bring in a degree of pragmatism here. We need a credible alternative, which would be systematically authorize movement on the basis of a PCR test, which is negative after treatment by insecticide through at least a 2 week period. Now these viruses don't respect national borders. So to impose restrictions between member states for those that have the same epidemiological circumstances would create unreasonable barriers to the functioning of the internal market. When you got the same serotypes in a destination country, there should be no additional restriction that needs to apply. Finally, we need to continue to provide financing for research to develop multiserotype vaccines that work and help to bring about authorization at the European Union level. So we need the European approach, which is a coordinated approach based on the scientific best available knowledge and realities on the ground. And I hope, therefore, that the European Commission will look once again at what they've produced here.”
  Animal diseases prevention and management in the EU
• “Merci. Merci. Thank you. Well, yes. As a farmer, I'm a little bit shocked by this discussion. Given that you can't stigmatise farmers. Um, just by explaining what's happening. We're not a we're all against what's happening in Ukraine, but we have to take account of the economic reality. Now the sugar sector is strongly impacted, for instance poultry, where standards are not the same. Looking at the directive on emissions, there are differences in standards. The poultry sector is threatened and on wheat. Over the last three weeks, wheat has just gone from 200 down to 170. This is due to the Ukrainian market and Ukrainian products. So you're talking about a strategic choice, but it's not our strategic choice to intend that Ukraine should be put in difficulties. Now there is a considerable impact. Let's not pretend otherwise. And we do have to take account of that.”
  Agricultural trade: Ukraine imports
• “(10:49:08 – 10:50:25): you, chair. I think there are things that are undeniable, the catastrophic humanitarian situation. But also, it's for the council to take sanctions as inter committee. We have to calibrate the impact of such decisions. But my question is the following. In terms of sanctions, if we were to suspend the Israel agreement, have we calibrated the direct economic impact that that would have? But that question was asked. But have we also estimated the impact on future partnerships? Could Israel turn instead easily to other trading partners such as The US, China, whatever? And regarding us, what would be our plan B in terms of other trade outlets? So in terms of economic impact, what would be the impact on us and on them of any decisions that we might take? Thank you. I'll now give the back floor first to the commission, mister DelVo, and then to the EEAS. Well, yeah, you like the other way around.”
  Relations with Israel - Palestine
• “Thank you very much. This project definitely responds to something, i.e. the lack of revenue for farmers. Colleagues. However, I do think that you have forgotten something. We have liberal economies and the result of the market price is from supply and demand. So how can you force buyers to purchase the products that are expensive, and how can you can you prevent a producer to act in a competitive fashion in order to get a better price? So how can you support a market price without without controlling the supply? And by preventing the entry of products from third countries that don't respect our rules. So we have been speaking a great deal of, uh, administrative simplification. And I'm wondering whether the project is also dealing with that. Thank you.”
  EU policy on farmer–buyer relations in the agri-food supply chain
• “Yes, sir. Chairman. Despite what we've been told, deforestation will be favoured by the Mercosur agreement. That's obvious. Biodiversity will be worsened. That's obvious. Generational renewal in our in farming will be compromised. Obviously, consumers health will be less protected. Obviously sugar, poultry, ethanol will be threatened, obviously. Do you really believe that it's worth sacrificing all of that for 1,000th of an of a percentage increase in European GDP?”
  Trade relations with Mercosur
• “Yes. I had asked for the floor chair to ask a question to Mr. Stahl because I'm. I was surprised when he said that there's no link between competitiveness, the lack of competitiveness or the difference of competitiveness and European standards. Or this is a clear three. There's three clear examples. Pesticides. We've banned some nicotinoids, uh, for producing beetroots in Europe. These products are authorised in other on other continents. Uh and of course they need if they need to be replaced. This is very expensive. So there's a competitor a clear competitiveness handicap. Let's take the example of hormones in livestock farming. If you increase want to increase the average yield of animals this gives an advantage in competitiveness. The same with animal welfare and transport. We spoke about this as well. This brings with it additional costs. This is very clear. And the second tool that I wanted to share is that we say that we're going to protect the environment, that we need to be concerned about how others do. So, uh, but it seems very clear to me that, uh, if there's a reduction in biodiversity, uh, somewhere that's a one single environment, uh, if there's an increase in CO2 emissions, this goes into the same atmosphere and it affects everybody. So I think we need to see this, uh, very holistically. Uh, so we shouldn't impose. It's not about imposing a manner of producing on someone else, but if we have a producer with an environmental, uh, objective, not imposing it on them comes back to the fact that we're not working for nothing. Uh, so it's not effective in terms of the environment. Thank you for allowing me to share my thoughts here.”
  Agriculture (green)
• “(16:11:17 – 16:12:55): You. Unlike what's been said, we have worked out what the impact of these standards will be. And in a gross number of member states, we're seeing a diminution of the headcount and incomes are no longer assured. It's very visible. It's very evident. And we're going to have to be pragmatic. A directive on industrial emissions has to concentrate on large industrial plants and not assimilating into it small family run holdings. To classifying these as a heavy industry will reduce Europe's ability to guarantee its food security. We need, therefore, Christine Singer's balanced approach with a red line for an extension of the IED directive to the bovine sector. I'd also like to welcome her preparedness to go back to the 2010 framework with clear thresholds and get rid of those thresholds based on the livestock unit basis started in 2024. In Ukraine, there's just one poultry producer, 25,000,000 chickens, where 30,000 units here is considered to be an industrial scale unit. Now we've really got to come back down to earth. If we're going to crush our holdings and constraints that other countries don't have to comply by then. We are going to squeeze them out of existence.”
  Agriculture (green)
• “Thank you very much, Madam Chair. And thank you for the two experts. We've already had a number of debates on the epidemiological situation of zoonoses, African swine fever, lumpy skin disease, etc. it's essential to have information and it's essential we have vaccination with the Renew Europe group. We're asking the commission and the member states to work on putting in place a new European strategy of vaccination in order to allow. A strategy so that we can have that in place and at work. We know that the. Vaccinations need to be applied in a way so that you can use them for the right diseases, so the animals can develop the right antibodies. These vaccines work very well in many cases of diseases, and it's important to exchange information between member states. And we have to look at how things adapt to climate change, but also to science as well. Other member states are open to working together on a European vaccine strategy So that we can ease the way in which we have to deal with this crisis and help our farmers very much.”
  Animal diseases prevention and management in the EU
• “Thank you. Chairman. I'd just like to share a thought with you. It's an interesting discussion and I think we need some moderation here. What is very important is that we need to use intellectual honesty. And when we talk about deforestation, and I hear some say that this agreement is in favour of avoiding deforestation. When we are annually importing goods which correspond correspond to the production of 1 million hectares of land, and there's no traceability as to where the product originates and South America. But I'm sorry, then you're making fun of us and you need to have intellectual honesty. Now, the Paris Agreement apparently is a guarantee, but there's no figures given. Nothing. None of it is binding. And, you know, that's kind of slipped into the text, too. And, you know, you need to call a spade a spade and stop making fun of us. And I don't understand why you're not providing us with more information, which is what Celine asked for in relation to the procedure, the timing, and so on. We have the impression that for the past year that we've been discussed at discussing it. It's entirely vague and sort of we're being led up the garden path and that's simply not acceptable. Thank you.”
  Trade impact on forests
• “Thank you very much, Madam Chair. What we have just heard is completely unbelievable. You say that we are the most efficient in the world. At the same time, we are losing market share to imports. Now, this shows that there is unbelievable failure happened. We. We have more and more complications with administration and red tape and our food independence and food security is under threat. The EU Livestock Strategy will be implemented by Commissioner Hanson. We need a consistent policy in the long term to increase trust among young people, because we really need to ask ourselves fundamental questions. We shouldn't be afraid to call into question the principles that have been guiding us for the past 30 years, and which are leading to failure. It's time to change all of that now.”
  Agriculture (green)
• “Well, my question was very similar. The issue of competition. Obviously, we want to move towards more environmentally friendly fuels. But if there isn't a global system, would there not be a possibility that companies outside of the EU can just avoid the system by. Making sure that any connections are in countries that aren't covered by this. So it's a question of ensuring that European companies can remain competitive in all of this.”
  Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM)
• “Madam. President. Commissioner, this simplification package for CIP is going in the right direction with some specifics. Well done. Thank you very much. But let's be honest, what we need in farming is stronger decisions to give some hope to our young farmers. The future cap, with a 20% shorter budget, is going to be under considerable pressures. And at the same time, the European Union is getting ready to sign up to Mercosur authorising imports from low cost of low cost products, which are going to push our prices down. So what we need is a bit of cohesion and consistency. We need a proper income for the farmers with a stronger, higher budget for the cap or greater protection at the borders. All the rest is just hot air. Yes, we should simplify. Weakening is not the same thing. The people who will be demonstrating the farmers in Brussels on Thursday know all about this. Let us stand up for our food autonomy. Let us stand up for our honor codes.”
  Trade relations with Mercosur · Agricultural funding
• “Mr. President. I'm worried. I'm worried to hear the commission's reaction. About the fertiliser crisis. They're telling us that there's a security of supply. For this season. But then on the other hand, they're saying that there is a guaranteed stability of cereal prices. Now, do you realize you're talking about the stability of a price, which is well below the production cost? I find that really worrying. It's not reassuring at all. And let me explain why right now, production costs, like fertilizers, are far too high because of the fact that Europe has no strategy or autonomy in production terms, because but also because we have environmental standards which have forced fertilizer prices up. So the European farmer is stuck between, um, sales prices attached to world prices, which are low, and then these production costs. And that's the cancer that's eating away at European agriculture. And that's basically what needs to be changed. This is a great example of this situation of the fertilizer crisis of what's strangling European agriculture. Thank you.”
  Use of fertilisers
• “Thank you very much indeed, chair. Just like to say well done to the commission for this agreement. You know, are we dreaming doubling trade with India as well as protecting our sensitive farming products and also developing some farming product import exports. It's amazing. I would like to know though, what are the sectors, European sectors that are more at risk? I imagine there are differing situations. Second question on Cbam. You're trying to reassure us here, but what about the Indian authorities? I think there's a bit of tension there. Uh, on Cbam. Do we already have a strategy prepared for Cbam? Thank you.”
  Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM)