Angéline FURET

Policy topics Angéline FURET is active on

What Angéline FURET has said (61)

• 2025-04-17 “E-001578/2025 Answer given by Mr Serafin on behalf of the European Commission The Conditionality Regulation 1 is based on objective conditions and criteria for its application and implementation to ensure equal and fair treatment of all Member States. Member States’ procedural rights are fully safeguarded. In the formal procedure provided by the Conditionality Regulation, Member States can present their views on the Commission’s preliminary findings and on the intention to propose measures. Before the Council’s vote on measures, a Member State may request the referral of the matters to the European Council if it considers that there are serious breaches of the principles of objectivity, non-discrimination or equal treatment. The Council has to approve measures by qualified majority. Moreover, final decisions adopted under the Regulation are subject to full judicial review by the European Court of Justice. The Conditionality Regulation is not a mechanism for sanctioning breaches of the principle of rule of law and even less diverging views. It is there to protect the EU budget. The applicable rules 2 do not foresee the possibility for the Commission to unilaterally decide to take over funds delegated to Member States under shared management and implement them in direct/indirect management. The Own Resources legal framework 3 does not foresee or support a conditionality mechanism that would allow Member States to suspend their contributions to the EU budget. Member States are legally obliged, in accordance with Own Resources Legislation 4 , to ensure timely contributions to the EU budget and any delay gives rise to payment of late interest with a view to ensuring equal treatment between all Member States as contributors to the EU budget. Last but not least, the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union 5 establishes in its Article 310(1), second subparagraph, that the revenue and expenditure shall be in balance. Any conditionality mechanism regarding the payment of Member States contributions would therefore put the principle of budgetary balance at risk. It would also endanger the implementation of expenditure that has been agreed and budgeted. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32020R2092. 2 Common Provisions Regulation (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32021R1060) and the Financial Regulation (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:L_202402509). 3 https://commission.europa.eu/publications/own-resources-legal-texts_en. 4 https://commission.europa.eu/publications/own-resources-legal-texts_en. 5 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:2bf140bf-a3f8-4ab2-b506fd71826e6da6.0023.02/DOC_2&format=PDF.”
  EU Supervision of the Rule of Law · Rule of law in Hungary · Rule of law and democracy in the EU (political compass)
• 2025-02-20 “E-000776/2025 Answer given by Mr Síkela on behalf of the European Commission On 6 December 2024, on the occasion of the conclusion of negotiations of the EU-Mercosur Partnership Agreement, the President of the Commission mentioned EUR 1.8 billion 1 in EU support that will facilitate the fair green and digital transition in Mercosur countries. It reflects the EU’s broader commitment to invest in mutually beneficial sustainable partnerships through the EU-Latin America and Caribbean Global Gateway Investment Agenda. Specifically, it could support: (a) developing sustainable forest value chains, particularly in the Amazon region; (b) the adaptation of economic actors (especially micro, small, and medium-sized enterprises, women, smallholder farmers, indigenous peoples, and local communities) to the evolving trade environment; (c) strengthening capacities for implementing environmental and labour laws and policies, in line with commitments under the agreement; (d) fostering investments in renewable energy and critical raw materials, including their value chains, while improving connectivity and infrastructure. The Commission remains fully committed to ensuring transparency and integrity in all aspects of EU trade and cooperation agreements. The package will be implemented by the Commission under the standard procedures governing the general budget of the EU. In compliance with the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument — Global Europe (NDICI — GE), Member States will be formally consulted prior to the adoption of decisions by the College of Commissioners. As usual, documents will be shared at the same time with the European Parliament to ensure its right to scrutiny. The European Parliament and the Council will also be informed of the committee proceedings. Robust monitoring, evaluation, and control mechanisms will be in place to ensure that the funds are used as intended and that any risks of mismanagement or misappropriation are effectively mitigated. 1 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_24_6244”
  EU Development & Humanitarian Aid · EU climate aid for global South
• 2025-02-07 “E-000567/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Virkkunen on behalf of the European Commission The Digital Services Act (DSA) 1 does not regulate online content, nor individual expressions or statements online which are protected by the right of freedom of expression under the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights 2 , within the boundaries defined in national laws on illegal content. The DSA fosters innovation by setting a single clear and risk-based framework for the EU, thus making the single market easier to navigate, lowering compliance costs and establishing a level playing field. In addition, the most stringent obligations only apply to designated providers of very large online platforms (VLOPs) and very large online search engines (VLOSEs) given their systemic impact in facilitating public debate and the dissemination of information, opinions and ideas. The DSA implementation costs are annually reported to the European Parliament and the Council pursuant to Article 43(7) of the DSA and published on the Commission’s website 3 . The Commission is currently preparing the report covering the second year of DSA enforcement 4 , which will be transmitted to the European Parliament and the Council soon. In the EU fact checkers verified by the European Fact Checking Standards Network, work based on high ethical and professional standards, which guarantee their independence. The Commission does not hire fact checkers and Article 35 of the DSA does not prescribe fact checking as a mitigating measure for systemic risks concerning civic discourse, electoral processes and public security. Rather providers of VLOPs and VLOSEs are required to put in place reasonable, proportionate and effective mitigation measures, tailored to the specific systemic risks they have identified and fully respecting freedom of expression, which may include fact checking. 5 1 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), OJ L 277, 27.10.2022, p. 1–102. 2 Enshrined in Article 11 of the EU charter on freedom of expression. 3 For the first report, see: https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/report-overall-annual-costs-incurredfulfilment-commissions-tasks-under-digital-services-act-dsa 4 Which ranges from 1 January 2024 to 31 December 2024. 5 See also the recent Commission Opinion on the assessment of the Code of Practice on Disinformation https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/code-conduct-disinformation”
  Disinformation & online freedoms
• 2025-01-30 “E-000414/2025 Answer given by Mr McGrath on behalf of the European Commission The Commission will not comment about statements made by former Commissioners in their private capacity. The Commission has no powers to intervene in national elections. The conduct and the organisation of elections, and any decisions related to the electoral process, are the competence and responsibility of the Member States, in accordance with their national legislation, international obligations and applicable EU law. National authorities and courts are primarily responsible for ensuring compliance with applicable rules. Free and fair elections are at the core of democracy. The Commission supports Member States on electoral matters, notably through the framework of the European Cooperation Network on Elections, which brings together national authorities with competences in electoral matters and facilitates the exchanges of information and best practices. The Commission is also working with Member States to support the application of EU law provisions which are relevant in national electoral contexts in the EU, such as the Digital Services Act 1 , Regulation 2024/900 on the transparency and targeting of political advertising 2 (which will apply in full from October 2025), the General Data Protection Regulation 3 and the Artificial Intelligence (AI) Act 4 (if AI is used to influence the outcome of an election). In 2023, the Commission published a Recommendation on inclusive and resilient electoral processes in the Union 5 . 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32022R2065 In 2024, the Commission issued Guidelines for providers of Very Large Online Platforms and Very Large Online Search Engines on the mitigation of systemic risks for electoral processes, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52024XC03014&qid=1714466886277 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/900/oj/eng 3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/679/oj/eng 4 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj/eng 5 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reco/2023/2829/oj/eng”
  EU Supervision of the Rule of Law · Foreign interference in Europe
• “Yes. Thank you chairman. For once, we can actually welcome the desire of a European agency to rationalise their costs, the choice of the EBA to move to the area of La Défense, where the rental costs are three times lower than elsewhere, is a decision based on good sense. But there is one major inconsistency in this file. You have said that you want to lease a 5400m², which is about the same size as where you are now, but you have said that you want to favor hybrid forms of working or remote working, and you've been doing this since 2022. So how can you justify to our citizens that you want to have this vast working area in service, where your working methods would allow you to drastically reduce your, um, premise footprint? Thinking in terms of the taxpayer, I think the best way to reduce costs is physical mutualisation rather than increasing the number of leases. Maybe you could bring together a number of European institutions under one roof so that you can cut operating costs. Thank you.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “The capital markets union. Well, Mr. Draghi has suggested it's the miracle solution to save Europe from bankruptcy. But what actually is it? Take Europe's savings and put them in a single pot. But of course, it won't be the people who decide how to use that money. It will be the big financial players and foreign funds. Ursula and her Brussels technocrats are using Mr. Draghi as a Swiss knife. He saved the bank yesterday. He's pushed forward this new plan today. This is not a reform. It's treason. Treason against savers. Against SMEs. Savings should serve businesses, farmers and industry and reinforce our economic sovereignty. It shouldn't go into the pockets of Peking and Wall Street. Thank you.”
  European Banking Union
• “Chair, I can be very clear. Yes. I want France and European countries to be able to defend themselves, but I do not want Brussels to, um, put their hands on our armies. What we see today is a dangerous slide, um, pretending to a better fund defence. The commission wants to take control of what belongs to member states defence. And now, uh, war is being classified as green activities in this taxonomy. Uh, this is ridiculous. What are we talking about a recyclable bullets or a what here? Defense is not an environmental marketing. It's not greenwashing. It's about sovereignty and courage. The security of the French people will never be run by technocrats.”
  EU competences on defence
• “Today we are talking about a future European Union budget that is absolutely crucial. We're talking about European people's money and money belonging to the people of France. Now we seem to always be calling for more more debt, greater budget and more green policies because of some kind of claimed climate emergency. Now, although miss Van der Leyen may not like to hear this, we can't have a green ideology which is financed by opaque sources. Europe should be about the competitiveness of our companies and real investment in our territories. Yet the upcoming European budget has to be realistic. It has to be specific and centred on the real needs of ordinary people defending our borders, our farmers and our artisans and craftspeople. And we should make sure that it also Strengthens our economies and guarantees our sovereignty. French people want an efficient. European Union, which acts in their interests and protects them. And that is the only end to which the money of French people should be spent.”
  Size of EU budget
• “I would like to begin by thanking Johan van Overtveldt and commend him on his report. He quite rightly viewed this matter and saw that the commission was liking to seize more power. Parliament currently decides on a case by case basis, whether EGF funds can be drawn down to help workers let go in future. Under the current proposed reforms, the commission alone would make that call. In other words, it would no longer be your elected representatives in charge of the funding, but unelected technocrats in Brussels. What is even worse, the Commission is looking to triple technical assistance. So three times more money for Brussels bureaucracy and three times less for workers who have lost their jobs. Yes, you need human resources to manage the funding, but Brussels thinks of itself first, not citizens. So we fully agree with you, Johan van Overtveldt. We need to retain democratic oversight and the funding must remain with workers. And that is why patriots will vote for this report. Thank you.”
  Conditions to access EU budget
• “Yes. Thank you chairman. For once, we can actually welcome the desire of a European agency to rationalise their costs, the choice of the EBA to move to the area of La Défense, where the rental costs are three times lower than elsewhere, is a decision based on good sense. But there is one major inconsistency in this file. You have said that you want to lease a 5400m², which is about the same size as where you are now, but you have said that you want to favor hybrid forms of working or remote working, and you've been doing this since 2022. So how can you justify to our citizens that you want to have this vast working area in service, where your working methods would allow you to drastically reduce your, um, premise footprint? Thinking in terms of the taxpayer, I think the best way to reduce costs is physical mutualisation rather than increasing the number of leases. Maybe you could bring together a number of European institutions under one roof so that you can cut operating costs. Thank you.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, both of you rapporteurs, for this report, which shows us an MFF 28 to 34, pretty much along the same lines as the one we had before, which is still like a running scared in increasing budgets, more loans, more European taxes, more for resources, but taxpayers can't do it anymore. So for patriots, before you ask for one more Europe, the EU should try to recover the €51 billion of fraud that the European courts have detected from 21 to 24. Almost 212 billion a year, which would be almost enough to reimburse the debt of the coast. Post Covid plan. And that reimbursement should be the priority. And I know that some of the colleagues would like to use the budget to continue to spend money and just forgetting that debt, but that debt is huge and that reimbursement must be a priority. But rather than that, we see that the EU wants to federalize Europe through the debt. Where as they should use the competences given them by the treaties. And there's a ruling that I'd like to mention in our amendments, we're going to make, uh, to this effect. And while the budget just kind of keeps getting bigger and bigger, we've got agriculture and fishing which are being sacrificed, which serve the Europeans directly. We think there should be an agriculture exception. And we've got to strengthen the cap. And then we call we talk about the conditionality of the state rule of law, which allows, uh, member states funds should be blocked when the policies don't suit the EU. But then there should be some kind of reciprocity. I have no more time. I had some other points, but I'll leave it at that for the time being.”
  Size of EU budget
• “Thank you chair. The questions from my colleagues, Mr. Chastel and Mr. Hohlmeier are fair, and so I would. I ask colleagues to not vote in favour because this, uh, lease for our delegation in Ghana is a huge waste of money of millions of euros. When we look at your figures and we compare them with the rental market there, the gaps are huge. You you've got a rent of. It's more than €32 per meter for your offices. It's what we pay in Brussels, €2.1 million is the extra that you're paying compared to the local prices. Then the fitting out you're asking for €3.1 million. That's um, that's, uh, thousands of euros per meter squared to decorate these rental bureaus. In Ghana, there are offices available entirely fitted out for a much lower price. You are asking the taxpayer, therefore, to finance this work at three times what you should be paying. And you are throwing money out of the window just for branded, uh, products. So I have two questions for the E. S how do you justify paying this 2.1 million rent? And who is benefiting from this, uh, very expensive, uh, expenditure. The public should not be financing this. This is why the Patriots will submit an unfavorable opinion and we will try to block this project. Thank you.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “Thank you. Chairman. Mrs. Filipkova, cover 21 million for Ukraine. Again, a drop in the ocean of spending. That we've. We're up to 167 million for financial and humanitarian and military aid to this country. The Ukrainian Court of Auditors has recognized that the millions of dollars have been lost in arms contracts to doubtful third parties. So my question this time it is a question. Can you guarantee to the European citizens that the the funds in this transfer will not be end up in this system with all this corruption, what are the independent and proper control mechanisms? As the Commission put in place to make sure that every euro spent for Ukraine will actually benefit its population and not opaque networks. And well, this logic go to do you will um, uh, finance the construction of a country which is not a member at the detriment of its own citizens. Thank you very much.”
  Russia-Ukraine conflict (10th term)
• “Thank you very much, chair. Madam rapporteur. I will give you a second just to put your headset on. I know you didn't want me to be the shadow because I'm not a part of the broad coalition. But I hope on this subject you will allow me to give you my input, because apparently your feminism stops depending on what the political party and that women from the right aren't like other women when it comes to Erasmus+, it is a success and it is currently being held hostage. For example, the budget. There has been no merging. It's been siloed and it should be a in grants for students, and that it shouldn't have a technocratic variation in terms of its approach to inflation when it comes to conditionality and rule of law that is permanent. It is illegal. And the suspension of um grants because of this approach is something that isn't worthy of democracy. Are you still, um, those in favour of Democracy Now based on values? We would like to see guarantees. No association that is close to the Muslim Brotherhood. I hope this is clear. Should get a single cent from the Erasmus budget now. Public funds should fund the future of our young people. It should not be ideological or Islamic blackmail. As Catherine Griset stated in culture. A very good colleague at that. She said that this is a program for education and freedom, and it should be protected from the commission's manipulation. Thank you.”
  EU policy on Islam
• “Thank you. Chair. I'm activated again, and I'm shadow rapporteur on this file. I will speak in French. The file that is presented to us today by the Eeas, shows Perfectly the indecent way that public service is leaving, that it's completely out of kilter with their fellow citizens. We've talked about Erasmus plus students €750 in Paris, and here we're approving an enormous amount of money for a real estate whim, these millions just to renovate Paris offices just because you don't like the style anymore. And that is not enough. You want to rent a huge office in Cote d'Ivoire and in harmony €750,000. So they're looking for some 350m², stating that that their offices are just not luxurious enough to represent the EU. Meanwhile, citizens have to face inflation and tighten their budgets, tightening their belts. And we're asking for palaces for these diplomats with the taxpayers money. We categorically reject this, and we think we should put an end to this overspending. And once and for all, we should respect the money of those who work for it. Thank you.”
  Budget for EU politicians
• “Commissioner, I'm not asking you to speculate. I'm asking you to be a prudent manager of funds. We have no certainty on whether Russia is going to pay damages or not. So. I'm not asking you to speculate. I'm asking you to respond to questions asked by the people of Europe on this possibility.”
  EU-Russia relations (from March 2022)
• “You promised us €750 billion to get out of the Covid crisis. But the truth is that this is a huge rip off. Brussels borrowed this money from private banks in our name, and it's going to cause 1400 billion with interest. So each French person is going to have to reimburse every year Euro is spent. Electrical vehicles are solar panels from China, which are very expensive. This is also a complete failure. The economy is not recovering, prices are exploding and the French are getting poorer. The recovery has never occurred, but Brussels has now come up with a new plan to fund a European army to support the European Defence programme, using the same methods making French people pay a debt which is decided elsewhere at the same time. Our own army can not even pay its own bills. So what? €8 billion are missing? We are supported Ukraine and now the world is in flames and we are neglecting our own defence. Europe should not borrow in our name. It is seeking a new European taxes, taking money out of our boxes, our own pockets. They call it own resources so they cannot sell us out. I'm here to defend France at our freedom and our money. That's enough. It is time to stop this scandal now. Thank you.”
  Own EU resources
• “To explain very simply what's happening to finance the support to Ukraine in 2026, 27 alone. As my excellent colleague said, 200 billion has already been spent and we're thinking of spending another 800 billion. The European Union is not helping. We're talking about €80 billion borrowed by the European Union, guaranteed by the European budget. Part of that will go to the functioning of the European government. Some of it will go to the military. But in either case, the European Union is running up debt. But the treaties don't provide for massive borrowing for external policy. We are told that Russian reparations will pay back these loans, but there is no guarantee of that at this stage at all. The risk is immediate and it's borne by the European budget and taxpayers. My question is simple who decided that the European Union would run up debt in the way it is for this reason from budget.”
  Russia-Ukraine conflict (10th term)
• “Chair. Acer is a European any agency and they want to leave their office in Ljubljana, which is completely fine. They want to renovate and of course they want to go to a new green building. And all of this is going to cost €52 million over 20 years. This is for a leasing contract. Why? Because they want to seize a market opportunity. Well, it's speculation on the Slovenian market using European taxpayers money, so. There could even be penalties if Acer withdraws before the end of the lease. This is what taxpayers don't want palaces for agencies. While the, uh, normal people have to suffer cuts. We, as the National Rally will vote against this instead of building new ivory towers. We need to rebuild trust. Thank you.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “Merci, monsieur le président. Je vais parler en France. Thank you. Chairman. I too will be speaking in French. Thank you to the speakers for their work and analysis. I've listened and read your contributions very carefully, and I'll be very direct without trying to sketch a caricature. This is a strong change in the way economic budgetary decisions are taken in Europe now. Mr.. Sorry if I've mangled your name, but you explained that the future MFF and the Competitiveness Fund will give the commission a greater room for manoeuvre, in particular because there is more flexible programming and more political programming. My question is therefore straightforward won't the Parliament simply be reduced to voting through the amounts when it is the commission that decides by itself what the priorities are without any democratic oversight over those investment decisions. Then, Mr. Lousberg, you yourself highlight that there's not sufficient key priorities, clear prioritization, and that resources might be diluted as a result. But access to funds is based on figures, and isn't there, therefore, a real risk that member states will have to align themselves to priorities that they didn't design or decide on, simply so they can recover their own money? And where does the political, the real political responsibility for those choices lie then? Mrs. Martelli, you said how much is needed for defence, but how can we avoid that? This leading once again to a debt and pooling of debt without sufficient involvement of the national parliaments, meaning that political and budgetary oversight and governance is foregone in areas which are as important as our security.”
  Conditions to access EU budget
• “Thank you very much. The union's financial regulation sets out a specific point. When the EU is spending that money, it has to be able to show that it brings added value compared to what the member states might have done alone. And so that is the so-called EU added value, um, as termed by Brussels. But when we read the European Court of Auditors report, it's quite shocking really. The Commission is talking about measuring performance without clearly defining what this European added value is. The result is that anyone could interpret this how they want. So you want to measure performance without really knowing what you're measuring. We should be frank here. If the EU is incapable of defining its own added value, it's because it acts everywhere, even when it doesn't actually bring anything extra. Perhaps it would be time for the EU to stop dealing with everything and to focus on the competences bestowed on it by the treaties, rather than simply trying to take competences from the Member States. Thank you.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “Thank you. Chair. I will speak in French. Yes, again. Brussels is taking us for a ride. Now, we have underlined that our court are requiring that from January 26th, we give the €30 million of the European Globalisation Fund without any scrutiny. What arrogance. What content for the European peoples. The Commission wants to decide itself how it spends our money. We will only be entitled after the fact to see a little report. Sorry, but I categorically refused that French citizens money be completely avoid any scrutiny by its representatives. And as a French representative of the European Parliament, I will vote against this blank check, which we're asking. Being asked to give Brussels. Thank you, Mr. Furey. Now there's no further shadows. Does anyone wish to take the floor under? Catch the eye. I don't see anyone. So I now ask the commission representative to comment and to answer the questions which have been asked by the members, which are very important questions. Thank you.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “Merci. Thank you, Madam Chair. The European Union wants to Uh, mobilize €8.5 million, uh, for for the uh, Globalisation Fund in order to help uh, Swedish northvolt employees who've been laid off. And Northvolt was the big symbol of the industrial Green Deal, something to rival China. It's just that it went bust. They got behind with production, bad management and unbeatable competition from the Chinese competitors. Able to do it? Uh, less than half the price. So the European taxpayer has paid the help, uh, to, uh, the laid off workers, uh, has seen unemployment rate go from 2.9 to 8, more than 8% over a few weeks. This is the real result of the Brussels industrial policy. We subsidize new projects. We are there to support them when they fail, and it's the taxpayer who picks up the bill. We will vote in favour, of course, because we cannot abandon the workers and the families who are the paying the human costs of the errors behind all of this.”
  European Globalisation Adjustment Fund
• “Yes. Thank you. This may appear to be technical, but actually it's simple. The Echa budget today is about €130 million a year. And 40 million come from the fees from the chemical industry and the rest from the European budget. So taxpayers money. But the chemical industries contributions seem to be on the decline. Why? Because the European industry is on a a decline and there's less production, less on the market, and therefore fewer contributions. Interesting. So we've proposed something unique, funded by the global subsidy from Europe. I don't we don't have any figures. We don't know how it's going to pan out. But we do know that the European budget will provide the money and therefore taxpayers money. Once again, it's you know, it's we're going to foot the bill. Joe Bloggs this is just not acceptable because the money must go into the budget and therefore citizens. So we don't want any blank checks and we want a very strict audit of the budgetary expenditure.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “Merci, Monsieur. President. Thank you. Chairman. The Draghi report sets out a lucid but worrying point. Europe is losing it somewhat in terms of competition, defence and even its possibilities to guide its own savings. I'd like to recall you that overindebted indebtedness and rushing into things and no solutions. Yes, we have to mobilise European savings, but that is up to the citizens, not to Brussels. It's not up to the Commission to create labelled products or European investment funds to better guide households towards their ideological priorities. Yes, we have to support strategic public investment, but that support must remain in the hands of the states based on a a mutualised European debt, because otherwise we'd end up with a new Trojan horse. And finally, the union of the capital markets Union shouldn't overtake all fiscal or budget sovereignty for member states. I'm saying stating this clearly now. Our group is in favour of ambitious reindustrialisation, but we need not to rush into things, technologically speaking. Thank you.”
  EU fiscal rules and oversight of national budgets
• “This joint budget for 2026 is not the result of a negotiation. It's a masquerade, really. Here, we've only just been able to change 0.2% of the budget. The rest, the 99.8% was already completely set in stone. And we have called this a compromise, a democratic debate. No, it's an institutional straitjacket to then approve these choices, which are no longer up for discussion. This is exactly what people have rejected all of these projects, which then snowball, which are all this money that's sent abroad. Then without all of the changes that we want to the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund, all of this goes runs completely counter to our values and what we've been told at the ballot box to protect our borders, defend farmers, restore economic sovereignty and restore purchasing power and stop this ballooning budget. But you haven't listened to us. You might have been listening, but it's not a form of of democratic power. This has been built without people's involvement and against the people. This budget does not protect us. It does not deal with the urgent concerns, and it does not deal with voters concerns. We will be voting against because we're faithful to our voters and our principles, and we'll never then have the future that we want unless we defend our own interests. Thank you.”
  Size of EU budget
• “(18:25:00 – 18:26:11): Oh, better to vote than not to. We have known about the crisis in the steel industry for a long time, But what we have also experienced is this dogmatic approach, the creation of a situation where the cost of manufacturers has gone up by 35% in 2022. We've seen deliberate sabotage of our nuclear industry at the same time. This is hypocrisy. We are against unfair competition, but nevertheless, you import steel from abroad, which is not green steel. So it's the workers in Europe which are paying the bill. We're seeing a punitive regime, and we're seeing a possible return to competitive nuclear energy. And we have this wild free trade, you have been advocating. The, companies and the factories should be allowed to continue manufacturing. Thank you.”
  Energy (green transition)
• “Thank you, Madam Chair. Today we are talking about 417 workers let go by Belgian in Belgium. Yes, we should support them. We back this form fund. But this begs another question. How have we ended up here? Belgian B.V. was Struggling as a result of excessive energy costs they could not buy in Russian gas. This is due to EU policy. Companies shut down job losses. If we want to make a real difference then we need to change tack. What we have seen is relocation. Know how? Being sacrificed on the altar of low cost. And then we set up a European fund, a sticking plaster to cover over a gaping wound. What we need is better protection. Sovereignty. If we do not have energy sovereignty, if we do not have manufacturing sovereignty, we will not have any sovereignty left at all. No European Union left either. It is very interesting to note that all of a sudden member state Decisions are down to Brussels.”
  EU approach to energy security (home-made vs import sources)
• “And my last question is addressed to all three of you. What the democratic legitimacy can be given to these types of decisions being taken at central level when it has to do with security, you're taking it away from the citizens and its representatives. Thank you. I too would like to think Mr.. Mr.. And Mrs. Martelli for their presentations and for making their powerpoint presentations available in advance, even if it's not not up on the screen. It is useful to us, of course. So you've done some very good work. I have three questions. First of all, on governance, you know, how do you find the Holy grail, the right balance between Transparency flexibility and simplification. And you know, we need to understand what this money is going to be used for. So could each of you maybe just tell us what you would prefer in looking for this balance between those three parts of governance? There were different solutions proffered, so let us know which one is your favorite.”
  EU political integration
• “Mr. president. We are. We hear about energy sovereignty, but the European Union has chosen has chosen its own sovereignty. The Nord Stream pipeline is a major problem, but there's been no serious investigation into it. But now, if we stop Russian imports and replace it with American imports, then this is just ideological, ideological and costly decision. The consequences of this will be. Significant. This will be very difficult for households. So we need a realistic and diversified energy policy based on the interest of European people, not on foreign international choices or dogma.”
  EU approach to energy security (home-made vs import sources)
• “Thank you. Chair. Once again, we're being asked to approve these building projects that are thousands of kilometers from our citizens without any type of budgetary discipline in Accra, the the EU wants to rent new properties for the their representative. When the property that they have at the moment is perfectly fine and the rent goes on to 36. Ljubljana. It's very similar. I hope I'll have the opportunity to speak on that as well. I think we have enough going on with our own buildings in the Spac building, and so I think it would be right for the EU to ask for savings and to impose some kind of rigour on member states. Um, so this should not be authorised. The Patriots and the Rassemblement National will be voting against this in order to be responsible towards the European taxpayer.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “And international trade has always been a form of leverage, a geopolitical leverage. And perhaps it's time to rethink how we use our customs duties. Now, what I'm less pleased about is this almost unanimous approach here in this committee an attempt to turn to own resources. And yes, this is somewhat unusual time at the moment, but a lot of income has not been recovered, for example, attacks in ports. And Monsieur Germain said. Now, if we took a more rigorous approach to our accounting and our budgets, then we wouldn't have to. Revert to own resources in any case. The Washington is never going to give up anything for free. But the US has is willing to give up its own funds to calm relationships with the US. The US is pursuing a unilateral and aggressive trade policy, but we need to do the same. We have not stood firm. Other countries have. I think that's the least we could do. So this text has reduced our income, and it's exposed us to the necessity of turning to own resources and has weakened our budget and made it susceptible to to A any changes in our relationships with the US. This approach now is not an EU strategy. We have just given up. We lay down and rolled over and we shouldn't this is not a partnership, but we are giving and they are taking. I don't think it's too late, however, to resolve this. Thank you.”
  EU-US trade relations
• “Thank you, Mr. President. I will speak in French. I'm making this intervention on behalf of my colleague, Mr. Deutsch. The European Commission's proposal for the MFA is in reality a proposed war budget. It takes money from farmers, regions and businesses and basically funnels it to Ukraine. Financing this conflict is going to swallow up everything. Until now, €200 billion have already been mobilised. Now today we're talking about another 90 billion, then 366 billion that's already envisaged for the upcoming MFF. And that's we shouldn't also forget the €1.6 billion that Ukraine is claiming and the Commission is agreeing to now the grand coalition. Epp, socialists, Liberals and Greens support this. You also want a war budget and the price of this. These policies will be paid for by our Member States, our farmers, our regions and our businesses. The Patriot Group believes that we should achieve peace as quickly as possible. We systematically reject any European decision aiming to prolong the war in Ukraine and to fund this massacre. We oppose any kind of escalation of the conflict funded by European taxpayers. The MFF proposed by the Commission is a budget for the coalition comprised of the EPP and Liberals and Greens. For years, you've wanted more and more green policies and less and less cap on your request. The European Commission is preparing to reduce farmers assistance by 20% And by imposing the Mercosur agreement, you're increasing pressure on our farmers. In addition, rather than effectively protecting our borders, you for years have been welcoming illegal migrants. Rather than stopping illegal migration, you have let it increase, and now you want to once again increase the billions that are allocated to a European migration policy, which has already failed. The Patriots for Europe group calls for substantial European Union funds and resources to be mobilised to help member States to protect their external borders. We need physical infrastructure like walls. We need surveillance methods also, including aerial surveillance, and we need appropriate equipment. We propose an overarching migrant policy aiming to keep asylum seekers at the external borders and to stop human trafficking and hybrid attacks while implementing a genuinely effective returns policy. Thank you very much.”
  Russia-Ukraine conflict (10th term) · Asylum & border control
• “The formal notification that Azerbaijan is withdrawing from the Euronest Agreement Assembly should not be considered just a procedural move. It's a strategic punishment against the EU, which insists on trying to play with statehood. The analysis of this crisis relates to three things that you're refusing to face up to in diplomatic terms. We're paying the price of your interference. Interference and our relationship to Armenia. We should be clear about our relation. But you thought you were guaranteeing gas supplies. But at the same with all of these resolutions. But you didn't actually project any Armenians at all. Taking over the role of nation states to preach morals. You didn't win respect. You just created a vacuum in geopolitical terms. Well, nature abhors a vacuum, and member states feel that Trump, for peace and international prosperity from the U.S. American administration is a real textbook case of realism. They've managed to create a transit corridor, aligning both Azerbaijan and Armenia's priorities. They've created a reality that even Iran can live with, even it's very resistant to border issues. So now there is a new strategic road. It's peaceful and it's basically controlled by American capital on Geoeconomics. Europe is isolated and the shape of Central Asia is being created without us. This corridor is just our attempts to catch up don't really have any roots on the ground. We have to stop sitting by whilst the world is reshaped in front of our eyes. We have realized the truth. Diplomacy is for member states, not for the commission. So stop this diplomacy which is just statement. Stop trying to teach the world and lecture. Let countries do their thing and. Start working on adult realpolitik. This is not going to happen with the Commission trying to do things. This is for the Member States to do. Thank you.”
  EU-Azerbaijan relations
• “Thank you. Chair. We're asking for about €1 million today. Y to send our boats to fish in the waters of Sao Tomé and Principe. A very small archipelago. Um, and this is all nicely packaged, uh, in sustainable fisheries. But this is hypocrisy. We talk about human rights and sustainable fishing, but it's basically organized pillaging of their waters at a low cost. Sorry. So a small number of players can make the maximum profit possible. At the same time, families there are Um, starving and end up trying to chance their luck here in Europe. Are fishermen, are, um, struggling with quotas and unfair competition. None of this is fair competition. It's not fair. I don't want our money to pay for this. I'm against it. We should not be, um, providing unfair competition for our fishermen and also starving people in Africa.”
  Fisheries access for developing countries
• “Thank you very much, chair. I'd like to thank the commission for their presentation, but I would also like to express a fundamental worry that I have. The Social Fund for the climate, as it is set out at first view. First appearance seems to be something that's worthwhile, but it's trying to work out the downsides of the ets2 something that we know is not going to work. Having a tax on carbon and fuel for domestic heating, while pretending that this is going to allow prices to remain affordable. So this is not really a social strategy. It's more a cash cow. So I have a couple of questions I'd like to put. First of all, the national plans. Are they going to have clear allow clear information to be provided to rural populations for example, and on prices and energy efficiency. And are we going to measure results or is this just a box ticking exercise? I'm extremely sceptical about this mechanism, which when it comes down to it, is financing the effects of a policy that could be avoided from the outset. Thank you.”
  EU approach to electricity market and prices
• “Thank you very much, Madam Chair. The European Commission would like to dilute the pack by more than €800 billion, even though articles 38 and 39 of the treaty on the functioning of the European Union set out specific objectives one. To assure equitable livelihoods for farmers and to stabilise to stabilise the markets. And three make sure that there is proper food supply to the European Union. And so the real amounts for agriculture would only be known after the adoption of national plans, which were adopted between different member states and the government commissions for the disbursement of funds over said years. So the farmers would not have any visibility in that area in this single fund that they're talking about. Each company would be able to support its producers in different ways, which would create unfair competition between European farmers. And so the Commission, therefore, is contradicting the very spirit of the treaties where the Commission is supposed to be the guardian thereof in the entire cap is actually described in the treaties, and the Commission cannot evade that and actually seek to implement any other agenda.”
  Agricultural funding
• “Merci, monsieur. Thank you. Chair. We will vote against this for three main reasons. We see shortcomings under management by the Commission. As Monika Hohlmeier just said, the methods and the time frames show clearly that there problems according to the rules. We've got a four week deadline. And they were late, despite the fact that they knew about them since 2024. This is unacceptable. At the same time, you say this is budget neutral, but in your documents we can see skyrocketing of costs for 2026. We see an increase of the rent by 20% due to the exorbitant prices and the lack of your, um, ability to foresee what's going to happen. I don't think this is a good solution. At the same time, you want to hold on to the old buildings until 2027. This isn't in line with the environmental requirements. You're imposing them on citizens, but you're exempt from them. There's a lack of consistency, and we refuse to give you a blank check.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “Thank you. Chairman. Commissioner, thank you for your presence. Now, I'm going to be very clear what you're proposing on Ukraine isn't solidarity. It's organized debt. Now, you've already changed the rules to borrow, uh, €800 billion for Covid. Now, that hasn't been reimbursed yet. And now you're talking own resources. But actually, it's taxes on Europeans to repay those loans. And now you're starting again. You're talking about a massive package. And to do that, you're talking about changing the European budget. The reality is that we're trying to guarantee €30 billion, which aren't going for humanitarian assistance. They're paying for the daily functioning of the European state. So you're turning the European budget into a debt machine, and you're making Europeans pay for the functioning of another country. And then you're basically chaining our people to unlimited commitments without their consent. We have more and more wars going on. The US are withdrawing from Europe, and you're not placing any limit on the amount that our budget is supposed to cover. So the people are paying, taxpayers are going to pay now and in the future, and they've never voted for that. So my question is simple are do you take responsibility for establishing this Europe based on debt, where debt constantly increases and people are obliged to pay without having consented to it? Thank you.”
  Own EU resources
• “Thank you very much, chair. I'd be looking at the Economic and Social Committee, the for budgetary transfers there. One, two, three, four and five. Show a clear and worrying slippage in the way things are being managed. We're talking about essential monies here for remuneration, interpretation or environmental credits without any planning ahead, and the sort of golden parachutes being given to certain civil servants and then talking about credit, um, carbon credits being saved for normal environmental actions and then talking about additional in interpretation equipment that hadn't been thought through and provided for ahead of time. If each of these individual transfers might be modest, the accumulation of money means that we can see a clear lack of planning and management coming from an institution that is meant to enshrine the values of the European Union. We have to stop this Permanent way of siphoning off money that's draining public funds and is undermining the creditworthiness of the European Union to intervene.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “This recommendation on strengthening cooperation between the EU and Canada seems at first sight to be uncontroversial. But behind the text, what this Parliament is really calling for is the full ratification of the Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement, etc. ratification by all Member States. You remember Siti.a in France, in Belgium, in Germany, thousands of citizens and farmers took to the streets to protest. Why? Because this agreement opens up our markets to agricultural goods that once again do not respect the same standards that are imposed on our farmers. And while our farmers have to respect ever more stringent rules, unfair competition is being organized against our own market. At a time where the European Union is trying to impose the Mercosur agreement, adding further trade pressure to our farmers is irresponsible. Let's be clear this text is not a straightforward analysis of EU Canada Relations. It's a political signal sent to our governments, telling them to speed up their ratification of an agreement that remains on ice in a number of member states, including France. In other words, this strategic partnership is becoming an instrument for political pressure to impose the ratification of the CTA. And if CTA wasn't bad enough, this Parliament also wants to open up to Canada. European funding for defence defence with safe €150 billion of our taxpayers money should be spent on our own defence industry, not be spent outside our borders. I'm all in favour of cooperation, but not at the expense of our sovereignty or of our agriculture from Europe.”
  Free trade agreements (FTAs)
• “Thank you. Chair. I would like to say very clearly that this Rearm Europe project. Is totally unacceptable. Citizens money should be used solely for European citizens, not for something else. It is true that strengthening our defence capacity is necessary, but that must not in any way be done with money that was intended to support our regions, innovation, our roads and making drinking water available to all, including in our overseas territories. So I say no. Stop diverting this money for the exclusive benefit of the American defense industry is not only unfair, but it's actually dangerous for our economies, and it's dangerous for the future of our regions. We need to support our regions, our businesses, our crafts, and not depend on external intervention above all. Defense must be the responsibility of states, not of the EU. Each country must have full responsibility for its military choices. Full stop.”
  EU competences on defence
• “Thank you very much. The union's financial regulation sets out a specific point. When the EU is spending that money, it has to be able to show that it brings added value compared to what the member states might have done alone. And so that is the so-called EU added value, um, as termed by Brussels. But when we read the European Court of Auditors report, it's quite shocking really. The Commission is talking about measuring performance without clearly defining what this European added value is. The result is that anyone could interpret this how they want. So you want to measure performance without really knowing what you're measuring. We should be frank here. If the EU is incapable of defining its own added value, it's because it acts everywhere, even when it doesn't actually bring anything extra. Perhaps it would be time for the EU to stop dealing with everything and to focus on the competences bestowed on it by the treaties, rather than simply trying to take competences from the Member States. Thank you.”
  EU political integration
• “Thank you. Chair. It's my fault. I took time to put my head out. €40 million for Moldova for a new facility for reforms and growth leads to some remarks. Farmers and SMEs are suffering austerity. There are funds for a third state which is unstable with a frontier frontier of Ukraine. There's a geopolitical agenda. It's rather than the interests of the peoples. There is no democratic control or control of the funds. We refused, making the EU into an ATM for external funds. These 40 millions should be for our citizens and not financing imposed for reforms on a foreign state.”
  EU-Moldova relations
• “Thank you chair. Um, not so usual. I share it with my very good colleague, Mr. Sanchez, But for this fight, it will be me. I will speak in French, said decision. This decision is a budgetary transfer that's being approved in a single vote. We're being asked to approve €350 million. So 100 million for Ukraine, 125.5 million for Sudan, 67.5 million for Syria, 58 million for Afghanistan. Now, with these types of, uh, uh, we're being told either we have to accept everything and there's a risk that European money ends up with the Taliban in Afghanistan, had a militia in Syria, or we say no to this aid because we're talking about Islamist regime.”
  EU Development & Humanitarian Aid
• “Now we are analyzing a blank check for 100 billion to help everyone except the Europeans. And then there would be 100 billion for a Ukraine. Our workers, our public services are falling foul of EU policy. And meanwhile, the EU is going to shower the rest of the planet with EU money. And our rapporteurs approach is just making things worse. Essentially a money generating factory for NGOs to fund the Green Deal. In addition to that, you are planning to spend 70 billion in Africa without asking for even a baseline cooperation in the area of illegal immigrants and without any conditionality when it comes to migratory policy, we are calling for full conditionality. The patriots for Europe will vote against this type of an approach that would not allow us to be able to veto this lack of cooperation. Thank you.”
  EU development aid (migration conditionality)
• “Thank you very much, chair. Colleagues, we have to stop having these facades of the 100 billion of the EIB. It is not wealth that has been generated. It is debt, and it uses the financial guarantee of our member states. So to be clear, Brussels uses France's signature and other member states to borrow on international markets. Were there to be a failure, it will be EU taxpayers that will be on the hook. Moreover, this is getting worse by technocrats that are focusing on ideology, not looking at nuclear, But investing in gadgets, for example. Green coaching. Yes, you heard me correctly. It is a. It infringes on our ability to invest and. In fact, there is so much opacity here. What exactly are we investing in? There is a radio silence. They do not explain to us and they keep focusing on the wrong things. When our workers, our farmers and the entire country of France is collapsing. They are strengthening ideology. The EIB is not a political party. First point. Second, when it comes to European priorities, it should financing our defence factories, not other countries factories. And we do not agree in pooling debt, which is a stranglehold on member states. Thank you.”
  EU political integration
• “Thank you very much chair. We really need to be very careful and lucid when we talk about these, um, 267 redundancies at Tupperware in Belgium, and this €1.600 thousand that's, uh, is for their adjustment. Now, this company closed down Tupperware because it was weighed under by debt. And it's the workers of Europe that pay the price of financial decisions taking on the other side of the world. So the Patriots group would like to show solidarity with these people who have lost their jobs, some of whom are over 55, which makes reintegration very difficult. We have a clear red line, though. The EGF fund should be an exceptional instrument, not just some kind of instrument to be used for deindustrialisation, so it must go for useful reintegration into the working life and not be used for or circumvented there to all sorts of ideological training programs that had nothing to do with the case in question. But these industrial closures must not become the rule in Europe. That's the main thing we need to work on.”
  European Globalisation Adjustment Fund
• “We've heard about Belgian in Belgium and now we have Goodyear in Germany. It seems to be never ending. Why? Well, this is not a A mistake. This is the direct result of skyrocketing energy costs. You have opened the doors to unfettered Asian competition. No proper customs tariffs. This is not down to competitiveness. It's your de-industrialisation policy. You could have taken measures. The EU has tools in place to defend our manufacturing sector and industrial sector, but it is not taking those steps. You don't have a real industrial policy just sticking plasters. And you will vote on this and we will vote on this because we do not want to abandon these workers. They are paying the price of your dogmatic approach. You're destroying our companies, our factories, and you're easing your conscience using taxpayers money. At this pace, the European Union will be responsible for its own bankruptcy. Thank you.”
  Free trade agreements (FTAs)
• “I just also wanted to say something. Really? Just echoing what Mr. Sanchez has said. And then I can also give you my conclusion from this. Please, please, please. I'm asking the European institutions. Please give us a more readable version of these expenses. You can't just spend the money somewhere because you've managed to make a little bit of saving elsewhere, because you've made savings with staff. You go and spend it somewhere else. Please, please, please be more careful with our money and with the taxpayers money. Thank you.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “I would like to share with you my deep concern regarding the implementation of the RRF. Just 15 months before the final date, less than 30% of the landmark objectives have been achieved. 61% have yet to be evaluated. This terrible delay undermines the credibility of an instrument which, from the outset was designed hastily, without any proper democratic oversight. Even worse than that, more than 50% 50% of the funding is still to be released. The European Court of Auditors has identified a lack of a clear link between funds and results. Moreover, there's a lack of guarantees regarding double funding. The follow up mechanism is based on opaque, opaque estimates rather than verifiable indicators. Transparency has been severely limited. Certain important documents have not yet been published. For Sweden, for example, member states receive payments, although they have only partially achieved their landmark 7% for Bulgaria, for example, of landmarks and 24% of the funds posed transferred. Three questions how do you maintain these transfers? Despite the fact that execution remains very much short of initial objectives? Two why does the Commission continue to authorise massive reviews or revisions of national plans? Based on different parameters which are difficult to verify? Thirdly, why is it the Commission could is satisfactory. Certain milestones which aren't satisfactory haven't been approved. In the case of Slovakia, for example. It's important that the RF be a success, but this is unlikely given the enormous lack of transparency and the failure for proper budgetary oversight for econ.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “Chair, colleagues, the commission wants €800 million. That's the number of the day. And that's in order to establish effective, inclusive and resilient, uh, and digital justice. This is terrible jargon, but the reality is much less poetic. We have a lack of transparency. We have no detail. We have a single budgetary line. It's a black box. You want the parliament to give you the keys to the safe without having any oversight. It's unacceptable. Then what is all this for? To give subsidies to militant NGOs under the guise of inclusion. Then you will inculcate our judges with a European dogma. In France, the judiciary is held accountable to the people, not to Brussels fads. Then you're going to use our money to fund the courts in eastern countries. Our own public services are collapsing, but you're going to boost the resilience of others so that you can prepare for further enlargement. We will not fund a machine that crushes our own national competences. Thank you.”
  EU Supervision of the Rule of Law
• “I'll be speaking French. So this hearing at least has the merit. Of being clear underlying choices, technical vocabulary. At least for me, it does reveal a very simple political choice which enables the European Union to levy taxes as a state. Let's be clear. Own resources are new taxes. New European taxes. And these taxes will arrive precisely at the moment in which the European Union is pretends to relaunch growth and competitiveness, which is a clear contradiction on corporate tax. We say no. Companies are already collapsing under the weight of rules and charges. The objective of of taxing them all the same is going to undermine our competitiveness vis a vis the US and China, and it's also a conflict with the treaties. We're also told that we need new taxes, own resources to reimburse the cost of the post Covid program. That's not true. If we were seriously controlling our expenditures, this money would already have been available. Before we create new European taxes, the European Union should start by doing what it demands of others, reducing its expenditures, fight waste and respect national competence.”
  Own EU resources
• “Thank you very much. The union's financial regulation sets out a specific point. When the EU is spending that money, it has to be able to show that it brings added value compared to what the member states might have done alone. And so that is the so-called EU added value, um, as termed by Brussels. But when we read the European Court of Auditors report, it's quite shocking really. The Commission is talking about measuring performance without clearly defining what this European added value is. The result is that anyone could interpret this how they want. So you want to measure performance without really knowing what you're measuring. We should be frank here. If the EU is incapable of defining its own added value, it's because it acts everywhere, even when it doesn't actually bring anything extra. Perhaps it would be time for the EU to stop dealing with everything and to focus on the competences bestowed on it by the treaties, rather than simply trying to take competences from the Member States. Thank you.”
  EU political integration
• “Thank you. Chairman. Did Keller say. Oh, Mrs. Keller say when she knew I was going to speak. Uh, the, uh, this may seem to be a rare case of good management. Reduction of the occupied space of 40%, annual savings of €250,000 per sharing space with the European Patent Office. And, uh, setting up in a renovated building which has been certified as sustainable and accessible. And the agency has worked in a methodological, methodological way, transparently. But there is an essential political question why in have so much real estate investment for agencies, the impact of which is way off the from the priorities of the citizens. The Agency of Fundamental Rights is not an operational agency. It's an advisory body, the reports of which are used very little and which it wants her to permanently extend as its activities, as so many European agencies do. And given our budget constraints, it's a ten year lease, €500,000 in works. It's a budget of over €600,000 and we will have to re-evaluate it later this. So I will be voting against this project as a result.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “Thank you very much, chairman. Colleagues. I'm going to be speaking in French. I speak on this file replacing my colleague, Mélanie Didier. The commission presents a project which is not based on experiments, but is based on scientific fact. This is therefore progress and gives companies a possibility to have more competitiveness. We believe, however, that this instrument should not be subject to too much red tape, and we have three major points, therefore, in that direction. First of all, we have to be pragmatic manager of a company. A director of a company doesn't do everything by himself. There has to therefore be fluidity, fluid fluidity and delegation of tasks. So we believe that that has to be seen to in order to have flexibility. And then we have this sovereignty issue for our datas. These are very sensitive data in our companies, and they have to therefore be restricted to the European cloud. We want to promote our European champions and not to give them up to foreign competition. And then we have to have an identifier which is in the text and which is the key for fluid cross-border recognition and security. In conclusion, I have two questions for the commission. Technically speaking, how are you going to guarantee immediate interoperability between this wallet and our registers at national level? We are being promised simplification, but of course we mustn't forget the real costs for our SMEs. What do you foresee there for in in respect of that? And how can we avoid these wallets be a burden for access to the market? Thank you.”
  Electronic identity
• “Thank you very much, Madam Chair. This study explains that gender budgeting would allow us to redistribute the budget rather than increase the budget. But the introduction of this methodology means that European programs would have to be assessed through indicators and through reporting obligations, to see whether the policies that are being developed do promote gender equality. But this leads to performance bureaucracy. It's costly and will take up a lot of human resources. So what I would like to know is what the financial cost of this type of approach is in having these assessments for the 2021 2023 budgets and the cost that it would bring with it for the MFF. Please tell us this in Euro and in FTS and a simple redistributing of the budget. Wouldn't that block future actions such as the European Mobility Adjustment Fund where. There are activities being deployed which would benefit only men? So how would that be looked at in future?”
  Gender roles, equality and inclusion
• “Merci, Monsieur. President. Thank you for the different transfers we've been looking at are all about the same things. Our budgetary management lacks sincerity and rigour. On the eeaS, we see that 9.2 million were excessive over budgeted for salaries. Now we've got 10.4 million for works. The EU is not a state and doesn't have full diplomatic powers. We've got €346 million available in the EAS. And they spend this on all sorts of things, even a so-called brand book which had already been rejected. We've got internal renovations, but at the same time we've got the huge cost of the spark renovations, and we've got the two seats, which are costing taxpayers a fortune. At the same time. We've got only €6,000 for further training for the Ombudsman, which will be put to good effect. And there's clearly good financial management here. I am against these transfers. Apart from the one by the Ombudsman, which is going in the right direction. Thank you.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “Thank you very much, chairman. Thank you for your presentation. As you said, the Chinese economic model depends to a degree on exporting its overcapacity, especially in strategic sectors like solar panels, air vehicles or primary materials. And these strategies lead to worries for us in the EU. It affects our strategic sovereignty on specific actions. What is the Commission going to do to deal with these structural problems? And do you have a clear strategy, once again with specific actions linked to it, to limit the impact of these Chinese overcapacities on our sensitive industries and above all, to diversify, diversify our supply chains to avoid vulnerabilities in future.”
  Trade relations with China · Chinese clean tech competition: trade barriers and investment caps vs. open market
• “Thank you thank you very much Mister Chair I can keep it brief as well I think that all of our colleagues here know our position on this. The European Union is a confederation and therefore not a state and for that reason it is not the European Union's job to have representations with staff who are effectively ambassadors in foreign countries.”
  EU competences on foreign affairs
• “Thank you very much. The Technical Support Instrument, or PSI, is an EU program intended to help member states carry out their reforms. It is therefore national governments requesting assistance from Brussels. That's the theory. But in practice, the commission is picking and choosing which projects to fund which should be a priority. This is EU money, over €800 million from 2021 to 2027, 100% coming from the taxpayers. Pocket funding experts studies reform plans on what are sometimes green issues such as the green transition, gender, air quality, ideological reform introduced by Brussels. In short, with no transparency and no debate in national parliaments. Which leads me to the following simple question. Are member States free to engage in reform, or is the Commission dictating their policies? Plus a little footnote Mr. Gell-Mann was referring to regional plans, EU funding going directly through the states to be redistributed within the member state. I would also point out that there are strings attached. The reform if a member state doesn't do the expected reform, it doesn't get the money. So how much should we add to the TSI for member States to be able to carry out the expected reform? I think it would be democratic to. Ensure that the money disbursed by Brussels is in line with the reform.”
  Conditions to access EU budget