Ana Catarina MENDES

Policy topics Ana Catarina MENDES is active on

What Ana Catarina MENDES has said (32)

• 2026-06-17 “Thank you very much, president. Commissioner, colleagues, Lithuania has been on the front line in this new forms of attacks, these hybrid attacks, and it's a systematic approach. It's aggression against the European space and against European democracies. Lithuania has had to deal with attempts to undermine its society. And the aim is particularly clear. It's trying to create division, trying to create fear, and trying to reduce trust in democratic institutions. That's why. Commissioner, we have seen this and we've been looking at in the Democracy Shield Committee, and it echoes what our colleague from Virginia said. It's extremely important that the center for Democratic Resilience has its own competencies. It has involvement of all member states and has the capacity not just to react to these threats, but to also focus on prevention. Prevention is absolutely vital to stop disinformation and so that there are no threats to our democracy. Thank you very much, speaker.”
  Foreign interference in Europe · Disinformation & online freedoms
• 2026-06-17 “Thank you very much, president, commissioner, colleagues. Lithuania has been on the front line in this new forms of attacks, these hybrid attacks. Now it's a systematic approach. It's aggression against the European space and against European democracies. Lithuania has had to fit deal with, attempts to undermine its society, and the aim is particularly clear. It's trying to create division, trying to create fear, and trying to reduce trust in democratic, institutions. That's why commissioner, we have seen this, and we've been looking at in the democracy shield committee. And, echoes what, our colleague from Geneva said. It's extremely important that the center for democratic resilience has its own competencies. It has involvement of all member states and has the capacity not just to react to these threats, but to also focus on prevention. Prevention is absolutely vital to stop disinformation and so that there are no threats to our democracies.”
  EU policy on integration and ethnic, racial and religious discrimination
• 2026-06-16 “Thank you, very much. Digital sovereignty is not just a European necessity. It is a strategic urgency for Europe. We are dependent on platforms that we do not control infrastructure that is not in Europe, that is developed outside of Europe. We are dependent on others to communicate, to innovate, to manage our data, and that means that we are really not sovereign. It costs us millions of euros. It calls into question our security, our data protection, our democratic autonomy. The S and D would like to see an ambitious strategy to strengthen technological sovereignty. I think it is important to be very clear. Sovereignty is not about creating new markets or subsidizing large companies. We need to invest in European capacity. We need to protect critical infrastructure and to ensure democratic control of technologies that affect the lives of millions of citizens. In order to move forward, we need to find our own autonomous resources. We believe in a digital tax, a tax on digital services. According to estimates from the European Commission, this could bring in €5,000,000,000 of revenue a year. So we need to tax large technology companies, to help promote our own technological, sovereignty.”
  EU digital & tech sovereignty
• 2026-06-16 “Thank you very much. Digital sovereignty is not just a European necessity. It is a strategic Urgency for Europe. We are dependent on platforms that we do not control, infrastructure that is not in Europe, that is developed outside of Europe. We are dependent on others to communicate, to innovate, to manage our data. And that means that we are really not sovereign. It costs us millions of euros. It calls into question our security, our data protection, our democratic autonomy. The S and D would like to see an ambitious strategy to strengthen technological sovereignty. I think it is important to be very clear sovereignty is not about creating new markets or subsidizing large companies. We need to invest in European capacity. We need to protect critical infrastructure and to ensure democratic control of technologies that affect the lives of millions of citizens. In order to move forward, we need to find our own autonomous resources. We believe in a digital tax, a tax on digital services. According to estimates from the European Commission, this could bring in €5 billion of revenue a year. So we need to tax large technology companies to help promote our own technological sovereignty.”
  EU digital & tech sovereignty
• 2026-03-11 “Answer given by Executive Vice-President Virkkunen on behalf of the European Commission 20.5.2026 Written question Safeguarding the integrity of the information space to support everyone in society to access reliable and trustworthy information and exercise their democratic rights is essential for democracy as outlined in the European Democracy Shield (EDS) Communication [1] . In this vein, the Commission has supported the development of technological tools that enable journalists, fact-checkers, civil society groups and all citizens to detect disinformation and foreign interference (FIMI) campaigns, including through support for consecutive projects under Horizon 2020 [2] and Horizon Europe [3] such as InVID [4] , WeVerify [5] and vera.ai [6] , with around EUR 34 million through EU Horizon Europe Cluster 4 funding. Results developed under vera.ai are being further taken up by some members of the consortium in the ongoing AI-CODE project, which ensures continuity of tools and expertise supported through earlier EU funding. Furthermore, the Commission also supports other relevant projects contributing to information integrity, such as European Narrative Observatory pilots, recurring funding to foster media literacy under Creative Europe, and support to the European Digital Media Observatory (EDMO) under Digital Europe [7] . As part of the EDS, the Commission has also launched new initiatives, such as a call for proposals for a common research framework [8] that will support technical infrastructure and research on information integrity. This is complemented by support for a European Network of Fact-Checkers. Europe must be better equipped to protect the integrity of its public debate and democratic processes. For that reason, under the new Multiannual Financial Framework, the Commission proposes to continue supporting innovation across the media sector. As part of the proposed new AgoraEU programme [9] , the Commission intends to step up support actions that promote and protect a free, viable and diverse EU information ecosystem. [1] Communication on the European Democracy Shield: https://commission.europa.eu/document/2539eb53-9485-4199-bfdc-97166893ff45_en. [2] https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-open-calls/horizon-2020_en. [3] https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-open-calls/horizon-europe_en. [4] https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/687786. [5] https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/825297. [6] https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/101070093. [7] Latest call: https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/portal/screen/opportunities/topic-details/DIGITAL-2026-BESTUSE-TECH-EDMO-09-HUBS?keywords=edmo&isExactMatch=true&status=31094501,31094502,31094503&order=DESC&pageNumber=1&pageSize=50&sortBy=relevance. [8] https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/portal/screen/opportunities/topic-details/DIGITAL-2026-BESTUSE-RSF-10-AWARENESS?order=DESC&pageNumber=1&pageSize=50&sortBy=startDate&isExactMatch=true&status=31094501,31094502,31094503&frameworkProgramme=43152860. [9] Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the ‘AgoraEU’ programme for the period 2028-2034, and repealing Regulations (EU) 2021/692 and (EU) 2021/818: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52025PC0550.”
  EU industrial funding · Promotion of open-source softwares · Disinformation & online freedoms
• 2026-02-04 “E-000430/2026 Answer given by Ms Lahbib on behalf of the European Commission From the onset, the Commission, through the Emergency Response Coordination Centre (ERCC) 1 , has been in continuous contact with the Portuguese civil protection authorities. Through the ERCC, Portugal has proactively activated the Copernicus Emergency Management Service Rapid Mapping 2 , which provided satellite mapping, supporting the response efforts on the ground. The Commission has actively used the European Flood Awareness System 3 and scientific multi-hazard early warning and monitoring services 4 , to anticipate necessary support. Any country can request assistance through the Union Civil Protection Mechanism, in the event of a disaster that exceeds its national capacities 5 . Portugal’s national authorities have not requested such assistance for Storm Kristin. 1 https://civil-protection-humanitarian-aid.ec.europa.eu/what/civil-protection/emergency-response-coordinationcentre-ercc_en. 2 https://mapping.emergency.copernicus.eu/. 3 It provides forecast and disseminates notifications for potential flooding. 4 Through the ARISTOTLE Scientific Partnership, a consortium of meteorological and geophysical institutes across Europe. 5 https://civil-protection-humanitarian-aid.ec.europa.eu/what/civil-protection/eu-civil-protection-mechanism_en.”
  Climate efforts
• 2026-01-21 “P-000224/2026 Answer given by Mr Brunner on behalf of the European Commission The Commission and Portugal have had exchanges with regard to the assessment of Portugal in the Annual Asylum and Migration Report 1 and the Commission implementing decision (EU) 2025/2323 2 . The Commission provided Portugal with clarifications on the methodology 3 and data used to identify Member States facing a significant migratory situation. The Commission and Member States, including Portugal, will continue to work together to update the data availability throughout the next months. Portugal did not vote against but rather abstained regarding the Council implementing decision (EU) 2025/2652 4 , which established the solidarity pool for 2026. The next annual Council implementing decision establishing the solidarity pool for 2027 will be adopted before the end of 2026. 1 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council: The European Annual Asylum and Migration Report (2025), COM(2025) 795 final, https://eurlex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:f449c5d6-bf11-11f0-a612-01aa75ed71a1.0001.02/DOC_1&format=PDF. 2 Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2025/2323 of 11 November 2025 pursuant to Article 11 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1351 of the European Parliament and of the Council, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:L_202502323. 3 Commission Staff Working Document, Methodology for the purposes of Commission implementing decision pursuant to Article 11 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1351 of the European Parliament and of the Council, SWD(2025) 792 final, https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/document/download/80637837-e569-4896-98f22e8b92abf66e_en?filename=Methodology_en.pdf. 4 Council implementing decision (EU) 2025/2642 of 19 December 2025 on the establishment of the Annual Solidarity Pool for 2026, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:L_202502642.”
  Asylum & border control
• 2025-10-22 “E-004164/2025 Answer given by Mr Brunner on behalf of the European Commission On 11 November 2025, the Commission adopted the European Annual Asylum and Migration Report 1 , the Commission implementing decision on determining Member States under migratory pressure, at risk of migratory pressure or facing a significant migratory situation 2 , as well as the Commission proposal for a Council implementing act establishing the Annual Solidarity Pool 3 . Launching the first annual migration management cycle is a very important step in the implementation of the Pact on Migration and Asylum 4 and a priority for the Commission. Given that this is the first time the Commission is launching the annual migration management cycle in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2024/1351 5 and that the implementation of that cycle will apply as of mid-2026, when Regulation (EU) 2024/1351 will start applying in full, the Commission took the time needed to properly calibrate all the necessary aspects to finalise the adoption of those acts. This postponement has no impact on when the Pact on Migration and Asylum will become fully applicable, as of mid-2026. The Commission is working closely with Member States to ensure their readiness to apply the Pact on Migration and Asylum as of mid-2026. 1 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council: The European Annual Asylum and Migration Report (2025), COM(2025) 795 final, https://eurlex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:f449c5d6-bf11-11f0-a612-01aa75ed71a1.0001.02/DOC_1&format=PDF. 2 Commission Implementing Decision (EU) of 11.11.2025 pursuant to Article 11 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1351 of the European Parliament and of the Council, C(2025) 7099 final, https://homeaffairs.ec.europa.eu/document/download/a7eb5da4-ed82-4431-925b-0d71eaff93c6_en?filename=CommissionImplementing-Decision-pursuant-to-Article-11-of-Regulation-EU-2024-1351_en.pdf. 3 This document is restricted until the adoption of the Council implementing act referred to in Article 57 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1351, as set out in Article 12(6) of that Regulation. The document was transmitted to the European Parliament. 4 https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/migration-and-asylum/pact-migration-and-asylum_en. 5 Regulation (EU) 2024/1351 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 May 2024 on asylum and migration management, amending Regulations (EU) 2021/1147 and (EU) 2021/1060 and repealing Regulation (EU) No 604/2013, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:L_202401351.”
  Asylum & border control
• 2025-10-01 “E-003823/2025 Answer given by Mr McGrath on behalf of the European Commission As announced by the President of the Commission in her State of the Union address and detailed in the recently presented European Democracy Shield 1 , the European Centre for Democratic Resilience (‘the Centre’) will facilitate information sharing and support operational cooperation and capacity building to withstand evolving common threats, in particular foreign information manipulation and interference (FIMI) and disinformation. Its aim will be to improve situational awareness and the capacity to anticipate and detect threats, develop a robust and coordinated early warning system and support rapid response capacity. It will also support the raising of awareness to prepare and empower societies and institutions, making them more resilient to information manipulation and disinformation. Its work will contribute to consolidating the EU’s whole-of-society approach to strengthen preparedness, increase awareness and build democratic resilience. To support better cooperation and coordination at EU level, the Centre will bring together expertise and capacities across Member States, EU candidate countries and potential candidates, and EU institutions, bodies, offices and agencies, including the European External Action Service (EEAS), as relevant. The Centre will primarily work as a dedicated hub for exchange and operational cooperation. A Stakeholder Platform for independent noninstitutional stakeholders will be established to enable contributions from a broad set of relevant stakeholders and communities and to feed these contributions into the work of the Centre. The functioning of the Centre will be supported from existing resources under this MultiAnnual Financial Framework. The Commissioner for Democracy, Justice, the Rule of Law and Consumer Protection will hold political responsibility for this Centre. The Commission will regularly update the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation of the European Democracy Shield. 1 Communication on the European Democracy Shield, JOIN(2025) 791 final, 12 November 2025: https://commission.europa.eu/document/2539eb53-9485-4199-bfdc-97166893ff45_en”
  Disinformation & online freedoms · EU engagement with civil society
• 2025-04-24 “E-001646/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Virkkunen on behalf of the European Commission The Commission strongly condemns the dissemination of illegal content, particularly if it violates fundamental rights and targets women. The Digital Services Act (DSA) 1 imposes new obligations on providers of intermediary services to guarantee a safe online environment. In practice providers of intermediary services need to put in place an easy-to-use reporting tool for illegal content on the platform, collaborate with competent authorities upon the receipt of orders to remove illegal content or provide information, on the basis of other applicable EU or national law. In addition, the DSA lays down enhanced due diligence obligations on providers of very large online platforms (VLOPs) and very large online search engines (VLOSEs). These providers are required to assess and mitigate systemic risks stemming from their services and related systems, including the dissemination of illegal content risks for the exercise of fundamental rights, gender-based violence and person’s physical and mental well-being. Mitigation measures may include the automated detection and removal of illegal content. Due to suspicions of non-compliance with provisions related to illegal content and the protection of minors, the Commission is formally investigating X, 2 Facebook, Instagram 3 , four adult-content platforms 4 and TikTok. 5 In each Member State, the Digital Services Coordinators (DSCs) 6 are responsible to enforce and supervise compliance with the DSA by providers of intermediary services whose main establishment is located in that Member State and are not designated VLOPs/VLOSEs. In this instance, the designated DSC in Portugal, i.e. Autoridade Nacional de Comunicações (ANACOM), may have additional information. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=LEGISSUM:4625430. 2 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_23_6709. 3 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_24_2373 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_24_2664. 4 https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/news/commission-opens-investigations-safeguard-minors-pornographiccontent-under-digital-services-act. 5 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_24_926. 6 https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/dsa-dscs#1720699867912-1.”
  Safety features & content control for child protection online · Digital platforms liability for harmful and illegal content
• “We have different models. Chinese models that are being used by Europeans. So what we're talking about here really are economic issues, but we're also talking about how we can put across narratives, focus on topics. Push person subjects to the fore. It's about exerting influence. And it can have an impact on information ecosystems, I'd like to talk about three vulnerabilities. First of all. Setting function criteria. It's not always transparent. There's a policy that underpins it. The public debate is always about censorship, but are things that are far more subtle than that that affect public opinion. And some of the international community is busy with the future risks of AI, but we shouldn't underestimate the existing risks. We have this AI and the Chinese models. What does NATO think of those? Do they need to be analysed in technical terms or the strategic aspect. And what can NATO do together with the EU to promote transparency and democratic democratic accountability when AI is used in political contexts? Thank you.”
  Foreign interference in Europe
• “We have different models. Chinese models that are being used by Europeans. So what we're talking about here really are economic issues, but we're also talking about how we can put across narratives, focus on topics. Push person subjects to the fore. It's about exerting influence. And it can have an impact on information ecosystems, I'd like to talk about three vulnerabilities. First of all. Setting function criteria. It's not always transparent. There's a policy that underpins it. The public debate is always about censorship, but are things that are far more subtle than that that affect public opinion. And some of the international community is busy with the future risks of AI, but we shouldn't underestimate the existing risks. We have this AI and the Chinese models. What does NATO think of those? Do they need to be analysed in technical terms or the strategic aspect. And what can NATO do together with the EU to promote transparency and democratic democratic accountability when AI is used in political contexts? Thank you.”
  Artificial Intelligence for military purposes
• “Colleagues, the commission's mandate is strong, is clear. A strong Europe that defends its own values and respects the role of the Parliament. The first 100 days have raised some concerns about their working method, including the European platform. We have the migration package where migration is mixed up with security, and we're also concerned about the simplification package. You want to cut red tape in Europe, but we also see deregulation which will Um, perhaps in danger social and environmental gains that we've made. You also want to encourage, uh, policies that I find concerning. I'm concerned about the delay in the implementation of the RRF in Portugal. This has an effect on people's lives. We've recently seen huge geopolitical changes, but we can't forget cohesion policy.”
  Von der Leyen
• “Thank you very much. Now, Miss Mendes, you have one minute. Thank you very much, president. Commissioner, colleagues, faced with these threats and strategic issues, defence in Europe has to be stronger. And there are two things from my perspective, we need to remove those barriers which continue to fragment our defence market and also invest in common products projects which will reinforce our capabilities. European industry is particularly fragmented. There are lots of administrative barriers, rules and different national approaches that limit cooperation and increase costs. A single defence market would be more efficient, it would be more innovative and make better use of public resources. But colleagues. Removing barriers is not enough. The commissioner. We need European projects which are ambitious, which help us to develop common strategic capabilities. We need to strengthen our industrial and technological base by focusing on innovation, know how, creating jobs, more cooperation because we need to do better. Thank you very much. Now, miss ya for one minute.”
  EU competences on defence
• “The lack of a binding legal framework for the response that Europe must have for discrimination. This is leaving millions of people who have unequal levels of protection based on the member state they live in. And this is why we have this proposal for a directive. This is about sending out a very strong political message if we don't actually adopt this directive. It shows that we are not willing or able to defend the values in which the European Union is based. Discrimination is going up. Citizens trust in the European Union is being put to the test for this reason. The Equal Treatment Directive is absolutely essential. Adopting this directive means showing we have a Europe. That means that fundamental rights do not change depending on where you are. In 2009, a decision was taken. We've had, um, but we've seen significant delays since then. The parliament has been fighting. Civil society has been fighting. But the deadlock is in the council. For this reason, ladies and gentlemen, we cannot simply continue saying to victims that they must wait. Equality needs to be all encompassing, and we need to see consistency in political action and in terms of respect for the values that the European Union defends. For this reason, this struggle is not non-negotiable, and we will continue fighting to defend all of those people who are being discriminated against, whatever type it is.”
  EU policy on integration and ethnic, racial and religious discrimination
• “Thank you very much, president. Commissioner, colleagues, faced with the threats and strategic issues, defence in Europe has to be stronger. And there are two things. From my perspective, we need to remove those barriers which continue to fragment our defence market and also invest in common products projects which will reinforce our capabilities. European industry is particularly fragmented. There are lots of administrative barriers, rules and different national approaches that limit cooperation and increase costs. A single defence market would be more efficient, it would be more innovative and make better use of public resources. But colleagues. Removing barriers is not enough. The commissioner. We need European projects which are ambitious, which help us to develop common strategic capabilities. We need to strengthen our industrial and technological base by focusing on innovation, know how, creating jobs, more cooperation because we need to do better.”
  EU competences on defence
• “(15:52:50 – 15:55:03): thank you very much, chairman, and thank you very much for putting this agenda this agenda item on. Thank you very much, commissioner, for being president. The choices to be made in implementation are national choices. That's what you said, commissioner. It's a national choice. And I wanted to remind, you of this because when I was the responsible minister in Portugal, I negotiated on this package. I felt it was balanced on many points, but the implementation side was not balanced. So, commissioner, you should be, working clearly on fundamental rights as enshrined in the treaties, and we want to make some proposals to you that are very specific. Today, in Portugal, there's a strike of the migration agency workers. It seems that they are working in a climate of complete disorganization, where they need the human and technological resources available for proper screening and registration and support for migrants. Last week, Portugal gave you the precise numbers for migration and the impact on the employment market. €16,000,000,000 was the total that foreigners contribute to sustaining social security in my country. So there are a lot of migrants who are now leaving because of the way the migration pact is being implemented, because it is not a balanced approach, but a restrictive approach. Commissioner, my question is this, what criteria should we consider would, validate success for the pact? Is it reducing irregular migration by increasing returns or improving the conditions for integration? Well, it's international day of the child today, so maybe we should be thinking carefully and ensure that the, returns regulation does not penalize children by sending them back without their parents in bad conditions.”
  Asylum & border control
• “We had elections in my native Portugal in the in past days and it was scary. If you look at the online platforms, online platforms really interfered with disinformation during the campaign. So we need to have a more robust framework to tackle that. So if we're going to tackle misinformation, then we need to invest in, uh, in literacy, media literacy, digital literacy. But we also need to have a good source of information. We need to have a fund, uh, Which would, uh, pay European fact checkers. And this would ensure that we have a professional fact checkers if they're paid. We also need to really fight back against hybrid warfare and cyber warfare, and we need to have robust support for the media while supporting the pluralism of the media. One final note before my time runs out. We must not forget that protecting critical infrastructure from physical and cyber attacks requires European funding. In this committee, we must turn to the Commission and we must say to the commission, look, if you're going to protect democracy, then you have to put your money where your mouth is. We really need money if we're going to deal with the warfare that is at our feet. Thank you.”
  Disinformation & online freedoms
• “Thank you. I'd like to thank you for coming here to our committee. We're all working on protecting democracy from attacks from various quarters. I have three questions after your introductory remarks. First of all, the center. There has been a report and there have been amendments. There are proposals for improvement. How will. You guarantee political neutrality and funding? Particularly with with a view to FEMA and then accountability and transparency and measuring the efficiency of that center? How is that going to be done? There must be no overlapping. We don't want to see work being done twice. And then finally, interaction with the digital platform. Another platform is being created. And my question. Is. How that is going to be done with a view to the legislative act. Thank you.”
  Foreign interference in Europe
• “Thank you very much, president. Yes. In this Parliament, it's important when we talk about competitiveness and strategic autonomy, that we look at this particular subject in some detail. We need to have a single market that is not fragmented, that doesn't, uh, waste all the talent that's available. We have a single market that's extremely important. It's important for the competitiveness of our economy. It's important to allow innovative companies to be given strategic priority for the single market. But it's absolutely essential that this harmonisation that we're requesting here, that's been recommended by the rapporteur that this harmonisation be brought about on European territory, but not to the detriment of relocation. So I think we need to make sure there are guarantees of rights of employees. We want to be more digital and more innovative. We need a robust economy in Europe. We need to have the digital side of things as well. But we also need to be able to trust on it to have European values.”
  EU Single Market harmonisation
• “Mr. president, Commissioner. Colleagues, I think if you look at recent elections in some member states and you look at national security strategies emerging from Trump's US right now, it is clear that we have direct threats to our democracies and electoral processes. There are algorithms present in the public debate now which are not at all neutral. They're actually favouring false and fake content. It's clickbait and it's intended for profit and organised crime. Gangs and foreign agents are behind this. We saw that in Romania, Czech Republic, we see it on our own platforms every day, the platforms we use. Faced with this, the commission has no time to lose. The instruments are there. The DSA is there and we need to ensure that we're not complacent. I'm thinking particularly of articles 34 and 35. They have to be applied. We don't have a lack of legal instruments. Dear colleagues, what we have is a lack of a will to act clearly with no subterfuge. Come straight out and say these are the responsibilities we have. This damage is being caused right now, and it is not only about the damage being caused. Right now, we're compromising the future of people who will not live under the same freedoms that we've enjoyed. And this is all done by people who are putting profit first, trying to create democratic chaos without any accountability. We need prevention in the EU. We need a strong, ambitious European democracy shield. We need to assess risks, protect elections, protect our digital space and ensure that anti-democratic forces cannot get their hands on them in the SD. We welcome the Commission's goodwill here. We welcome the proposals on the Democracy Shield, but it has to be more ambitious. We need more action and also we need to be fearless. This is a corrosion of our democracy. Let's not be scared to say, look, they're attacking us. They're attacking the heart of our democracy. So let's go for it. Let's protect our democracies.”
  Disinformation & online freedoms
• “Thank you, Mr. Olivera. As I just said, this is a program with clear intentions with without specific proposals. I said that, but once again, we need a program that is serious and practical, balanced when it comes to building housing. It isn't just a problem for our states. And we have this crisis in Portugal on a big scale. 35% of housing has been removed. There's a lot of, um, imbalances. In 2022, there were plans for affordable housing. And we need that again. And it needs to be serious for all Member States.”
  EU housing policy
• “Madam president. Thank you very much, Madam Chair, and thank you very much to our speakers. It's been a very interesting morning indeed, although rather worrying when it comes to working out what to do when faced with this huge challenge. In the Industrial Revolution, we had the challenge of regulating the employment market and giving workers their right. Now, with the digital revolution, our challenge is how can we place AI at the service of our democracies? There are plenty of risks which have been talked about this morning, and I think that the committee has been dealing with a lot of these subjects. I don't have too many points to make, but I have three questions. First of all, I have been spoken about not just in terms of manipulation of information, but how can we respond to these risks? How can we respond to the risks of artificial intelligence? Second question. This is a very broad legal scope. There was legislation passed in the last parliamentary term. How can we use this legislation to combat the threat to democratic systems? And how can artificial intelligence be an opportunity for our democracies? Finally, as my colleague said a few minutes ago, I come from a different generation. But the new generation is very much attached to digital tools. Is digital literacy enough? Is there any way to ensure that our young people can trust and have confidence in democratic institutions? And how can I actually reinforce that democracy for our younger generation?”
  Artificial Intelligence
• “(17:29:19 – 17:33:55): Thank you, chairman. Well, I'd like to thank everyone for the comments they've made, so colleagues and also the commission. And I'd also like to welcome the work that we've done together with the commission to try and listen to all points of view and understand what we can do with this fund, which hasn't actually been increased significantly since the last MFF in spite of the fact that we have many problems to resolve in Europe, also with regard to integration. Integration and border protection don't have to be in opposition, I don't think. Integration is important for those who come to Europe. They need measures to ensure that they're made welcome and integrated into our societies. In the NFF, the commission presented a proposal which significantly increases funding for internal affairs and among those for border protection. So I really can't accept the argument that we're causing problems when it comes to protecting our borders because, actually, those agencies whose task is to protect our borders have got more money this time. There's money for the implementation of the migration pact as well. And human resources and technological resources, of course, there need to be available to manage and ensure that our our borders and ensure that they're secure. But that doesn't mean that we shouldn't look at this instrument too. And this instrument is important. I mean, the fact is that the fund, the AMIF, is not there to protect borders or to deal with crime or whatever. It's there to ensure that local authorities and member states can fund programs to integrate people. And when we talk about integration, we're talking about language lessons. So learning the language, we're talking about including people in the labor market, We're ensuring that people have access to public services and also that they have access to housing. So practical things. We're not talking about preventing vulnerable people from accessing benefits, whether they're asylum seekers or migrants. And to conclude, I wanted to say just a couple of things. I'd like to draw colleagues' attention to the fact that restrictive policies on migration means an exponential increase in illegal migration and, therefore, human trafficking and organized crime. Colleagues might might not wanna see that, but that's something that has is important, and we have to work on that. And then a final thing. This is something that's come up in shadows meetings during discussions. So I'd say this to colleagues. Now the European Union was built on diversity, and it's good that we have this diversity, and we will certainly disagree on migration policy. But I would like to give 1 figure. It's not true that the vast majority of foreign citizens who come to Europe live off benefits. And let me give you the example of my country in Portugal during the last 10 years, the contribution of foreign citizens to social security, so to social protection, was €16,000,000,000. We can look at the benefits provided. And if you look at the figure, it's just onefive of the contribution that they made. So they're making a disproportionate contribution, and that's what I draw your attention to. We shouldn't get our facts wrong here. So thank you, chairman. Thank you for your patience. This draft law is something that will ensure the integration of people into Europe and, in particular, asylum seekers. These are vulnerable people. Thank you.”
  Asylum & border control
• “Thank you. President. Commissioner. Dear colleagues, as we present the European Commission's work programme, we're hoping to strengthen democracy and trust in our institutions. And I hope that the president of the European Commission should have respect for the most democratic institution of the European Union, which is the European Parliament. And discussing this document, this work programme today here also means showing respect for democracy at a moment where we all feel that our democracies, both for member states and for Europe. The European project as a whole is in crisis and under attack. And when we hear the Commissioner speak very quickly over all the points, while not speaking deeply about any of them, we felt that competitiveness is key. But, Commissioner, there is no competitiveness. Without democracy. There is no competitiveness without a strong rule of law that independently, uh, has independent judiciary and can transparently follow all procedures. There is no competitiveness if there is no equal opportunity for all. There is no competitiveness if we don't have the ability for us to choose who will lead this, um, European space, there is no competitiveness if women in the working world are not treated the same as men. There is no democracy nor competitiveness if we're not able to look at the green transition and the digital transition with the social justice it requires. And this is why I'll finish, chair, that the competitiveness and democracy have to go hand in hand and institutions require respect. We deserve respect by having president von der Leyen here.”
  EU Supervision of the Rule of Law
• “Thank you very much. President. Madam Commissioner. Colleagues, this is a crucial debate. It's an absolutely fundamental debate. The European Union was built on fundamental values such as human dignity, respect for human rights and non-discrimination. But despite these commitments, we are at a very concerning juncture. People are discriminated against because of their beliefs, their creed, their sexual orientation and their religion. And what's important to remember at this time is the proposal for a horizontal anti-discrimination directive from the European Commission. 17 years have gone by and it's been there's been deadlock in the Council for all that time. I'd like to thank the Danish presidency for putting this debate as a priority, as well as putting the adoption of the directive on the agenda, even though we haven't managed to do that. I'd like to thank Madam Commissioner for all of the work that she has done as well. Usually this is called a horizontal directive and it has ambitious goals. That's to protect against discrimination beyond employment, ensuring equal treatment, social protection, healthcare, education and housing. It's about fighting discrimination where there could be motive for discrimination. Discrimination, for example racial or ethnic origin, discrimination against age, religion, sexual orientation outside of the workplace and this flouting of rights is incompatible with the fundamental values of the European Union. The aim of this directive is fundamental, especially at a time when Europe in Europe we are seeing the normalisation of social exclusion, the political weaponization of difference.”
  EU policy on integration and ethnic, racial and religious discrimination
• “Thank you madam president I will speak in Portuguese, if you don't mind. I'd like to start by congratulating the rapporteur for the excellent work that he's done on this report. It is a very important contribution, as he's already said, to our defence policies and the defence of Europe up to 2030. I have got just a few comments or questions to make. First. We're seeing in the war of Ukraine, and we're seeing the pressure that Russia exerts on Ukraine. It's all very clear. Just yesterday, the national president or the speaker of the Ukrainian House died in an attack. So we need to have an explicit reference to the situation in Ukraine and the defense of Ukraine, that they need to be defended because we need to defend democratic spaces as we defend Europe. Second comment I would like to have a more holistic vision of defense reflected here. Defending Europe isn't just a question of having conventional military defense strategies. We also need to respond to hybrid threats, cyber attacks and socioeconomic manipulation because our democracies also depend on this. And so we need to ensure this in order to protect our democracies. A couple more comments from me. One on the Multiannual Financial Framework, it would seem that we really need to ensure that we are able to respond in monetary terms to Europe's defence needs, and so we need to have the financial instruments in place that are more in line with our investment needs, more productive and invest in productive investments are not just private investments, they can also be public investments. And my final comment I think it's very important that we think about innovation. The financial instruments today are not just about innovations in the forms of drone or drone development or security development. There's a lot more to that. So we need to think about financing programmes of other types that are also able to respond in good time, because this is so urgent. So this report is an important contribution to our conversation about this. And there will be amendments and we will ensure that this reflects Europe's needs. Thank you.”
  Defence spending
• “Well, the same was the case in the Portuguese parliament. Uh, I can tell you this. I fully endorse the Competitiveness Compass as tabled by the Commission, since it focuses on the regulation. We refer to this just now. Commissioner, this regulation. It's what it is. I'm in favor of streamlining. I think this deregulation is back pedaling, and it's undoing what we've already achieved. Uh, the far what the far right is saying here is really endangering the Green Deal in Europe.”
  Overall simplification of regulation in the EU
• “And I would like to put out a call. This is a compromise of ours. The rapporteur, I think, is on the same wavelength. We don't need to set up a whole new aqui. What we need is to apply the legislation that's recently been approved in the EP, which member states have the obligation to implement. And that's why I would like to put out a call once again for us to strengthen the current instruments so that we can protect ourselves not only in the face of manipulation of information, but to protect journalists, civil society in the work that they do. And all of that. Is to do with strengthening democracy. And finally, a couple of things, talking about inclusivity as we do in this committee. And that's in the report, the importance of candidate countries, which will be part of defense and protection of democracy and resilience. Let's not duplicate institutions that have specific missions. So that member states aren't just taking part on a voluntary basis, but we can so that we can fund resilience to to fight against one of the biggest dangers to democracy, which is manipulation of information, disinformation. And we're constantly up against this and it eats away at us. And the risk is that we'll be no more. We need to keep the European project afoot. Thanks to our rapporteur once again and for your patience during the negotiations.”
  Disinformation & online freedoms
• “(17:06:02 – 17:06:06): Thank you, mister president. I will speak in Portuguese. I'd like to start by thanking all of the colleagues, all of the technical teams behind them and the secretariat for the committee for all of the work that we've been able to do at this preliminary phase of the work. We're working on a regulation that we hope is going to be capable of responding to the challenges of foreign citizens who need to be integrated in the European space. Now it's a technical debate, no doubt about that, but it is also a very political 1. Now different political groups have different ways of seeing the integration of foreigners in Europe. I'm profoundly convinced, Chair, that the choices that we're making today and in the coming years will determine an integration policy that is more or less an example of solidarity. So the choices that we make have to be to give a good reception and good integration of foreigners. And I think that we can build upon the debate we've just had to try and build a more cohesive society. So I am positive to the proposal from the commission on maintaining an instrument financing asylum migration and integration policies in the period 2028 to 2034, even though it's not an independent fund. Now I'd like to focus on 5 major modifications that I'm putting forward in the draft report. 1st of all, it's a question of language. Now language is not just a semantic issue. It's a very important part of the way that we decide to deal with these issues. Words like weaponization have been removed. We've made an effort to include integration in the objectives that are listed. We've removed formulations which dehumanize migrants or reduce migration simply to as a kind of prevention and control issue. That's not the way that the majority in this house see it. So language is an essential point in this report. Secondly, in terms of the objectives, the commission put to the primary objective as return in this regulation. We go back to the previous objectives in the previous regulation, where integration is the 1st objective. And we also reintroduced the Annex, which clearly identifies the actions which are eligible for funding in line with the practice that's currently in place. As I see it, we've ensured that we've got a coherent division of responsibilities between the Schengen Borders and Visas instrument and the AMIF. Financial priorities, this is not just a technical issue. It's a political issue. Money means political decisions, choices. So finance needs to be stable and predictable so that the integration objectives can be implemented. So for that, I would like to see at least 20% for integration actions, 20% for implementing the European common asylum system, that's to say, implementing the migration pact, at least 5% for actions implemented by local and regional authorities. That's a request from the committee of the regions. They have focused a lot on the need for local and regional authorities to implement all of this. And 5%, just 5% for 3rd countries because the priority is for integration in Europe. 4th priority is co financing. If the commission makes a change here, which is very difficult when it comes to co financing, it's going to be difficult elsewhere. But in this particular field, the co financing levels are insufficient for many civil society organizations and also for local authorities. So 80% should be the co financing rate for AMIF projects and 90% should be for integration projects. That, I think, is more coherent. And why would this make the proposal better? Well, of course, we're going to have to discuss this with the shadow rapporteur, civil society, and various foundations. I think that we would make the instrument more transparent and predictable if we reintroduce the annex with the list of eligible actions. It will be more coherent if we keep the instrument promoting and financing the internal dimension of migration and the importance of integration. And it's more effective because clear and transparent rules respond to the needs of member states, local authorities, and civil society. Now I talked about more transparency, and that's why we're making these proposals because we need to clearly identify what are the eligible actions for financing besides what exists today. And that's why this is a very fragile regulation. It's the up to the European Parliament to impose transparency in this regulation. And I'd like to thank you for the extra minute of speaking time you gave me, chair. Thank you.”
  EU policy on integration and ethnic, racial and religious discrimination
• “Thank you, Madam president. Minister. Commissioner. Colleagues. Our democracy is under attack. Undoubtedly. And we're seeing a worrying grow in hybrid growth, in hybrid attacks on the EU. Alarming levels of disinformation in member states, citizens trust is undermined and citizens stop believing. Official sources and stop believing. There are answers to their problems, so it's absolutely vital for the European Commission to act. The Commission president gave a good speech about the need to defend democracy today. But I have two key questions, Commissioner. You can't have democracy without a strong rule of law and scrupulous respect for the rule of law. What is the state of play in terms of monitoring recommendations of the rule of law? Report on Member States so that we can evaluate the health of our democracies? Second question, Commissioner, how can we work together? Parliament and commission to defend democracy so that we can make our institutions stronger and more deserving of the trust of citizens.”
  EU Supervision of the Rule of Law
• “Thank you. I would like to start thanking Thomas Torbay for a great piece of work and for trying to reach an agreement. And also, I would like to point out, I would like to pass on a message from our colleague. On the one hand, we've got the we've got compromise because the number of amendments shows the degree of compromise there is in the Parliament in terms of protecting democracy. But being aware of the risks we're up against and the need to call upon the Commission to be more ambitious still in protecting our democracy. Bearing in mind what we're aiming for, we've just seen this in AI, I and new technologies. And as a I in these technologies are undermining our democracy. We need to change things so that democracy is safeguarded. And that's why these amendments and these compromises. Are to do with providing information about threats external to the EU, to our democracies. But within the EU too, we have threats afoot in member states and we need to deal with them. We need to see that some member states use democracy to attack democracy itself and to promote a divide within institutions, and that's why we've launched amendments that do that. At the same time, the EU, in the face of internal and external threats needs to be strategically autonomous. We need to finally spend money on promoting our technology. Technological autonomy so that we can resist these threats and respond properly, because that will make us more independent, as opposed to being dependent on other tech firms, particularly American ones, but also Chinese ones.”
  EU digital & tech sovereignty