Maria ZACHARIA

Policy topics Maria ZACHARIA is active on

What Maria ZACHARIA has said (77)

• 2026-07-09 “(11:54:58 - 11:55:55): Should withdraw this proposal. This is so called 20th regime is not an administrative proposal. That's just an innocent 1. It's a backdoor for companies to let them do social dumping and to cut workers' rights. The European Confederation of Workers says that there is no alternative solution for the workers here, and competitiveness is being used as pretext to cut workers' rights. This is a race towards the bottom and towards decline. And this needs to be said clearly in your rules that workers' rights will always be a priority in the country where the worker is working. We need guarantees for each worker, and we need to withdraw that proposal. Going on.”
  EU regulation of cross-border and posted workers
• 2026-07-09 “Colleagues, the temperatures are changing because of climate change. Biodiversity is struggling and there's pressure on coastal ecosystems. The CFP continues to treat marine ecosystems as a source of fishing resources, rather than a resource that can help us tackle the climate crisis. The pollution and residues that come from rivers and other sources are. Destroying our coastal areas and our waters and also our fisheries resources. And all of this is key for us to change. Climate neutrality. But it's not being used appropriately. And that's particularly the case in grace.We really need to use the CFP appropriately.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2026-07-08 “(10:49:00 - 10:50:11): Every summer, the same, mistakes and the same discourse. Nature doesn't, make mistakes. You, however, every time you have to choose between the environment and profit, you choose profit. You are allowing all of our natural resources to burn in the name of supposed development. Today, we it's the people who are paying. There are no longer natural disasters without political responsibility. Climate change is not an excuse for political inaction. We can't talk about preparedness when we face permanent dangers, and you continue to send seasonal responses. We can't talk about the protection or or civil protection when we're talking about industry, agriculture, workers, and firefighters. They are working in extreme temperatures, without sufficient protection. I want to ask you to fund prevention and, forest management and, firefighting services as well as the protection of people who are on the frontline. Thank you.”
  EU policy on infrastructure for preventing climate-related disasters (floods, droughts, extreme weather etc.)
• 2026-06-24 “Ladies and gentlemen, in Greece, after our financial crisis, We have had many houses put up for auction taken over again by the banks, and this has been done with the guarantee of the commission, with the consent of the commission. So what about the real estate market who is actually controlling that and controlling the influence of money laundering in that sector? We see political personessages talking about their funds in that regard, income, and then we see that this is not the case. So this is a very big problem, for the country and for the economic activities of the country. Citizens want to have more transparency, therefore, and they want the real estate, the the the the the property to go to those who actually have a title to it, the beneficial owners. We want transparency and we want the real owners of the properties to be able to have access to their property. Shall we continue talking about the problem without actually setting in motion the mechanisms to protect them? Thank you.”
  Anti-money laundering regulation
• 2026-02-16 “E-000648/2026 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission E-scooters fall under the definition of electrical and electronic equipment (EEE), as per the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directive 1 . Member States must ensure that EEE producers fulfill their extended producer responsibility to finance and organise separate collection and treatment of such waste. All EEE producers must be registered in every Member State where they place EEE on the market and report the quantity of EEE placed on that market. Member States report annually to the Commission such quantities and the amounts collected, prepared for re-use, recycled, and recovered. This includes WEEE treated in another Member State or outside the EU. Some Member States have set out rules on penalties applicable to infringements of national provisions on WEEE management. Member States have individually taken action specific to their national circumstances to reduce the number of non-compliant producers 2 . Regarding light means of transport (LMT) batteries, many provisions of the Batteries Regulation 3 have not yet started to apply, such as those on due diligence, labelling and battery passport. The Commission has no indication from market surveillance authorities that there are significant compliance problems with those provisions that already do apply. The WEEE Directive specifies the rules for WEEE shipments, inspection and monitoring, and distinguishes between used EEE and WEEE to prevent illegal WEEE exports. As per the Waste Shipment Regulation 4 , the export of WEEE from the EU to non-Members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) is prohibited. The export of WEEE from the EU to OECD countries is subject to the prior notification and consent procedure. 1 Directive 2012/19/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) (recast), OJ L 197, 24.7.2012, p. 38–71. 2 More details are available in the Commission SWD(2025) 184 final on the evaluation of the WEEE Directive. 3 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. 1–117. 4 Regulation (EU) 2024/1157 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 April 2024 on shipments of waste, amending Regulations (EU) No 1257/2013 and (EU) 2020/1056 and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006, OJ L, 2024/1157, 30.4.2024.”
  Sustainability of batteries regulation · Circular economy
• 2026-02-06 “E-000499/2026 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission The Floods Directive 1 requires EU countries to carry out a preliminary flood risk assessment, prepare flood hazard and risk maps, and establish flood risk management plans, but the Commission does not assess whether concrete projects increase the risk of floods as this is not required under the legislation. Case-law from the Court of Justice of the European Union on the implementation of the Water Framework Directive (WFD) 2 indicates that, before a project affecting a water body is authorised, it must be shown that the project will not jeopardise the achievement of good ecological status in the affected water body or lead to the deterioration of the status of any of the quality elements defined by the WFD, including morphological conditions, unless an exemption on grounds of overriding public interest under Article 4(7) of the WFD applies. According to Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive 3 , any plan or project likely to have a significant negative effect on a Natura 2000 site, either individually or in combination with other plans or projects, must be subject to an appropriate assessment of its implications for the site in view of the site’s conservation objectives. It can only be approved if it will not adversely affect the integrity of the site concerned. Exceptions to this obligation may be accepted under the conditions established in Article 6(4). Without prejudice to the Commission’s role as guardian of the Treaties, it is primarily the responsibility of the Greek authorities to ensure compliance with EU environmental law. 1 Directive 2007/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2007 on the assessment and management of flood, OJ L 288, 6.11.2007, p. 27–34. 2 Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy, OJ L 327, 22.12.2000, p. 1–73, as amended by Commission Directive 2014/101/EU of 30 October 2014, OJ L 311, 31.10.2014, p. 32–35. 3 Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7–50.”
  EU policy on infrastructure for preventing climate-related disasters (floods, droughts, extreme weather etc.) · EU policy on water management · Nature protection and restoration in the EU
• 2026-02-06 “E-000497/2026 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission Without prejudice to the Commission’s role as guardian of the Treaties, it is primarily the responsibility of the Greek authorities to select the location of projects end ensure that they are developed in compliance with EU environmental law. Decisions taken in this context are subject to judicial review by national courts, who are the common courts of EU law and the best placed to adjudicate on such matters. The Commission has thus not examined the authorisation of the project. Ensuring that all EU countries have access to Liquefied Natural Gas markets is part of the EU's energy union strategy 1 , as it can help diversify gas supplies and improve improving EU energy security in the short-term, while more sustainable solutions towards full decarbonisation by 2050 are established. Compliance with the ‘do no significant harm principle’ is assessed by the Commission if a project is supported by EU financial programs. This project has not been selected so far for EU co-financing by the European Structural and Investment Funds 2 . Further, while projects applying for Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) 3 funding are screened for their compliance with EU environmental law, the project in question has not received CEF funding, and is not eligible to do so under the CEF Regulation 4 as it has not been included in the Union list of Projects of Common and Mutual Interest under the Trans-European Networks for Energy (TEN-E) Regulation 5 , which does not cover natural gas projects in its scope since its 2022 repeal. 1 https://energy.ec.europa.eu/strategy/energy-union_en. 2 https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/funding_en. 3 https://commission.europa.eu/funding-tenders/find-funding/eu-funding-programmes/connecting-europefacility_en. 4 Regulation (EU) 2021/1153 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 July 2021 establishing the Connecting Europe Facility and repealing Regulations (EU) No 1316/2013 and (EU) No 283/2014, OJ L 249, 14.7.2021, pp. 38–81. 5 Regulation (EU) 2022/869 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2022 on guidelines for trans-European energy infrastructure, amending Regulations (EC) No 715/2009, (EU) 2019/942 and (EU) 2019/943 and Directives 2009/73/EC and (EU) 2019/944, and repealing Regulation (EU) No 347/2013, OJ L 152, 3.6.2022, pp. 45–102.”
  EU policy on sustainability criteria in public funding · Natural gas · Energy (green transition)
• 2026-02-06 “Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission 7.5.2026 Written question Member States shall establish an integrated, adequate network for the recovery of mixed municipal waste and for waste disposal [1] . This network shall enable the EU as a whole to become self-sufficient in waste management. Member States shall also move towards that aim individually. The Waste Shipment Regulation [2] imposes strict rules on shipments for recovery of mixed municipal waste and refuse-derived fuels processed from such waste. Shipments of such waste destined for disposal shall be prohibited according to the regulation [3] . Other refuse-derived fuels are subject to prior consent procedures in most Member States. The impacts on health do not determine if the practices are recovery or disposal [4] . All waste management shall be carried out without risks to health and environment [5] . Waste-derived fuels subject to incineration or co-incineration fall under the Industrial Emissions Directive (IED) [6] . Plants performing activities listed in Annex 1 to the IED must operate in accordance with permits based on Best Available Techniques [7] . National authorities and the judiciary are primarily responsible to ensure that EU law is properly implemented and better placed to carry out investigations in individual cases such as this. [1] Article 16 of Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on waste and repealing certain Directives, OJ L 312, 22.11.2008, p. 3-30, as amended by Directive (EU) 2018/851 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May, OJ L 150, 14.6.2018, p. 109-140. [2] Regulation (EU) 2024/1157 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 April 2024 on shipments of waste, amending Regulations (EU) No 1257/2013 and (EU) 2020/1056 and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006, OJ L, 2024/1157, 30.4.2024. [3] Article 4(3) of the Waste Shipment Regulation. [4] Article 3(15), 3(19) and Annex II of Directive 2008/98/EC on waste, as amended. [5] Article 13 of Directive 2008/98/EC on waste, as amended. [6] Directive 2010/75/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 on industrial emissions (integrated pollution prevention and control), OJ L 334, 17.12.2010, p. 17-119. [7] Best Available Techniques (BAT) means the most effective and advanced techniques, developed on a scale allowing implementation in the relevant industrial sector, under economically and technically viable conditions.”
  Circular economy
• 2025-11-07 “E-004402/2025 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission Under the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive (EIA) 1 , Member States must ensure that projects listed under its Annexes, including aquaculture projects, undergo an EIA when likely to significantly affect the environment, including the marine environment. Moreover, under the Habitats Directive 2 , projects that may affect Natura 2000 sites require an appropriate assessment and may be authorised only if site integrity is safeguarded, with exceptions only under strict conditions 3 . Without prejudice to the Commission’s role as guardian of the Treaties, it is primarily the responsibility of the Greek authorities to ensure compliance with EU environmental law. Alleged breaches may be brought before national courts. The Commission has issued guidance on aquaculture and Natura 2000 4 . The Commission monitors the effectiveness of Article 35 of the Waste Framework Directive 5 . In Greece, a national registry for waste collection and transport was developed by the Hellenic Ministry of Environment and Energy, and it is addressed to companies and organisations (including local authorities) that generate, collect and treat waste. Compliance with the Do No Significant Harm (DNSH) principle is required for recovery and resilience plans. The Commission has assessed Greece’s plan. Greece must ensure DNSH and environmental law compliance during implementation. As regards activities supported by the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF), the scope and conditions of the EMFAF Regulation ensure compliance with the DNSH. Moreover, Member States must ensure that all aquaculture activities, EU-funded or not, comply fully with EU and national environmental rules. 1 Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, OJ L 26, 28.1.2012, p. 1–21, as amended by Directive 2014/52/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014, OJ L 124, 25.4.2014, p. 1–18. 2 Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7–50. 3 Commission’s guidance document: Directorate-General for Environment, Managing Natura 2000 sites – The provisions of Article 6 of the ‘Habitats’ Directive 92/43/EEC, Publications Office, 2019, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2779/02245. 4 European Commission: Directorate-General for Environment, Guidance on aquaculture and Natura 2000 – Sustainable aquaculture activities in the context of the Natura 2000 Network, Publications Office, 2019, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2779/34131. 5 Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on waste and repealing certain Directives, OJ L 312, 22.11.2008, p. 3–30, as amended by Directive (EU) 2018/851 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May, OJ L 150, 14.6.2018, p. 109–140.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries · Nature protection and restoration in the EU · Funding for fisheries and aquaculture
• 2025-09-26 “E-003766/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Fitto on behalf of the European Commission In line with the principle of shared management, Member States put in place a management and control system for the Cohesion Policy programmes, ensuring that they operate in line with the principles of sound financial management and in respect of all regulatory requirements. System audits, operational audits and audits of accounts are conducted by the competent national authorities to provide assurance to the Commission concerning the effective functioning of the management system and the legality and regularity of expenditures reported for projects co-financed under Cohesion Policy programmes. In case of irregularities identified during these audits, the primary responsibility for recovery lays with the Member State concerned. Should the Commission identify irregular, deficient or non-compliant expenditures in the accounts submitted by a Member State, it may take the necessary decisions to correct any irregular or illegal expenditure related to projects co-financed under Cohesion Policy programmes. Furthermore, investigations on mismanagement of funds that might result in cases of fraud, corruption, and serious misconduct affecting EU financial interests can be carried out independently by the public prosecution office of the EU (EPPO). The EPPO works with national authorities and the Commission, specifically the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), to ensure coherent action. Information sharing agreements are in place between the EPPO, the Commission and OLAF to facilitate both judicial action and administrative follow-up.”
  Environmental crimes and justice · EU policy on sustainability criteria in public funding
• 2025-09-23 “E-003676/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Mînzatu on behalf of the Commission The European Qualifications Framework (EQF) is a Council Recommendation 1 , set up in 2008 and updated in 2017. As such, it is a voluntary tool to make national qualifications easier to understand and more comparable. The European Qualifications Framework seeks to support cross-border mobility of learners and workers. There is an alignment between the Bologna Process levels and the European Qualifications Framework levels. Greece referenced its National Qualifications Framework to the European Qualifications Framework in 2014. It is each Member State’s responsibility to determine the levels of their National Qualifications Framework and to link the levels of these to the levels of the European Qualifications Framework through a peer reviewed process called EQF ‘referencing’. The organisation and classification of staff within the national public administration is the exclusive competence of Member States. In doing so, however, they must respect EU law, including Article 45 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and Article 7(1) of Regulation 492/2011 2 which prohibit discrimination based on nationality between workers of the Member States as regards employment, remuneration and other conditions of work and employment. The situation described by the Honourable Member concerning the different levels of qualifications required for engineers in the Greek public administration appears to concern different types of education. As the question concerns Greek nationals in Greece, EU law on free movement of workers does not appear to be relevant in this respect. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32017H0615(01). 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2011/492/oj/eng.”
  EU policy on integration and ethnic, racial and religious discrimination · EU competences on human rights
• 2025-08-20 “E-003264/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Mînzatu on behalf of the European Commission The protection and promotion of the rights of the child is enshrined in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, but the Charter applies to Member States only when they are implementing EU law 1 . Since the substantive family law and child protection issues are not regulated by EU law, the Commission has no powers to intervene in the case described in petition 0252/2025. Given their non-binding nature, no infringement proceedings can be launched with regards to the follow-up of Council Recommendations (EU) 2021/1004 establishing a European Child Guarantee 2 (ECG) and (EU) 2024/1238 on integrated child protection systems 3 . The breach of Article 4 of Regulation (EC) 883/2004, which concerns coordination of social security systems for mobile workers and their families, cannot be established. Article 4 bans discrimination of mobile workers in access to benefits available in the host Member State. There is no indication of the practice complained concerning mobile workers or their families, nor of the refusal of financial support being only applied to mobile workers. As per Commission’s opinion to petition 0252/2025 4 , the Greek child guarantee action plan sets as target for 2030 to reduce the number of children in institutional alternative care to zero. The Greek Child Guarantee Coordinator is aware of the issue described in petition 0252/2025. The implementation of the ECG in Greece is a key priority highlighted in the 2025 European Semester process 5 and is supported by EU cohesion policy funds and the Recovery and Resilience Facility 6 . 1 Article 51(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. 2 Council Recommendation (EU) 2021/1004 of 14 June 2021 establishing a European Child Guarantee https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32021H1004&qid=1678779757366. 3 Council Recommendation (EU) 2024/1238 of 23 April 2024 on developing and strengthening integrated child protection systems in the best interests of the child - https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32024H1238. 4 https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/PETI-CM-776787_EN.docx. 5 2025 Country Report – Greece https://economy-finance.ec.europa.eu/document/download/e4a67707-7a124af0-8f3a9b01301e263f_en?filename=EL_CR_SWD_2025_208_1_EN_autre_document_travail_service_part1_v4.pdf. 6 https://commission.europa.eu/business-economy-euro/economic-recovery/recovery-and-resilience-facility_en.”
  EU policy on disability inclusion & accessibility · EU policy on integration and ethnic, racial and religious discrimination
• 2025-07-27 “E-003110/2025 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission In its reply to question Ε-001877/2025, the Commission explained that national authorities are primarily responsible for ensuring that all obligations under EU law are met (including crossborder consultation, assessment of geological conditions, the impact of the proximity to the Anatolian fault line, etc.), as well as compliance with the Do No Significant Harm Technical Guidance 1 . However, Directive 2009/31/EC 2 requires Member States to make available to the Commission the permit applications and any other material taken into consideration when deciding on the award of a CO2 storage permit. The Commission examines these, including any environmental impact assessment, against the requirements of the Directive and issues a non-binding opinion on the draft permit within four months of receipt of the documentation. The Greek competent authority is still preparing the documentation. Once the full documentation is submitted, the Commission will complete its review and issue its opinion. The competent authority shall notify the final decision to the Commission, and where it departs from the Commission opinion it shall state its reasons. Beneficiaries of all Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) 3 grants must implement the action in compliance with all applicable EU, international and national legal obligations. In the specific case, according to the information submitted, the project is subject to compliance with Environmental Impact Assessment Directive 4 . Furthermore, the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) 5 for the activities covered by the CEF Grant Agreement 6 is one of the deliverables, to be completed before the start of the related works. This will be monitored as part of the relevant reporting and monitoring obligations. 1 Commission Notice Technical guidance on the application of ‘do no significant harm’ under the Recovery and Resilience Facility Regulation 2021/C 58/01, C/2021/1054, OJ C 58, 18.2.2021, pp. 1–30. 2 Directive 2009/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the geological storage of carbon dioxide and amending Council Directive 85/337/EEC, European Parliament and Council Directives 2000/60/EC, 2001/80/EC, 2004/35/EC, 2006/12/EC, 2008/1/EC and Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006, OJ L 140, 5.6.2009, pp. 114–135. 3 https://commission.europa.eu/funding-tenders/find-funding/eu-funding-programmes/connecting-europefacility_en. 4 Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, OJ L 26, 28.1.2012, p. 1–21, as amended by Directive 2014/52/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014, OJ L 124, 25.4.2014, p. 1–18. 5 Under Directive 2001/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2001 on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment, OJ L 197, 21.7.2001, p. 30–37. 6 Project Phase 2.”
  Carbon capture storage and utilisation
• 2025-07-19 “P-003013/2025 Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Kallas on behalf of the European Commission The European Council’s conclusions of June 2022 1 state that Türkiye must respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all Member States. It is expected to make an unequivocal commitment to good neighbourly relations (essential part of Türkiye’s accession process), international agreements and the peaceful settlement of disputes. The 2023 Joint Communication on the state of play of EU-Türkiye political, economic and trade relations clearly indicates Türkiye’s commitment to good neighbourly relations remains an essential requirement to ensure a stable and secure environment in the Eastern Mediterranean and the development of a cooperative and mutually beneficial EU- Türkiye relationship 2 . Türkiye must avoid threats and actions that damage good neighbourly relations and respect the sovereignty of all Member States over their territorial sea and airspace as well as all their sovereign rights, including the right to explore and exploit natural resources in accordance with EU and international law, in particular the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 3 . The Council, in December 2024, noted the improvements in relations between Türkiye and Greece and the de-escalation in the Eastern Mediterranean and expectation to be sustained 4 . In June 2025, the European Council recalled that the Türkiye-Libya Memorandum of Understanding on the delimitation of maritime jurisdictions in the Mediterranean Sea infringes upon the sovereign rights of third states, does not comply with the Law of the Sea and cannot produce any legal consequences for third States 5 . The High Representative/Vice-President is continuously raising these issues with her Turkish interlocutors. The EU remains committed to defend its interests and those of its Member States as well as to uphold regional stability. 1 https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/57442/2022-06-2324-euco-conclusions-en.pdf. 2 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_23_6157. 3 https://enlargement.ec.europa.eu/document/download/8010c4db-6ef8-4c85-aa06814408921c89_en?filename=T%C3%BCrkiye%20Report%202024.pdf. 4 https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-16983-2024-INIT/en/pdf. 5 https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/cjtb3oep/20250626-european-council-conclusions-en.pdf.”
  EU competences on foreign affairs · EU-Turkey relations
• 2025-07-15 “E-002872/2025 Answer given by Mr McGrath on behalf of the European Commission The Mortgage Credit Directive 2014/17/EU 1 , which applies to contracts concluded after 2016, provides a high level of consumer protection and specific rules on mortgage credits denominated in a foreign currency. The relevant rules regarding foreign currency loans (e.g. the right to convert the credit agreement into an alternative currency) have been transposed by Greece in Article 12(1) (f) and Article 22 of L.4438/2016. The law has been assessed by the Commission and, based on the information available, there is no evidence of an incorrect or incomplete transposition. Under the prudential framework, credit institutions are not obliged to comply with the liquidity 2 3 and interest rate risk 4 requirements in each currency in which they lend. Supervisors do monitor the liquidity and interest rate risk 5 that might emerge from currency mismatches. The Commission has received complaints concerning the implementation of Directives 2014/17/EU and 93/13/EEC in certain Member States, including Greece. The Commission is analysing them and will decide on possible next steps as appropriate. It is the primary responsibility of the national authorities and courts to ensure the monitoring and enforcement of the application of consumer law in individual business-to-consumer relationships, considering the circumstances of each case, and to provide redress where appropriate 6 . In line with Directive (EU) 2020/1828 7 , which Greece has already transposed, 1 Directive 2014/17/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 February 2014 on credit agreements for consumers relating to residential immovable property and amending Directives 2008/48/EC and 2013/36/EU and Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 (OJ L 60, 28.2.2014, p. 34, http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2014/17/oj). 2 Article 428b of Regulation (EU) 2019/876 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2019 amending Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (OJ L 150, 7.6.2019, pp. 1–225, http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2019/876/oj). 3 Article 6 of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/61 of 10 October 2014 to supplement Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (OJ L 11, 17.1.2015, pp. 1–36, http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2015/61/oj). 4 Articles 84 and 98(5a) of Directive (EU) 2019/878 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2019 amending Directive 2013/36/EU (OJ L 150, 7.6.2019, pp. 253–295, https://eurlex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2019/878/oj). 5 Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2024/856 of 1 December 2023 supplementing Directive 2013/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to regulatory technical standards specifying the supervisory shock scenarios, the common modelling and parametric assumptions and what constitutes a large decline (OJ L, 2024/856, 24.4.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2024/856/oj). 6 Commission Notice – Guidance on the interpretation and application of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts, OJ C 323, 27.9.2019, p. 4–92, COM(2019)5325 final. National courts have referred several cases for preliminary ruling to the CJEU regarding unfair clauses in foreign exchange mortgage loans. 7 Directive (EU) 2020/1828 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2020 on representative actions for the protection of the collective interests of consumers and repealing Directive 2009/22/EC (Text with EEA relevance), OJ L 409, 4.12.2020, p. 1–27 Please see consumer friendly information on this Directive at the EC website: https://commission.europa.eu/law/law-topic/consumer-protectionlaw/representative-actions-directive_en.”
  Financial regulation · Non-performing mortgages
• 2025-07-15 “E-002881/2025 Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Kallas on behalf of the European Commission The EU is fully committed to a comprehensive settlement of the Cyprus problem, within the United Nations (UN) agreed framework, in accordance with all relevant UN Security Council resolutions and in line with the principles on which the EU is founded and the acquis. It remains crucial that Türkiye commits and actively contributes to a peaceful settlement, including its external aspects. As per the conclusions of the European Council of 17-18 April 2024, the EU attaches particular importance to the resumption of and progress in the Cyprus settlement talks in further enhancing EU-Türkiye cooperation 1 . The Council conclusions on Enlargement of 2024 welcomed the recent steps taken by the UN Secretary-General towards a resumption of settlement talks, indicating that the EU remains ready to play an active role in supporting all stages of the UN-led process, with all appropriate means at its disposal 2 . These messages are continuously communicated to the Turkish authorities. Concerning restrictive measures, under Article 29 of the Treaty on European Union 3 , it is strictly the prerogative of the Council of the EU, through its Member States, to take, with unanimity, decisions to adopt, renew or lift sanctions regimes. As a candidate country for EU accession, the EU will continue to call on Türkiye to comply with its international obligations, and with EU values. 1 https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/m5jlwe0p/euco-conclusions-20240417-18-en.pdf. 2 https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-16983-2024-INIT/en/pdf. 3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=legissum:25_1.”
  EU-Turkey relations
• 2025-07-15 “E-002900/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Mînzatu on behalf of the European Commission It appears that Law 5053/2023 does not contain any Article 59(3) as mentioned by the Honourable Member. Instead, its Article 9 permits work for more than one employer as long as working time limits, which derive from Directive 2003/88/EC 1 , are respected. The aim of Directive 2003/88/EC is to protect the health and safety of workers. The Directive sets a maximum average weekly working time (48 hours in a reference period of four months) and minimum daily (at least 11 consecutive hours per 24-hour period) and weekly rest periods (at least 24 hours of uninterrupted rest plus the 11 hours' daily rest). A 13-hour working day is allowed only if the average maximum weekly working time of 48 hours in the reference period of four months is respected. In the Tyco case 2 the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) held that travel time between home and the place of work counts as ‘working time’ in case of workers without fixed places of work. As regards daily travel time to a fixed place of work, there is no indication in the CJEU case law that such periods should be considered as ‘working time’ for the purposes of the Directive. The Commission has no indication that Law 5053/2023 breaches the Directive. At present, the Commission does not consider launching an infringement procedure against Greece over its Law 5053/2023. The Commission will continue monitoring compliance with the Directive by all Member States, including Greece, by taking into account any information it receives from the European Parliament and/or the public, including the individual complainants. 1 Directive 2003/88/EC concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time, OJ L 299, 18.11.2003, p. 9 replaced Council Directive 93/104/EC of 23 November 1993 concerning certain aspects of the organization of working time, OJ L 307, 13.12.1993, p. 18–24. - https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2003/88/oj/eng. 2 Judgment of 10 September 2015, Federación de Servicios Privados del sindicato Comisiones obreras (CC.OO.) v Tyco Integrated Security SL and Tyco Integrated Fire & Security Corporation Servicios SA, C266/14, ECLI:EU:C:2015:578.https://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=167291&pageIndex=0 &doclang=en&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=13069088.”
  EU regulation of cross-border and posted workers · EU rules on hazardous working conditions
• 2025-06-10 “E-002313/2025 Reply The European Union 1 has called for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza and the unconditional release of all hostages, leading to a permanent end to hostilities. It deplores the dire humanitarian situation in Gaza, the unacceptable number of civilian casualties and the levels of starvation. The EU has called on Israel to fully lift its blockade on Gaza, to allow immediate, unimpeded access for and the sustained distribution of humanitarian assistance at scale into and throughout Gaza, and to enable the UN and its agencies, and humanitarian organisations, to work independently and impartially to save lives and reduce suffering. Israel must fully comply with its obligations under international law, including international humanitarian law. On 23 June 2025, the High Representative presented to the Council the report on Israel’s compliance with Article 2 of the EU-Israel Association Agreement 2 . On 26 June 2025, the European Council took note of that report and invited the Council to continue discussions on a follow-up, as appropriate, in July 2025, taking into account the evolution of the situation on the ground. The Foreign Affairs Council subsequently exchanged views on the situation in the Middle East, including on Israel’s compliance with Article 2, on the understanding reached between the EU and Israel for the expansion of humanitarian aid into Gaza, and on an inventory of possible followup measures 3 . The Council is currently examining the Commission proposal of 29 July for a Council Decision on the partial suspension of the Agreement between the European Union, of the one part, and Israel, of the other part, on the participation of Israel in the Union programme Horizon Europe, and the Commission proposal of 17 September for a Council Decision on the suspension of certain trade-related provisions of the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement establishing an association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the State of Israel, of the other part. 1 https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2025/06/26/european-councilconclusions-on-the-middle-east/?utm_source=brevo&utm_campaign=AUTOMATED%20%20Alert%20-%20Newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_id=3318 2 https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/meetings/fac/2025/06/23/ 3 https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/meetings/fac/2025/07/15/”
  Relations with Israel - Palestine · EU competences on human rights
• 2025-06-10 “P-002314/2025 Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Kallas on behalf of the European Commission The High Representative/Vice-President (HR/VP) took note of the media reports about an Israeli navy intercepting a British-flagged (Freedom Flotilla Coalition) ship attempting to enter Gaza by sea. The EU called on all parties to take swift steps to release the passengers and produce a fundamental change to the humanitarian, political, security and economic situation in the Gaza Strip, for which a full opening of the crossing points is key, while addressing Israel's legitimate security concerns. The authorities responsible for ensuring consular protection are the states to which the citizens belong. The EU reiterates its urgent call for the immediate, unimpeded and sustained resumption of aid at scale into Gaza, fully in line with humanitarian principles, and calls for the immediate ceasefire and release of hostages. Following the exchange at the Foreign Affairs Council on 20 May 2025, the HR/VP announced a review of Israel’s compliance with Article 2 of the EU-Israel Association Agreement 1 . The review was presented at the Foreign Affairs Council on 23 June 2025 2 . The ministers of foreign affairs agreed that the EU’s aim is to improve the humanitarian situation. On this basis, the EU engaged in a frank and principled dialogue which led to Israel’s agreement to take significant steps to improve the humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip. The outcomes were presented at the Foreign Affairs Council of 15 July 2025. The EU will continue to closely monitor the implementation of the agreed actions and consider next steps, if necessary, based on developments on the ground. 1 https://eeas.europa.eu/archives/delegations/israel/documents/eu_israel/asso_agree_en.pdf. 2 https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/meetings/fac/2025/06/23/.”
  Relations with Israel - Palestine
• 2025-06-04 “E-002250/2025 Answer given by Ms Albuquerque on behalf of the European Commission Regulation (EU) 2024/1624 1 or the Anti-Money Laundering Regulation (AMLR) imposes transparency requirements on certain foreign legal entities and on foreign legal arrangements that interact with obliged entities in the EU. Third country legal entities belonging to a high-risk category or operating in high-risk sectors and foreign legal arrangements must register their beneficial ownership information in the central register of the Member State in which they have established a business relationship with an obliged entity. Third country legal entities and legal arrangements must also register their beneficial ownership information when they purchase property or certain luxury goods and when they are awarded a public contract for goods or services, or concessions by a contracting authority in the EU. This allows competent authorities to know who is behind structures even when transparency standards in third countries are lower than those in the EU. The Regulation will apply as of 10 July 2027. The Commission does not have the legal power to impose taxation. European banks which transact with companies located in jurisdictions that feature on the EU list (Annex I) of noncooperative jurisdictions for tax purposes 2 are subject to tax defensive measures in the EU Member State where they are established. Member States have enacted legislation and operate at least one such defensive measure (e.g. controlled foreign company rules, withholding tax, no taxdeductibility of business expenses, etc.). 1 OJ L, 2024/1624, 19.6.2024. 2 https://taxation-customs.ec.europa.eu/news/update-eu-list-non-cooperative-jurisdictions-tax-purposes-2025-0218_en.”
  Anti-money laundering regulation · Tax Havens
• 2025-06-04 “E-002249/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Virkkunen on behalf of the European Commission The incident in question underscores the risks associated with advanced Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems, particularly the potential loss of control at model level. The Commission is actively monitoring developments of frontier AI, including findings showing that advanced AI systems can exhibit self-preservation and behaviour unaligned with user intent 1 . Ensuring that AI systems have robust safety, oversight, and explainability mechanisms is crucial to prevent such issues. The AI Act rules on general-purpose AI, effective from August 2025, directly address such concerns in Chapter V, Article 55 2 . This mandates that providers of general-purpose AI models with systemic risks assess and mitigate these risks at Union level. To further help compliance, the General-Purpose AI Code of Practice was finalised in the course of July 2025. Once the Code has been validated by the European AI Office and the AI Board, providers should be able to rely on the Code to demonstrate compliance, ensuring responsible AI development. Additionally, providers of high-risk AI systems will be required to report any serious incidents to the relevant market surveillance authorities. The European AI Office is preparing guidelines to ensure a consistent approach to incident reporting across Member States. The Commission is dedicated to implementing the AI Act successfully, aiming to establish a safe, innovative, and dynamic governance system for trustworthy AI in Europe. This framework will ensure AI systems prioritise security, accountability, and fundamental rights. 1 [2412.04984] Frontier Models are Capable of In-context Scheming. 2 Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence and amending Regulations (EC) No 300/2008, (EU) No 167/2013, (EU) No 168/2013, (EU) 2018/858, (EU) 2018/1139 and (EU) 2019/2144 and Directives 2014/90/EU, (EU) 2016/797 and (EU) 2020/1828 (Artificial Intelligence Act), OJ L, 2024/1689, 12.7.2024.”
  Artificial Intelligence
• 2025-06-04 “E-002251/2025 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission 1. The Nature Restoration Regulation 1 does not differentiate between Member States based on environmental vulnerability. However, when preparing national restoration plans, Member States may consider regional and local characteristics. 2. According to the EU Biodiversity Strategy 2 , it is the responsibility of Member States to designate additional protected areas, to meet the target of legally protecting 30% of EU land and sea by 2030, with one third strictly protected. The Commission regularly invites all Member States to progress on these targets and report new designations to the European Environment Agency 3 . 3. In Greece’s Common Agricultural Policy 4 Strategic Plan 2023-2027 5 , EUR 50 million 6 EU contribution has been earmarked for preventing and restoring forest damage from fires and natural disasters 7 , including afforestation and reforestation. Support is also programmed in the Greek Rural Development Programme 2014-2022 8 , with EUR 55 million. Under shared management, Greece decides fund allocation, in line with the programme’s objectives and priorities. The cohesion policy 2021-2027, allocates EUR 395 million through national 9 and regional 10 programmes for sustainable development aimed at environmental protection, with a focus on climate resilience and biodiversity, including reforestation. Greece’s recovery and resilience plan 11 allocates EUR 631 million for reforestation and natural restoration by investing in anti-flood, anti-erosion and fire-prevention actions 12 . The EU’s environment and climate action programme 13 can assist in converting or replacing non-native forests to natural habitats. Specific guidance has been published on biodiversity-friendly afforestation, reforestation and tree planting 14 . 1 Regulation (EU) 2024/1991 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2024 on nature restoration and amending Regulation (EU) 2022/869. PE/74/2023/REV/1, OJ L, 2024/1991, 29.7.2024. 2 https://environment.ec.europa.eu/strategy/biodiversity-strategy-2030_en. 3 https://dopa.jrc.ec.europa.eu/kcbd/EUBDS2030-dashboard/?version=1. 4 https://ec.europa.eu/info/food-farming-fisheries/key-policies/common-agricultural-policy_en. 5 https://www.agrotikianaptixi.gr/category/sskap-2023-2027/sskap-egkrisi-tropopoiiseis/. 6 EUR 60 million total public expenditure. 7 Interventions Π3-73-1.3.1 and Π3-73-1.3.2 of the Greek CAP strategic Plan 2023-2027. 8 Rural Development Programme 2014-2020: https://www.agrotikianaptixi.gr/paa-2014-2020/egkriseistropopoiiseis/. 9 https://peka-program.gr/, https://civilprotection-program.gr/. 10 https://www.pepattikis.gr/, https://www.eydamth.gr/, https://www.e-pepba.gr/, https://dytikiellada.gr/, https://www.espa-epirus.gr/, https://www.thessalia-espa.gr/, https://pepionia.gr/, https://eydpelop2127.gr/. 11 https://commission.europa.eu/business-economy-euro/economic-recovery/recovery-and-resiliencefacility/country-pages/greeces-recovery-and-resilience-plan_en. 12 Measure 16849. 13 https://cinea.ec.europa.eu/programmes/life_en. 14 https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/1c4561c7-7c54-11ee-99ba-01aa75ed71a1.”
  Management of EU forests · Nature protection and restoration in the EU
• 2025-06-04 “E-002244/2025 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission 1. Considering the importance of addressing consistently the dual challenges of biodiversity loss and climate change, the restoration of biodiversity should take into account the deployment of renewable energy and vice versa. It should be possible to combine restoration activities and the deployment of renewable energy projects, wherever possible, including in renewables acceleration areas and dedicated grid areas. Under Article 14(13) of the Nature Restoration Regulation 1 Member States are required to coordinate the development of their national restoration plans with the mapping of areas that are required to fulfil their 2030 renewable energy target and the designation of renewables acceleration and dedicated infrastructure areas, and to promote synergies. Member States have until 1 September 2026 to submit their draft national restoration plans, which will then be assessed by the Commission. 2. Member States have flexibility to choose and prioritise areas for restoration in their national restoration plans, in particular for the 2030 targets. The determination of the most suitable areas for restoration measures shall be based on the best available knowledge and the latest scientific evidence, in line with the provisions of the Nature Restoration Regulation. 3. The Commission does not have competences to issue such recommendation. It is to be underlined that all renewable energy projects must comply with EU environment legislation, as well as with the rules on Renewable Energy Sources permitting, laid down in the revised Renewable Energy Directive 2 . 1 Regulation (EU) 2024/1991 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2024 on nature restoration and amending Regulation (EU) 2022/869, OJ L, 2024/1991, 29.7.2024. 2 Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources, OJ L 328 21.12.2018, p. 82, amended by Directive (EU) 2023/2413 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 October 2023, OJ L, 2023/2413, 31.10.2023.”
  EU policy on permitting for renewable energy projects · Nature protection and restoration in the EU
• 2025-06-04 “E-002257/2025 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission 1. Greece is in the process of adopting regional waste management plans, which are expected to supplement the national plan already adopted. The Commission will assess the compatibility of these plans with the Waste Framework Directive 1 , including how they support the implementation of the waste hierarchy set out by Article 4 of this Directive prioritising waste prevention, preparing for re-use and recycling 2 . 2. Incineration of mixed waste in installations dedicated to the processing of municipal solid waste is considered as recovery if certain energy efficiency criteria are met 3 . However, Member States shall in their plans, policies and legislation on waste take into account the above hierarchy and incentivise waste prevention and recycling e.g. by making use of economic instruments such as charges and restrictions for waste incineration, and setting up separate collection to avoid that recyclable waste is incinerated 4 . 3. The Commission will assess the national and regional waste plans of all Member States and may initiate infringement procedures if deemed necessary. 1 Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on waste and repealing certain Directives, OJ L 312, 22.11.2008, p. 3–30, as amended by Directive (EU) 2018/851 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May, OJ L 150, 14.6.2018, p. 109–140. 2 Articles 28 and 30-33. 3 Footnote to R1 in Annex II to Directive 2008/98 on waste. The term ‘recovery’ is defined in Article 3(15) of the directive and means ‘any operation the principal result of which is waste serving a useful purpose by replacing other materials which would otherwise have been used to fulfil a particular function, or waste being prepared to fulfil that function, in the plant or in the wider economy’. 4 E.g. Article 10(4), 11 and 22 of Directive 2008/98/EC on waste.”
  Circular economy · EU policy towards plastics
• 2025-05-25 “E-002092/2025 Answer given by Mr McGrath on behalf of the European Commission The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) 1 applies also when genetic material of newborns is processed. In accordance with the principle of lawfulness, the processing must be based on a valid legal basis under Article 6(1) GDPR. Furthermore, genetic data falls within the special categories of personal data which can be processed only if one of the conditions in Article 9(2) GDPR is fulfilled. This provides an additional layer of protection considering the potential risks arising from the processing of this type of data. The Commission has no knowledge of this specific agreement nor if it contains any data protection clauses. The monitoring and enforcement of the application of the GDPR falls within the competence of the national data protection authorities (DPAs) and courts, without prejudice to the Commission’s competences as guardian of the Treaties. It is therefore for the Greek DPA to examine whether the processing activities at stake comply with the GDPR. The Commission does not plan to establish a common European framework for bioethics and the genetic data of minors which largely remain a national competence. 1 Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation), OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1–88.”
  Public and private sectors role in healthcare services · Processing of health data
• 2025-05-13 “P-001904/2025 Answer given by Mr Hoekstra on behalf of the European Commission The Commission attaches great importance to the timely and correct transposition of EU law. Greece has not transposed the provisions of: (i) Council Directive (EU) 2020/285 of 18 February 2020 1 which exempts small enterprises from value-added tax (VAT), alleviates their VAT compliance obligations and makes it easier to trade within the internal market, and (ii) Council Directive (EU) 2022/542 of 5 April 2022 2 which allows for a wider use of reduced rates, including the use of zero rates for essential products such as food, pharmaceuticals and products intended for medical use. Both directives had to be transposed into national law by 31 December 2024. Therefore, the Commission opened infringement procedures 3 against Greece by sending letters of formal notice on 31 January 2025. Greece had to respond, complete its transposition and notify the measures to the Commission by 31 March 2025. Greece did not reply to the letters of formal notice or notify transposition measures for the directives. The Commission is currently envisaging the next step in the infringement procedures. 1 Council Directive (EU) 2020/285 of 18 February 2020 amending Directive 2006/112/EC on the common system of value added tax as regards the special scheme for small enterprises. 2 Council Directive (EU) 2022/542 of 5 April 2022 amending Directives 2006/112/EC and 2020/285 as regards rates of value added tax. 3 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/el/inf_25_273.”
  VAT harmonisation
• 2025-05-12 “E-001878/2025 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission The Commission is currently assessing the complaint referred to by the Honourable Member. This process involves verifying the clarification provided by the Greek authorities in response to the Commission’s inquiry. It should be noted that the Commission is not in a position to disclose any detail as complaints are confidential. For the time being, no drilling activity at sea has taken place in Greece. In addition, according to the Greek authorities and publicly available information, there is, to date, no reported impact of the pre-drilling activities (e.g. survey or exploration) on Natura 2000 sites. Without prejudice to the Commission’s role as guardian of the Treaties, it is primarily the responsibility of the Greek authorities, including judicial ones, to ensure that individual projects are developed in full compliance with EU environmental legislation, including Directive 2013/30/EU 1 on safety of offshore oil and gas operations which establishes the criteria under which a Member State can grant licences to carry out offshore oil and gas operations. The Commission will take action in case a wider issue of non-compliance is established (e.g. if the Greek legislation does not conform with the EU law or if a systemic breach takes place). The Greek European Maritime Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund 2 programme contributes to protecting and restoring aquatic biodiversity and ecosystems, by supporting actions such as strengthening marine protected areas, assessing conservation risks in Natura 2000 sites and developing management plans for them, with the Greek Managing Authority remaining responsible for allocating funding to projects that align with national priorities. 1 Directive 2013/30/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 June 2013 on safety of offshore oil and gas operations and amending Directive 2004/35/EC, OJ L 178, 28.6.2013, p. 66–106. 2 https://oceans-and-fisheries.ec.europa.eu/funding/emfaf_en.”
  EU ocean policy · Regulation of deep-seabed mining · Nature protection and restoration in the EU
• 2025-05-12 “E-001877/2025 Answer given by Mr Jørgensen on behalf of the European Commission The Honourable Member is right in pointing out that nearly EUR 120 million out of the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) Energy budget has been awarded for works on the Prinos CO 2 project in the beginning of 2025. The works subsidised by CEF Energy centre on the construction of a jetty and onshore work. In order to reduce costs, increase efficiency and speed up construction periods, certain initial works can be undertaken in parallel with the application for and compliance with the various and multiple permits required. The actual permits to use certain locations as storage for carbon dioxide are granted on the basis of Directive 2009/31/EC on the geological storage of carbon dioxide. Under the Seveso-III Directive 1 , upper-tier establishments 2 are required to produce a safety report as well as external and internal emergency plans 3 . Member States’ authorities are primarily responsible to ensure compliance with this legislation. Regarding the application of the Seveso-III Directive 4 , the requirements to produce a safety report, as well as internal and external emergency plans, only cover establishments classified as upper-tier 5 . Member States’ authorities are primarily responsible to ensure compliance with EU legislation. It is up to Member States to verify whether obligations arising from applicable environmental Directives 6 regarding the project in question have been respected, including with regard to carrying out assessments where required. As guardian of the Treaties, the Commission will monitor the situation and may decide to take action. In case of doubt, national Courts are fully competent to verify the compatibility of a permit with national and EU law. 1 Directive 2012/18/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on the control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances, amending and subsequently repealing Council Directive 96/82/EC, OJ L 197, 24.7.2012, p. 1–37. 2 Where high quantities of substances may be present, and which are subject to more stringent requirements, as opposed to lower-tier establishments. 3 The safety report and the internal emergency plan have to be produced by the operator within a reasonable period prior to the start of operation or construction. The external emergency has to be drawn up within 2 years after reception of the required information sent by the operator to the competent authorities. 4 Directive 2012/18/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on the control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances, amending and subsequently repealing Council Directive 96/82/EC, OJ L 197, 24.7.2012, p. 1–37. 5 Where high quantities of substances may be present, and which are subject to more stringent requirements, as opposed to lower-tier establishments. 6 E.g. Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, OJ L 26, 28.1.2012, as amended by Directive 2014/52/EU. It is to be noted that Directive 2001/42/EC applies to public plans and programmes.”
  EU funding for transportation
• 2025-05-12 “E-001879/2025 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission The Commission carried out an informal dialogue with Greek authorities and assessed the study of the Technical University of Crete and the report of the Hellenic Centre for Marine Research of 2012 1 in order to verify compliance with the Waste Framework Directive 2 as interpreted by the Court of Justice of the EU in case C-135/05 3 . The Commission concluded that based on the available evidence 4 regarding the reports and actions already taken by the Greek authorities after the accident (impact study on pollution, continuous monitoring of the zone affected, etc.), no breach of EU law could be established. However, the Commission also informed the Greek authorities that they should remain vigilant as the adverse effects of the shipwreck could be revealed after a prolonged period of time. The Commission is not aware of any judicial expert opinions from 2019 and 2020 quoted by the Honourable Member. Member States have a primary responsibility to monitor the application of the relevant legal provisions and to take the necessary steps for enforcement. In its role as guardian of the Treaties, the Commission will continue monitoring the situation and may decide to take appropriate action. The Commission aims to swiftly follow up on systemic issues involving the application of EU law in EU countries. However, one-off instances are better dealt with at national level, as long as there are available remedies, including judicial ones. In these cases, it is up to the national courts to apply and enforce citizens' rights under EU law. Should new elements arise, including pollution of the area, national courts are competent to verify the adequacy of the measures implemented by the Greek authorities with national and EU legislation. 1 Report entitled ‘Μελέτη των επιπτώσεων της ρύπανσης που προκλήθηκε από το ατύχημα του κρουαζιερόπλοιου ‘Sea Diamond’ στον όρμο Αθηνιος της Νήσου Θήρας» transmitted to the Commission by the Greek authorities. 2 Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on waste and repealing certain Directives, OJ L 312, 22.11.2008, p. 3–30, as amended by Directive (EU) 2018/851 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May, OJ L 150, 14.6.2018, p. 109–140. 3 https://curia.europa.eu/juris/liste.jsf?language=en&num=c-135/05. 4 i.e. absence of clear-cut evidence of the deterioration of the marine environment.”
  EU ocean policy · Environmental crimes and justice
• 2025-03-12 “E-001078/2025 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission The Commission has not been made aware of the project referred to by the Honourable Member but is aware of the importance of protecting natural habitats and species of European and international interest, such as the ecosystems hosted by Lake Trichonida. The protection of these ecosystems is governed by EU legislation, specifically the Habitats Directive 1 and the Birds Directive 2 . Under Article 6 of the Habitats Directive, if the project is likely to have a significant negative effect on a Natura 2000 site, the competent authorities must conduct an appropriate assessment of its implications for the site in view of its conservation objectives 3 . The project also falls under Annex II 4 to the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive 5 . For such projects, there is no automatic obligation for an EIA. Member States have to determine, through a case-by-case examination, by applying thresholds or criteria, or a combination of both, if the project is likely to have significant effects on the environment. If this is the case, an EIA has to be carried out. For projects for which it is determined that an assessment is not required, the determination must be made available to the public and specify the main reasons for not requiring such assessment. Under the Water Framework Directive 6 , it should be ensured that Article 4(7), concerning new modifications to the physical characteristics of a surface water body, is considered. The primary responsibility for ensuring that renewable energy projects are developed in full compliance with EU law lies with the Greek authorities. 1 Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7‐50. 2 Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds (Codified version). OJ L 20, 26.1.2010, p. 7–25. 3 Commission’s guidance document: Guidance on the requirements for hydropower in relation to EU nature legislation, Publications Office of the European Union, 2018, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2779/43645 4 Point 10(g). 5 Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, OJ L 26, 28.1.2012, p. 1–21, as amended by Directive 2014/52/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014, OJ L 124, 25.4.2014, p. 1–18. 6 Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy, OJ L 327, 22.12.2000, p. 1–73.”
  EU policy on permitting for renewable energy projects · Nature protection and restoration in the EU
• 2025-03-10 “P-001024/2025 Answer given by President von der Leyen on behalf of the European Commission The Commission cannot comment nor take a position on matters lying outside the scope of the Treaties on which the Union is founded.”
  EU competences on foreign affairs · EU competences on human rights
• 2025-03-04 “E-000907/2025 Answer given by Mr Jørgensen on behalf of the European Commission In accordance with the Radioactive Waste Directive 1 , each Member State is required by Article 4(4) to dispose of the radioactive waste or spent fuel generated in its territory, unless an agreement has been concluded with another Member State to use one of their disposal facilities. The Commission is not aware of any such agreement between Bulgaria and Greece. Each Member State is also required under Article 12 of the Directive to set out in a national programme how it intends to implement its national policies to comply with the requirements of Article 4. In its analysis of Bulgaria’s national programme or during its monitoring of the Kozloduy decommissioning programme, the Commission has not been informed about any intention by Bulgaria to store or dispose of radioactive waste or spent fuel from the decommissioning of the Kozloduy Units 1-4 in Greece. The Commission also notes that if such a national programme is likely to have significant impacts on the environment, a strategic environmental assessment (SEA) needs to be carried out, including transboundary consultations with neighbouring countries. 2 A SEA consultation on Bulgaria’s Draft updated Strategy for Spent Nuclear Fuel and Radioactive Waste was initiated in 2023 with several countries having responded 3 . The Commission is not aware of any deficiencies on the application of the above rules. The safety of radioactive waste management, including the evaluation of effects of external (seismic) events of a magnitude corresponding to the local situation and siting of nuclear installations, is an ultimate responsibility of Member States in accordance with the Directive 4 . Therefore, the Commission cannot provide an opinion on the danger of disposing of radioactive waste on Greek territory 5 . 1 Council Directive 2011/70/EURATOM of 19 July 2011 establishing a Community framework for the responsible and safe management of spent fuel and radioactive waste. The Radioactive Waste Directive reflects the international requirements of the ‘Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management’ and incorporates current international standards. 2 Directive 2001/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2001 on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment (OJ L 197, 21.7.2001, p. 30–37). 3 https://www.moew.government.bg/bg/procedura-po-strategicheska-ekologichna-ocenka-seo-za-aktualiziranastrategiya-za-upravlenie-na-otraboteno-yadreno-gorivo-oyag-i-radioaktivni-otpaduci-rao-v-bulgariya/. The national SEA register shows that the Strategy was approved by an SEA decision No 1-1/2024; full report of the public consultations also available. See: https://registers.moew.government.bg/eo/lot/37178 4 Article 4(1) of the Council Directive 2011/70/Euratom of 19 July 2011 establishing a Community framework for the responsible and safe management of spent fuel and radioactive waste 5 The Commissions expresses its opinions in matters related to nuclear waste management once such projects are notified to the Commission under articles 37 (installations for radioactive waste that may have a transboundary radiological impact) and 41 (investment projects for new or modified nuclear installations) of the EURATOM Treaty.”
  Nuclear energy
• 2025-01-28 “E-000367/2025 Answer given by Mr McGrath on behalf of the European Commission Directive 93/13/EEC 1 requires Member States to ensure that consumers are not bound by unfair contract terms. It applies to all contracts on the purchase of goods and services 2 including financial services. Under Directive 93/13/EEC as interpreted by the Court of Justice of the European Union, it is for Greek authorities and courts to assess, based on the circumstances of each case, whether Greek banks comply with their obligations regarding the fairness and transparency of contract terms such as those exposing the borrower to a foreign exchange risk 3 , and draw conclusions in each case. In particular, contracts continue to be binding without the unfair terms 4 unless this is impossible under national law. The practical consequences of the invalidity of a mortgage loan contract on account of unfair terms are also governed by national law, provided that it allows to restore the situation which the consumer would have been in without the contract 5 . Finally, remedies enabling consumers to rely on the unfairness of contract terms must be available under conditions which do not hamper the obtention of the protection sought, including through interim measures 6 . The Commission does not have powers to intervene in individual consumer disputes, to review decisions of national authorities and courts or to order the suspension of property auctioning. Regarding Directive 2014/17/EU 7 , it introduced specific rules to protect consumers where the credit is dominated in a foreign currency (e.g. explanations for the implications to consumers, right to convert the credit agreement into an alternative currency). The Directive only applies to mortgage credit contracts concluded as from March 2016, not offering protection for 1 Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts, OJ L 95, 21.4.1993, p. 29‐34. 2 See Section 5 of Commission Notice – Guidance on the interpretation and application of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts, OJ C 323, 27.9.2019, p. 4–92, COM(2019) 5325 final. However, pursuant to Article 1(2) of Directive 93/13/EEC, the directive does not apply to contract terms that reflect national mandatory statutory provisions, which are applicable independently of the parties’ choice or which are supplementary and apply in the absence of other arrangements between the parties; see for example the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 21 December 2021 in Case C-243/20 Trapeza Peiraios AE. 3 See for example the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 10 June 2021 in Joined Cases C-776/19 to C-782/19 BNP Paribas Personal Finance SA. 4 Article 6(1) of Directive 93/13/EEC. 5 See for example the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 15 June 2023 in Case C-520/21 Bank M. 6 See for example the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 10 September 2014 in Case C-34/13 Kušionová. 7 Directive 2014/17/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 February 2014 on credit agreements for consumers relating to residential immovable property and amending Directives 2008/48/EC and 2013/36/EU and Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 Text with EEA relevance, OJ L 60, 28.2.2014, p. 34–85.”
  Financial regulation · Non-performing mortgages
• 2025-01-22 “E-000287/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Mînzatu on behalf of the European Commission After having identified the application of less favourable employment conditions for fixedterm teachers working in public schools compared to permanent teachers, the Commission decided, on 25 July 2024, to open an infringement procedure 1 by sending a letter of formal notice to Greece for failing to correctly transpose into national law Council Directive 1999/70/EC 2 , which prohibits discrimination against fixed-term workers. Greece replied to that letter of formal notice providing further information which is currently being assessed by the Commission. If that response is considered unsatisfactory, the Commission may decide to issue a reasoned opinion. 1 INFR(2024)4013, https://ec.europa.eu/atwork/applying-eu-law/infringementsproceedings/infringement_decisions/?lang_code=en&langCode=EN&version=v1&typeOfSearch=byDecision&r efId=INFR(2024)4013&page=1&size=10&order=desc&sortColumns=decisionDate 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/1999/70/oj/eng”
  EU policy on permanent and fixed-term employment
• 2025-01-15 “E-000166/2025 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission Forests are a natural ally in adapting to and fighting against climate change and will play a vital role in making Europe the first climate neutral continent by 2050. To this end the EU Forest Strategy for 2030 1 calls for measures to increase their health and resilience. The Nature Restoration Regulation 2 requires Member States to put in place measures to restore certain degraded forest habitats and to enhance biodiversity also in forest ecosystems beyond those habitats. Concerning Natura 2000 sites, the Habitats Directive 3 requires Member States to implement conservation measures to achieve the sites’ conservation objectives and to take appropriate steps to avoid the deterioration of natural habitats and the habitats of species as well as significant disturbance of the species for which the sites have been designated. In addition, plans and projects, including wind turbines, likely to have a significant effect, either individually or in combination with other plans or projects, must be subject to an appropriate assessment of their implications for the site in view of the site’s conservation objectives. This assessment must include all stages of the project’s life cycle, including post-operation. The competent national authorities can agree to the plan or project only after having ascertained that it will not adversely affect the integrity of the site concerned, which may require decommissioning and restoration 4 . With regards to waste generated from wind turbines, currently there is no dedicated EU piece of legislation dealing with this waste stream. However, Member States have to ensure that waste wind turbines are subject to waste management that fully complies with the provisions of the Waste Framework Directive 5 . 1 https://environment.ec.europa.eu/strategy/forest-strategy_en 2 Articles 4 and 12 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1991 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2024 on nature restoration and amending Regulation (EU) 2022/869, OJ L, 2024/1991, 29.7.2024. 3 Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora. OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7–50. 4 Further guidance is provided in: European Commission: Directorate-General for Environment, Guidance document on wind energy developments and EU nature legislation, Publications Office of the European Union, 2020, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2779/457035 5 Directive (EU) 2018/851 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018 amending Directive 2008/98/EC on waste, OJ L 150, 14.6.2018, p. 109–140.”
  Energy (green transition)
• 2025-01-13 “E-000099/2025 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission The Commission does not envisage the establishment of a body with tasks as suggested by the Honourable Member. The Member States have the primary responsibility to monitor the application of the relevant legal provisions, including to ensure the compliance of national projects with applicable EU requirements. In accordance with Article 9a of the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive 1 , it is up to the Member States to ensure that the competent authorities perform any duties under that Directive in an objective manner and do not find themselves in situations of conflict of interest. Article 9a also provides that where the competent authority is also the developer, Member States shall at least implement, within their organisation of administrative competences, an appropriate separation between conflicting functions when performing the duties arising from this Directive. In its role as guardian of the Treaties, the Commission will continue monitoring the situation and may decide to take appropriate action. The Commission aims to swiftly follow up on systemic issues involving the application of EU law in EU countries. However, one-off instances of this are better dealt with at national level, as long as there are available remedies, including judicial ones. In these cases, it is up to the national courts to apply and enforce citizen rights under EU law. 1 Directive 2011/92/EU on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, OJ L 26, 28.1.2011, as amended by Directive 2014/52/EU, OJ L 124, 25.4.2014.”
  Energy (green transition)
• 2025-01-13 “E-000101/2025 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission The Commission has not received any information related to the internal circular mentioned by the Honourable Member. Renewable energy and biodiversity protection go hand in hand and EU law carefully considers this balance. If a windfarm project is likely to have significant effects on a Natura 2000 site, an appropriate assessment of its impacts should be carried out, and the project can be approved only when it has been ascertained that it will not adversely affect the integrity of the site 1 . The projects also undergo an environmental impact assessment (EIA), based on the Greek legislation transposing the EIA Directive 2 . Moreover, under the permitting rules in the Renewable Energy Directive 3 , when setting the renewable acceleration areas, Member States are obliged to choose areas that are not expected to have significant environmental impact 4 . Without prejudice to the Commission’s powers as guardian of the Treaties, national administrative and/or judicial bodies are primarily responsible to verify compliance of individual projects with the EU environmental legislation and provide the appropriate means to address the matter. Citizens are thus invited to use existing national means of redress if they want to oppose a specific project. The Commission may intervene in cases raising issues of wider principle, where there is sufficient evidence of a general practice, of a problem of compliance of national legislation with EU law or of a systematic failure to comply with EU law 5 . The Commission identified a structural problem and opened an infringement case 6 . The case concerns the absence of a legal framework that complies with the Habitats Directive. A reasoned opinion was sent in February 2023. The Commission continues to monitor the situation. 1 Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive - Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7–50. 2 Directive 2011/92/EU on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment , OJ L 26, 28.1.2012, p. 1–21, as amended by Directive 2014/52/EU on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, OJ L 124, 25.4.2014, p. 1–18. 3 Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources (recast), OJ L 328, 21.12.2018, p. 82–209. 4 Article 15c. 5 As set out in the Communication of 19 January 2017: EU law: Better results through better application C/2016/8600, OJ C 18, 19.1.2017, p. 10–20 and in the Communication of 13 October 2022: COM(2022) 518 final - Enforcing EU law for a Europe that delivers. 6 Case 2014/4073 opened in 2014 against Greece: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/inf_23_525, https://ec.europa.eu/atwork/applying-eulaw/infringementsproceedings/infringement_decisions/?typeOfSearch=false&active_only=0&noncom=0&r_dossier=INFR(2014)4 073&decision_date_from=&decision_date_to=&title=&submit=Search&lang_code=el&langCode=EN”
  Energy (green transition)
• 2025-01-07 “E-000023/2025 Answer given by Mr Jørgensen on behalf of the European Commission The Commission is closely monitoring Greece’s compliance with the relevant Directives 1 . Should the Commission identify any shortcomings in the transposition or implementation thereof, will initiate further action to address them. In particular, Directive (EU) 2021/2167 on credit servicers and credit purchasers aims to support the development of secondary markets for non-performing loans in the EU, by providing a harmonized framework for their sale from banks to credit purchaser and servicers. At the same time, the Directive ensures that the sale of such loans does not undermine borrowers’ rights. Furthermore, to protect consumers and prevent them from losing their homes, the Mortgage Credit Directive 2014/17/EU 2 provides safeguards 3 . The same Directive enables Member States to introduce, in line with EU law, more stringent provisions in order to protect consumers 4 . Regarding individual disputes, national authorities and courts ensure the rights of consumers granted under EU law. Regarding the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, everyone has the right to respect for his/her private and family life, home and communications. Within its scope of competence, the Commission remains committed to ensuring this right. In addition, to help tackle the housing crisis, the Commission has appointed the first-ever Commissioner responsible for housing and established a Task Force for Housing. The Commission will put forward a European Affordable Housing Plan and conduct an analysis of 1 Directive 2009/65/EC concerning undertakings for collective investment in transferable securities (UCITS) OJ L 302, 17.11.2009, p. 32–96. Directive 2011/61/EU on Alternative Investment Fund Managers, OJ L 174, 1.7.2011, p. 1–73 Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts, OJ L 95, 21.4.1993, p. 29– 34. Directive (EU) 2021/2167 on credit servicers and credit purchasers, OJ L 438, 8.12.2021, p. 1-37. 2 OJ L 60, 28.2.2014, p. 34. 3 Such as ensuring that the creditworthiness of a borrower is assessed before a mortgage can be granted as well as obliging creditors to have adequate policies and procedures so that they make efforts to exercise, where appropriate, reasonable forbearance before foreclosure proceedings are initiated. Such measures may consist of a total or partial refinancing of a credit agreement, or of a modification of the existing terms and conditions of a credit agreement. 4 For example, the Greek insolvency code already establishes a safety net for vulnerable debtors, with a temporary subsidy of their loan instalment in out-of-court restructuring and a sale-and-leaseback regime in case of insolvency or if their primary residence is about to be auctioned: Law 4738/2020 transposing Directive (EU) 2019/1023, as amended by law 4818/2021 and law 5024/2023. The new sale-and-leaseback regime aims to avoid past moral hazard behaviour and the adverse impact it has had in the cost of credit in Greece. Until said mechanism becomes operational, Law 4916/2022 provides for the protection of the primary residence of eligible vulnerable debtors by means of a state subsidy and the suspension of liquidation measures.”
  EU housing policy · Non-performing mortgages
• 2025-01-07 “E-000021/2025 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission After having issued a reasoned opinion (in February 2023 1 ), the Commission has remained in close contact with the Greek authorities. In their efforts to assist the Greek authorities to solve the issue, the case was discussed in April 2024 and the Greek authorities informed the Commission on steps taken to address the breaches identified by the Commission. It should be stressed that the existing infringement procedure concerns the fact that the current Special Framework for Spatial Planning and Sustainable Development for Renewable Energy Resources does not comply with the requirements of Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive 2 . Where appropriate, the Commission will not hesitate to refer the case to the Court of Justice of the EU. Member States have a primary responsibility to monitor the application of the relevant legal provisions and to take the necessary steps for enforcement. In its role as guardian of the Treaties, the Commission monitors the situation and may decide to take appropriate action. The Commission aims to swiftly follow up on systemic issues involving the application of EU law in EU countries. However, one-off instances of this are better dealt with at national level, as long as there are available remedies, including judicial ones. In these cases, it is up to the national courts to apply and enforce rights under EU law. Compliance of individual windfarm projects with the requirements of the Habitats Directive should be checked by the competent national authorities, including the judicial ones. 1 https://ec.europa.eu/atwork/applying-eu-law/infringementsproceedings/infringement_decisions/?typeOfSearch=false&active_only=0&noncom=0&r_dossier=INFR(2014)4 073&decision_date_from=&decision_date_to=&title=&submit=Search&lang_code=el&langCode=EN 2 Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7–50.”
  Energy (green transition)
• 2025-01-07 “P-000020/2025 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission 1. The Commission is aware of the challenges Greece is facing in implementing the waste management legislation 1 and is taking appropriate action. The Commission assists Greece in its efforts to reduce the percentage of waste being landfilled, by providing EU funding for instance via the EU programme for the environment and climate action on Circular Economy (LIFE-IP CEI-Greece) 2 , i.e. a country-wide project aiming to reduce the amount of municipal waste sent to landfills and to promote waste prevention and re-use. Where appropriate, the Commission may also take enforcement actions. For instance, the Commission has initiated an infringement procedure (case 2021/2166) concerning the non-compliance with EU law of 84 Greek landfills. In addition, the capacity of installations for treatment of waste before landfilling is insufficient for treating mixed municipal waste. A reasoned opinion was sent on 16 December 2024 3 . 2. It is up to each Member State to set the level of fees that it considers adequate as this is not regulated by Article 10 of the Landfill Directive 4 . 3. The Commission will continue to assist Greece in reaching the 2030 targets and, in its role as guardian of the Treaties, may decide to take appropriate measures, when necessary. The Commission can only request financial sanctions under Article 260 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union 5 . 1 Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on waste and repealing certain Directives, OJ L 312, 22.11.2008, p. 3–30, as amended by Directive (EU) 2018/851 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May, OJ L 150, 14.6.2018, p. 109–140. 2 https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/life/publicWebsite/project/LIFE18-IPE-GR-000013/circular-economyimplementation-in-greece 3 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/inf_24_6006 4 Directive 1999/31/EC of 26 April 1999 on the landfill of waste OJ L 182, 16.7.1999, p. 1–19. 5 For the infringement procedure: https://commission.europa.eu/law/application-eu-law/implementing-eulaw/infringement-procedure_en#financial-penalties”
  Energy (green transition)
• 2024-12-22 “P-003081/2024 Answer given by Ms Albuquerque on behalf of the European Commission Article 12(4) of Directive 2014/17/EU 1 provides that Member States may allow creditors to require the consumer to hold a relevant insurance policy related to the credit agreement. In such cases Member States shall ensure that the creditor accepts the insurance policy from a supplier different to his preferred supplier where such policy has a level of guarantee equivalent to the one the creditor has proposed. This requirement is typically met through a credit protection insurance policy, which covers the debtor against the risk of being unable to repay credit, in particular in the form of a mortgage. Article 11(4) of that Directive provides that where the conclusion of a contract regarding an ancillary service, such as insurance, is compulsory in order to obtain the credit or to obtain it on the terms and conditions marketed, and the cost of that service cannot be determined in advance, the obligation to enter into that contract shall be stated in a clear, concise and prominent way, along with the annual percentage rate of charge. In addition, Article 20 of Directive (EU) 2016/97 2 requires banks and insurance distributors to provide borrowers with clear information on insurance products to help them make informed decisions. The terms of credit protection insurance policies are subject to applicable national laws. EU law does not regulate the specific content or exclusions of such policies. However, any exclusions must comply with EU rules protecting consumers against unfair commercial practices 3 and unfair and non-transparent contract terms 4 . The remedies for non-performance of a contractual obligation under an insurance contract are governed by national rules, and enforcement falls within the remit of national competent authorities and courts. 1 Directive 2014/17/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 February 2014 on credit agreements for consumers relating to residential immovable property and amending Directives 2008/48/EC and 2013/36/EU and Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, OJ L 60, 28.2.2014, p. 34–85. 2 Directive (EU) 2016/97 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 January 2016 on insurance distribution, OJ L 26, 2.2.2016, p. 19–59. 3 Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Unfair Commercial Practices Directive’), OJ L 149, 11.6.2005, p. 22‐39. 4 Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts, OJ L 95, 21.4.1993, p. 29‐34.”
  Public and private sectors role in healthcare services
• 2024-12-17 “E-002980/2024 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission 1. Yes, the Commission has been made aware of this. The EU policy on critical raw materials 1 aims to ensure a secure and sustainable supply of critical raw materials while not weakening the environmental and social rules. Projects should be planned and implemented covering all aspects of sustainability highlighted in the publication ‘EU principles for sustainable raw materials’ 2 . The environmental effects of projects covering mining activities have to be duly assessed in accordance with EU requirements as the Habitats Directive 3 or the Water Framework Directive 4 . In view of the Commission's powers as guardian of the Treaties, it will make every effort to ensure that the environmental and social standards set are respected. 2. The supply of primary antimony is heavily concentrated in a few countries. Therefore, recycling plays a crucial role to ensure secure and sustainable supply of antimony. Secondary antimony is mainly recovered from lead-acid batteries and to a lesser extent from polymers 5 . The Commission aims to increase such recycling efforts by setting the right legal framework in the critical raw materials, waste and product legislation but also by funding several projects to develop innovative antimony recovery processes 6 . According to the Extractive Waste Directive 7 , operators of extractive waste facilities draw up a waste management plan, which have the objective to encourage the recovery of extractive waste by means of recycling, reusing or reclaiming such waste in accordance with the existing environmental standards. 1 https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/sectors/raw-materials/areas-specific-interest/critical-rawmaterials_en 2 https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/6d541f66-0f81-11ec-9151-01aa75ed71a1/language-en 3 Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7–50. 4 Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy, OJ L 327, 22.12.2000, p. 1. 5 Raw Materials Information System (RMIS) - https://rmis.jrc.ec.europa.eu/rmp/Antimony 6 Project Close WEEE – CORDIS - https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/641747 Project PLAST2bCLEANED - CORDIS - https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/821087 Project NONTOX – CORDIS - https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/820895/results Project Stibiox - CORDIS - https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/824871 7 Directive 2006/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 on the management of waste from extractive industries and amending Directive 2004/35/EC - Statement by the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission, OJ L 102, 11.4.2006, p. 15–34.”
  Energy (green transition)
• 2024-12-03 “E-002734/2024 Answer given by Mr Tzitzikostas on behalf of the European Commission 1. Regulation (EC) No 1071/2009 1 regulates the conditions of access to the occupation of road transport operator. It does not concern the social security system of each Member State, does not set out the type of insurance required, and is not relevant in determining whether there is a need to be insured. 2. As regards passenger transport, Regulation (EC) No 1071/2009 applies to undertakings operating passenger transport services for the public or for specific categories of users in return for payment by the person transported or by the transport organiser; it does not apply to undertakings which have a main occupation other than that of road passenger transport operator or which are engaged in road passenger transport services exclusively for noncommercial purposes as defined in its Article 1(4) in fine. The Regulation therefore does not apply to the ancillary activity of an undertaking which has a main occupation other than that of road passenger transport operator. As regards the transport of goods, the Regulation applies to natural or legal persons engaged in the transport of goods for hire and reward with a commercial purpose. Own-account transport of goods, which does not involve hire and reward operations, is therefore not covered. 1 Regulation (EC) No 1071/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 establishing common rules concerning the conditions to be complied with to pursue the occupation of road transport operator and repealing Council Directive 96/26/EC, OJ L 300, 14.11.2009, p. 51.”
  EU rules on hazardous working conditions
• 2024-11-27 “E-002676/2024 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Fitto on behalf of the European Commission The Commission is closely monitoring the implementation of the AntiNero programmes, which are part of the Greek Recovery and Resilience Plan (measure ID: 16849). The Commission is in regular contact with the Greek authorities to ensure that the investment is implemented within the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) timeframe and according to the conditions set out in the Annex to the Council Implementing Decision 1 . As the RRF is a performance-based instrument, the Commission only pays out the amounts to each country when they have achieved the agreed milestones and targets towards completing the measures included in their plan. In relation to the Antinero programmes, Greece has currently fulfilled milestone 61 for awarding contracts for AntiNero programmes I and II, concerning the upgrade of 37 500 ha of degraded forest ecosystems. Future milestones and targets will be assessed at the time of their corresponding payment requests. The Greek authorities have not informed the Commission of any allocation of these grants towards other initiatives such as the ‘Saving Energy in Businesses – Changing my business’ energy system’ project. Should a programme be implemented in or nearby a Natura 2000 site so that it is likely to have a significant effect thereon, Greece will also need to verify wherever an appropriate assessment is required in line with the provision of Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive 2 . Member States are primarily responsible to ensure compliance with EU law, including verifying individual cases of potential breach of the relevant rules or taking the necessary steps for enforcement, and the appropriate measures to address any matter that has arisen. In its role as the guardian of the Treaties, the Commission will monitor the situation and may decide to take appropriate action. 1 https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-11858-2024-ADD-1/en/pdf 2 OJ L 206, 22/07/1992, p. 7–50.”
  Energy (green transition)
• 2024-11-27 “E-002675/2024 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Fitto on behalf of the European Commission The Commission approved in July 2024 the implementation under the programming periods 2014-2020 and 2021-2027 of the major project on the extension of the port of Piraeus to serve cruise ships under the operational programme ‘Attica 2014-2020’. This approval was based on the positive appraisal of the information referred to in Article 101 of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 1 . Moreover, the approval occurred after a ruling of the Greek Council of State in March 2023 and a subsequent revision of the environmental terms endorsed by the Greek Ministry of Environment and Energy in September of 2023 2 . The Commission is aware of complaints and concerns that had been raised about this project prior to the ruling of March 2023. According to available information, there is no evidence of any specific infringement of Directive 2008/98/EC for this project 3 . However, if the Commission receives documented information that a violation of EU legislation may have taken place and that it points to a structural issue, it will verify the situation with the relevant national authorities and, if needed, will take appropriate action. Regarding the obligations under an international convention such as the Barcelona Convention, it is the responsibility of the contracting parties to uphold their respective obligations. 1 OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 320. 2 Commission Implementing Decision C (2024)4975 of 9.7.2024. 3 OJ L 312, 22.11.2008, p. 3 (Waste Framework Directive).”
  Energy (green transition)
• 2024-10-11 “E-002023/2024 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Mînzatu on behalf of the European Commission The EU promotes social dialogue for improving the employment conditions of workers and recognises the role of social partners, while respecting their autonomy 1 . The functioning of national social dialogue, including that of the collective bargaining framework, falls under the primary responsibility of Member States. The Commission is committed to follow up on enforcement and implementation of EU law by Member States. The Commission’s competence to enforce compliance with international conventions is generally limited to the areas where the EU has exclusive competence or where the EU has adopted relevant legislation. EU labour law does not regulate the conditions on individual dismissals 2 . Directive on collective redundancies contains rules on collective dismissals, obliging employers to inform and consult workers when envisaging collective redundancies, and to notify the competent public authority 3 . Greece has transposed these rules into national law 4 and the competent national authorities and national courts are to ensure that an individual employer complies with the relevant national provisions. The Employment Equality Directive prohibits discrimination in employment, also as regards working conditions, dismissals and pay 5 . The prohibition covers discrimination based on the grounds of religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation. The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) clarified that the scope of the Directive may not be extended to discrimination on grounds other than those exhaustively listed 6 . The CJEU also added that the Directive ‘does not cover political or trade union belief’ 7 . In this light, the situation the Honourable Member describes does not appear to fall within the scope of this Directive. 1 Article 152 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). 2 EU law only prohibits dismissals in very specific cases, such as in connection with pregnancies and parental leave (Council Directive 92/85/EEC, transfer of undertakings (Council Directive 2001/23/EC) and when there is discrimination on a limited number of specific grounds (Council Directive 2000/78/EC). 3 Council Directive 98/59/EC. 4 Collective redundancies are regulated by virtue of Law 1387/1983, as amended and currently in force. As regards the mechanism for information and consultation, the legislation provides that works councils may be set up by the employees in companies which employ at least 50 employees, where a trade union already exists in that company or at a company employing at least 20 employees if there is no such trade union. 5 Council Directive 2000/78/EC. 6 See, for example: judgment of 11 July 2006, Chacón Navas, C-13/05, ECLI:EU:C:2006:456. 7 Judgment of 13 October 2022, S.C.R.L. (Vêtement à connotation religieuse), C-344/20, ECLI:EU:C:2022:774.”
  EU policy on forced redundancies · EU regulation on worker representation in company decisions
• “Europe tells its citizens that the ETS is a tool to help the climate. In Greece, though, people are paying high bills. Small businesses are being strangled, and we have an energy market where the few players are becoming stronger and stronger. So as we're seeing the cost of the Green Deal increase and profits also increasing, we're not seeing a fair transition. We're seeing a transition where the environment is taking over and allowing huge profits to be made. Sustainable Europe doesn't just mean how much CO2 is being emitted. It's who's paying the price, who's making money, and who is shut out of the energy transition and a dignified life. I've begun a parliamentary investigation into the energy cartel in Greece. There have been, uh, data that's come out of the commission. I'd like you to read them.”
  EU approach to electricity market and prices
• “Ladies and gentlemen, the blackout in the Iberian Peninsula is only the beginning. The same instability threatens Greece, where a rampant and unbridled development of wind farms without any spatial planning, without storage, without the right infrastructure. All of this leads to instability, the squandering of energy and other problems. We're destroying Natura 2000 areas, mountain tops to set up wind turbines that don't lead to stability, but just profits for a handful, and very expensive electricity for consumers. The. Fact that a lot of electricity is produced when there is no demand throws the whole system off balance, and citizens and nature are paying the price. That is the problem. The solution isn't to go back to nuclear power. We have to solve this problem. This isn't an energy transition. It's just a green label on people trying to grab profits. Europe has to set certain limits. Thank you.”
  EU policy on permitting for renewable energy projects
• “Aviation and shipping have a serious impact on the environment, and yet they are the foundation of trade and social cohesion. It shouldn't be about choosing between the environment or the economy, but we should opt for a model that safeguards the environment, society and functional transport at the same time. At the moment, the EU is setting ambitious targets for transitioning to green fuels. But they do not guarantee sustainability. And there is the risk of greenwashing when it comes to non sustainable fuels. The EU is trapped by its obsession with neoliberalism and its dependent on private capital and the markets, but there is no corresponding public productive base. Honourable members energy is a strategic importance. We cannot deal with it as if it were a simple commodity. I support a public production model under democratic scrutiny that does not hand over energy to private capital. Now I support the public production of sustainable fuels Rechannelling EU funds, price control and safeguarding energy sovereignty. This is the only way that we can avoid creating a new cartel that will call the shots in global trade at the expense of our societies and sustainable democratic development.”
  Energy (green transition)
• “Three years. After the Tempe crime. We've had two trains on the same line. Contract 717. Eu rules the ertms system. That didn't work. An employee that was left alone in the office. Temperatures above 1000 degrees. We don't know what was on board by way of cargo. We don't. We weren't able to cordon off the accident site. Evidence was has disappeared. Videos have disappeared. There were depositions that have been erased. Hard disks show us that there was an unknown fuel on board. There were customs issues. And potentially there might have even been. The elements that were. Was military equipment. We don't know.”
  EU policy on aviation safety
• “So we are here today to talk about a very important issue and. I need to protest. Dear sir, because a few moments ago we had Miss Latino Polo in here saying that, uh, what we are talking about is totally trivial compared to the war. I asked for a blue card because I wanted to ask her how many years she has worked in the real world outside of the European Parliament. Because, uh, the reality in Greece is that, uh, women are paid on average, 13% less than men. But of course, she doesn't care about that. So that means that for every €100 is paid, a woman is paid 86 to 87. Whereas in certain fields, uh, that, uh, uh, gap rises to 25%. And then of course, we see that mirrored in pensions as well. So we need collective Bargaining and agreements, equal pay for equal work and. Quotas for women.”
  Gender pay transparency
• “Is the competitiveness compass isn't a compass for the people's. It is a map to exploit workers. You want cheap labor redundancies. You want to trample on rights. You want to use artificial intelligence, not to improve working conditions and reduce working hours without reducing wages. You don't want to do it to protect jobs and to make sure that labor law is protected. You're only interested in how big companies are going to increase their profits with the 28th legal regime and with the simplification of rules. You want a Europe where labor law is valid when it doesn't, uh, change the profits of a handful. This is a broken compass, and its rightful position is in the bin, because otherwise people will become even poorer. Competitiveness cannot be something that the workers will pay a high price for. Thank you.”
  EU regulation on worker representation in company decisions
• “Mr. Jiji Costas. Public transport. In a country like Greece which has privatized everything, it's a good target, I have to say. But we're speaking about competitive and sustainable public transport, when the basic thing is the security and safety of workers and of passengers. But you see that the EP and its particular approach didn't really catch on what they had to say. And with those four MEPs, we sort of slid onto the next topic, that of tempi. After two years of that terrible rail accident, 57 dead and no responses. There hasn't been a proper analysis of the train engines that were involved in those particular in that particular catastrophe. There's been a clear cover up. The government is intervening in the court procedure and in the legal process overall concerning this, nobody is taking responsibility. The same thing is taking place at sea and in the air. Investors try to reduce costs and at the same time they're reducing security and safety. People are paying with their lives for this. This is shameful for Greece. This is shameful for the European Union as well. And it ought to change. Thank you.”
  EU policy on aviation safety
• “The ECB and the Commission. Warn. Warn of the risks of cyber attacks, blackouts, natural disasters or even wars that can freeze digital transactions. That is why they recommend cash at home and a 72 hour survival kit. But is it purely a technical issue? No, it is about democracy. Who controls electronic money? Who can exclude citizens from economic life with the press of a button. Can the system punish activists, trade unionists or political opponents? Can you really guarantee that this will not happen? We have already seen the freezing of bank accounts of protesters in Canada in 2022, and European discussions about programmable money and CBDC, with the possibility of restrictions on use. Also, the possibility of real time exclusion from use through fintech and banking systems. So complete digital dependence means surveillance and social exclusion. The right to cast is not an anachronism. It is a shield of freedom, equality and social participation. It is a foundation of democracy and human dignity.”
  Means of payment (cash vs digital)
• “I'm not from Russia, so I will speak in Greek. First of all, I would like to express my support to the workers and the 30,000 dismissed from Amazon. We hear the same argument that AI is to blame AI, which is a social acquired right? Because we are our taxes, we have funded Progress of Technology, and it should be said that companies should go give back to the to society that worth. So it is unacceptable for technological progress to be converted into a weapon for mass dismissals, AI, social good and we legislators have to protect it. The question to the management is the 30,000 dismissed, thousands working for Amazon and 1 million people working all over the world in different professions are also consumers at the same time, are you sure that you have correctly weighted the cost of your option to treat your workforce like you treat them? Because there are multiple examples where workers all over the world have shown their solidarity by boycotting. And if this is the only language you speak, the Profit.”
  Artificial Intelligence
• “Colleagues. The debate on this outsourcing and subcontracting can't ignore the consequences. This undermines workers rights, and it has to be ended when this work goes through. Intermediaries. We are creating a system of different speeds of workers so that nobody is actually employed. In reality, the people are doing the same work in the same space, but some people have less protection, lower wages and less safety. Worker is not a product. It can't be considered a compressible cost. Workers need to be directly employed with full rights and collective agreements, and a clear responsibility of the employer. We need to end these opaque forms of employment in order to protect workers rights. Thank you.”
  EU policy on employment subcontracting
• “The agreement EU Mercosur is presented as an occasion a chance for European companies. But we should speak clearly. First of all, here we are not the European Parliament of multinationals. Also, the multinationals increase their profits through such an agreement. But the European farmers and the the animal breeders have a very high competition. What do our citizens gain? Cheaper products of doubtful quality that do not fulfil the standards of the European Union. Will we agree to fill our supermarkets with products that are produced with various substances that are not allowed, without any environmental responsibility in having the having the deforestation of the Amazon continuing, we will accept products coming from animals that have been raised under conditions that are inhumane for Europeans. Do you want to make an agreement? Make an agreement with the European farmers? The requests are just. They want just prices, reduction of the production cost and protection from various disasters.”
  Trade relations with Mercosur
• “Ladies and gentlemen, the housing crisis in Europe isn't just an economic problem, it's a social problem. The report that we're discussing today says that it's the problem lies in the fact that there is a housing shortage, and that we need more money to build new homes. But the reality of citizens is very different in many towns and cities. Houses have become goods. A golden visa funds by loans and means that there are auctions and foreclosures and flats are becoming Airbnb apartments or are kept vacant so rents go up. Housing is a basic social right and not a financial product. We need to protect first homes. We need more social housing and we need rules that put an end to speculation. The report that we're discussing today doesn't protect citizens. It's, uh, tailored to help the market. And I think it will make the housing crisis worse. That is why I will vote against it. And in the near future, I'm going to unveil a huge housing crisis in Greece. That report doesn't touch upon.”
  EU housing policy
• “Chair. Commissioner. Ladies and gentlemen, colleagues. First of all, I'd like to start by wishing you all a happy New Year. Now, when it comes to the housing plan that we've just heard about from the commissioner, I see that the plan is focusing on housing supply. However, there's another side to the issue. Which is also causing problems for housing and that is forced housing sales, expropriation of houses. I think that's also something that we need to talk about. Uh, we also have to talk about the right to housing, which is provided for in the European Charter. We have to ensure that, uh, people's primary residence is protected. Um, we we need to avoid is that if we build houses, then they are left empty. And then at the same time, there are citizens losing their houses because they haven't got enough money or because of the banks. I'm a member of the petitions committee as well, and we receive a lot of petitions recently. We've had Petitions from a number of different countries, including Greek petitions. And they have. And also petitions from Cyprus. And I'm sure that this is also the case in other European countries as well, that this phenomenon exists where houses are seized and there are for sales. I think that we have to ensure that we have protection of a primary residence as really the founding basis. Before we go any further.”
  Non-performing mortgages
• “Dear Minister. Dear Commissioner how can you talk about strategic autonomy in metals when in Greece we close down? Larco the only industry in the EU that produces nickel and they were led to the into the ground. For years we have seen the private sector that left this factory alone to survive. And what happened in the end the EU instead of helping Larco, they imposed a fine of €1 million. So we have seen hundreds of jobs lost. We are talking about people that were specialized in their job. The factory has closed down and the whole region of Larymna now has to fight unemployment. The EU has to take back this million euro fine and restart the factory of Larco under public control. Thank you very much.”
  Sourcing of critical raw materials
• “Commissioner. Roswell. Allow me in this debate to say that there is a risk, because there is now a contract to bury radioactive waste from Bulgaria in Greece. Did you know this? You know that we are the sixth most earthquake prone country in the world, and we have a lot of subterranean waters, and these are very important for farming. So we are not a country that should be burying radioactive waste because this could contaminate both above and below the ground. I also send you a question on Lake Trichonis and you haven't answered that. How can you allow boring in and pumping in a natural lake? And, uh, how would that impact the farming ground around the lake? So please say this in the report that we cannot allow our water to be filled with toxic nuclear waste. **Nicolae ŞTEFĂNUȚĂ @Co-Chair: Thank you. On behalf of the Commission, Mrs.. Commissioner Roswall has the floor.”
  Nuclear energy
• “Greeks are suffering because of heat waves. Uh, public water providers, which are now privatised, were no longer able to, uh, provide what was necessary. Uh, fires are occurring. Uh, windmills are taking over mountains and natural areas. This is a neoliberal policy. The country is being sacrificed for profit. There is no compensation for this. In Albania, 111km² with Greek minorities in it have been, um, burned. And these people have received no assistance. This is an attempt to move the Greek minority and colonize this area. Europe has to support local communities. Uh, to prevent building on burnt areas and to financing proper housing networks across Europe.”
  EU Development & Humanitarian Aid
• “Mr. Schulz, you present Greece as a country with a good practice. I think that maybe you're misinformed. The government did not restructure, bring back the collective bargaining. The minister decides the salaries and the employers are not obliged to negotiate agreements. We have the president of the Confederation of Workers has a stronger role. The sectoral agencies. We. We have a unilateral appeal. Um approach. And we do not have a necessary defense for the workers. The agreement was secret that was made on the presence of the president of the workers. We are not talking about a social agreement of the workers. It's a political agreement achieved by the government of Mitsotakis. We have 13 hours and fear at the work place. We have accidents at the workplace that are breaking records. So we have, um, we don't have the traditional working conditions. This is the success story. How you can never reach the 80%, the coverage by collective bargaining. And it's called a success story of the of the employers. And I hope you will continue laughing at what I say. Thank you.”
  EU regulation on worker representation in company decisions
• “Thank you. Chair. I will take the floor in Greek. Ladies and gentlemen, colleagues, I would like to give my opinion in light of what I heard from the Commission and here in the committee. What we heard from the Commission is very important because it gives a social, political spin to affordable housing and the energy transition. The energy transition, to my mind, Shouldn't become or lead to social desertification. Millions of Europeans, especially in more vulnerable countries, have a double pressure, housing pressure and energy poverty. In Greece, there are people who live, lose their houses in auctions for a few thousand euros and they are paying for what the governments have set up. Auctions of first homes are meaning that people are losing their homes. And these speculators are actually getting a lot of houses in order to make a profit on them. Let us be crystal clear. Banks, funds and real estate agencies that pretend to be investors cannot be objective because it's all about profits. Social housing, energy protection And decent living are things that have to be guaranteed by the member States and the EU. The transition has to be a fair one and funding has to come from different EU programmes, together with, um, the Cohesion Fund. We really have to focus on green autonomous houses with solar panels, proper insulation that are energy independent. And why not even a composting, recycling and water being perhaps treated on the premises? We don't want wind turbines that just destroy our mountains and our communities. If we don't make sure that each and every individual has a decent, uh, heated house. Then the energy transition will be a new disguise of social inequalities that shouldn't be and mustn't be the future of Europe. Thank you.”
  EU housing policy
• “Ladies and gentlemen, basic food prices being high isn't a crisis. It's a daily nightmare for millions of citizens. In Greece. Food prices went up by 27% over the last two years. Olive oil went up by 30% within a single year back in 2023. At the same time, producer prices are going down and shelves are being filled with products that are too expensive and everyone is on their knees. The problem isn't just inflation. There is a structural imbalance in the food chain. There are just a handful of supermarkets that control the market. Small producers are under pressure and prices remain high. And the food cartels. Fixed prices for maximum profits. And yet you are telling investors come here so that you can make profits. Profits? On the back of whom? Because of food. Food is a basic right. And the EU has the duty to protect us and protect food. And it shouldn't be about company profits very much.”
  EU policy on farmer–buyer relations in the agri-food supply chain
• “The report is based on the Draghi report and accepts the need for investment. However, it doesn't talk about the inequality and pay and the welfare state. We need the solution it proposes is more dependence on On markets. In other words, casino capitalism that's already destroyed is coming back, served up as a solution. In the south of Europe, we live in with poverty wages, with young people leaving health systems that are on the verge of collapse. This is the two tier Europe. We don't need more casino capitalism and dependence on the markets that are bankrupted Europe and created inequalities. We need a new social pact. We need a positive services, proper and fair taxes, help for SMEs and justice and transparency for all. Thank you.”
  EU competences on social policies
• “The committee presents today a plan for affordable housing. But let's be clear, the housing crisis is not a natural phenomena. It's the result of free market. The commission speaks about investments and offering. We're speaking about people. People who lose their houses. They've lost them to auctions. We're speaking about families that have been tossed onto the street by funds and banks, with the okay of the European Commission and all those people in Greece that were tricked by the banks with those Swiss franc loans. Silence on that particular front at that. These funds have been buying up homes. They've been increasing rent. They've turned homes into some sort of item for merchandise. It's a merchandise item. So what we need are protection of a first home, an end to all auctioning of houses, getting rid of speculation, getting rid of banking activities on the real estate market, and getting rid of Airbnb and Golden visas. So as long as the European Union protects, uh, golden visas and not individuals, we're lost. We have to put people on the forefront and protect their right to housing.”
  EU housing policy
• “I would like to clarify that whenever I've intervened, I've done that without supporting neither Putin nor Zelensky. I've never supported Trump. Von der Leyen. None of them. I'm interested in the European citizens. These are the ones I support and represent. The intention to use. The €200 billion of frozen Russian assets is an extremely dangerous choice, and I want this to be heard in here. I want you to know that before it is done. If we don't have an immunity for state funds, we will have funds that will be leaving Europe. The European system and the trust in Euro will be defeated. In order to avoid collapse, the ECB will have to print money. This will lead to inflation or overinflation in practice. Citizens with their salaries, with their pensions will have to pay. Europe cannot shoot its own feet. Thank you.”
  EU-Russia relations (from March 2022)
• “So we are here today to talk about a very important issue and. I need to protest. Dear sir, because a few moments ago we had Miss Latino Polo in here saying that, uh, what we are talking about is totally trivial compared to the war. I asked for a blue card because I wanted to ask her how many years she has worked in the real world outside of the European Parliament. Because, uh, the reality in Greece is that, uh, women are paid on average, 13% less than men. But of course, she doesn't care about that. So that means that for every €100 is paid, a woman is paid 86 to 87. Whereas in certain fields, uh, that, uh, uh, gap rises to 25%. And then of course, we see that mirrored in pensions as well. So we need collective Bargaining and agreements, equal pay for equal work and. Quotas for women.”
  Gender pay transparency
• “Thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen. Colleagues. I simply wanted to congratulate the rapporteur for a very, very serious effort to return dynamically to this particular issue of poverty. It ought to be on the political agenda. Recognition that millions of Europeans are unable to cover their basic needs housing, energy, health dignified work. This is this is a very important step forward. This particular report, it. Indeed. Indeed focuses on the important issues. The responsibility now is on the shoulders of the commission of the member states to have policies in place, which will help us to be able to deal with the causes of poverty class differences, insecurity and the increased cost of living. So a very important political message is being delivered right now that we will have to have national policies, European Union policies that will target truly target poverty. Thank you.”
  Minimum income harmonisation at EU level
• “(16:12:07 – 16:13:12): In the text on competitiveness of on the concerning parts, I've looked at that, but it's not really a strategy. Rather, it's a trans transformation into a geopolitical institution. But I'm sorry. The these ports are economic units. They're not necessarily part of the military, and you have simply left the employees and workers at ports completely outside of this discussion. These are the people who keep the ports alive. They what they need is flexibility. They when you're talking about automizing everything, well, that doesn't mean socializing this, rather a con continuation without workers councils and social dialogue. And that means that this you're you're you're ignoring the social policy aspect. Thank you. You see, we”
  EU regulation on worker representation in company decisions
• “Thank you. President. Behind the green transition, we have an industry which has. Destroyed the environment by building wind farms and solar farms for private interests in Greece. They often fail to obtain the necessary permits in areas protected by Natura 2000. This leads to the chopping down of forests. So as to build roads to access these wind farm installations. The environment should be at the service of human beings and animals rather than at the service of multinationals. Exemptions from. Regulation 2024. From 2019 should be introduced to protect vulnerable regions. In Greece. Whole regions in Attica, for example, should be subject to protection where the installation of wind farms would be banned. We should not have wind farms in forests.”
  EU policy on permitting for renewable energy projects
• “In Greece, we had a high percentage of owners living in their homes and the rate was almost 90%. Percent. And that's before Greece went bankrupt. And the memoranda of understanding with the memorandum of understanding, uh, they got rid of the protection of their first home. A lot of people lost their jobs as well. And this is connected to the question put by my colleague. So low income with, um, the fact that first homes were no longer protected led to this. And I think we need to make sure that first homes are protected. We have problems with auctions, the funds that just snatch people's houses away from them. And I think that if we were to do this, then it would lay the groundwork to implement what you said in practice. Let me say as well That the first speaker said that we can't, uh, get all the money from the public sector. Yes, of course. But then when you have a private players, it will be about profit. In Greece, for many decades, and I've said this before in the committee, we have a workers housing association. This was a self-funding organization. It was workers and employers that paid into that. In other words, it was their contributions that fed into that. And it was basically workers money. So the money, the contributions went into the fund and vulnerable groups got given housing. And for those who did have some income, a low income, they could get loans through the bank with collateral from the Greek public sector, and they also got subsidies for rent. And they also got money to cover construction. So in the cases of those houses that were already there. So every time we have this debate, I mention it because unfortunately, this organization was dismantled because the banks needed to be able to get their hands on houses. But I'm mentioning it here because housing is a pan-European issue, and we have to look at solutions that worked well for many decades. This solution worked very well. It meant people could buy homes and live in them, and maybe we could use these solutions and see if they work in other countries. Thank you.”
  Non-performing mortgages
• “So we are here today to talk about a very important issue and. I need to protest. Dear sir, because a few moments ago we had Miss Latino Polo in here saying that, uh, what we are talking about is totally trivial compared to the war. I asked for a blue card because I wanted to ask her how many years she has worked in the real world outside of the European Parliament. Because, uh, the reality in Greece is that, uh, women are paid on average, 13% less than men. But of course, she doesn't care about that. So that means that for every €100 is paid, a woman is paid 86 to 87. Whereas in certain fields, uh, that, uh, uh, gap rises to 25%. And then of course, we see that mirrored in pensions as well. So we need collective Bargaining and agreements, equal pay for equal work and. Quotas for women.”
  Gender pay transparency
• “We need to know what you think about the F-16s in Northern Cyprus. You haven't said anything about that. We've been spilling European blood in order to serve the West. The Peace of Westphalia. We need legal equality between nations. What have. All of this is still being observed in Ukraine, Gaza, Syria, Lebanon and Iran. Even Greenland or Panama, Canada and Cuba. They're all worthy of safety and democracy. Trump's. America and Israel, with their war criminal president or Prime Minister Netanyahu should face justice and you are siding with them. That's what you're guilty of. Miss von der Leyen, member states of the EU have to defend international law.”
  EU foreign policy approach
• “I agree with the need to have a European plan on cardiovascular health. We need to have a healthy life from an early age prevention education in schools. Limit junk foods and hyper processed food. And we need to have a horizontal raise of taxes on tobacco and vaping products. And we need also to sanction those that sell to underage people. We need to work together with the relevant scientific communities, because they are the ones that know the situation in each country. We need to talk to those people. If we are to have some successes in the health in each country, we need to trust doctors and not the tobacco industry. Also, stress in the workplace kills. We have 13 hour work days in Greece. This is a health risk. What about that? Thank you.”
  EU measures on lifestyle-related behaviours (smoking, drinking, eating, etc.)
• “Thank you very much. Dear colleagues, the Rodriguez report talks about abolishing controls. So there'll be a lot of scandals with money being wasted, such as the scandal that we saw in Greece. Around 80% of aid is going to about 20% of beneficiaries. The obligations for large farms will be reduced, but those for small farmers are still the same. This is all problematic. Farmers are struggling all of the against all of these imports coming in. The cost of energy are keeping up with phytosanitary standards. Um, none of this is imposed on those from the outside. So what is the case with, uh, animal diseases as well? In Greece, a whole herds are having to be cold without any aid. It is important to give money to farmers.”
  Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1)