Hélder SOUSA SILVA

Policy topics Hélder SOUSA SILVA is active on

What Hélder SOUSA SILVA has said (47)

• 2026-02-06 “E-000481/2026 E-000524/2026 Answer given by Mr Kubilius on behalf of the European Commission Pursuant to Articles 34(2) of the Space Programme Regulation 1 and 30(3) of the Secure Connectivity Regulation 2 , the Commission determines General Security Requirements (GSR) for all its space systems to address current and future threats upon them, such as replay and jamming/spoofing attacks. The GSR are EU classified information and are based on a security risk assessment which systematically analyses relevant risks considering the geopolitical context and the capabilities of state actors. The Commission relies on the Security Accreditation Board (SAB), an independent body composed of EU Member State representatives, established by Article 36 of the Space Programme Regulation, to provide security accreditation of EU space infrastructures before their deployment and operations by auditing all components and procedures to ensure full respect of the security requirements contained in the respective GSR. Moreover, risks linked to the supply chain of EU space systems are limited through eligibility and participation conditions defined in Article 24 of the Space Programme Regulation and Article 22 of the Secure Connectivity Regulation. Consequently, thanks to their security design, even if some of the targeted satellites host payloads for the EU space programme no effect is identified. European commercial sector satellites may be more exposed to interference or malicious activities. Therefore, the Commission proposal for an EU Space Act 3 in June 2025 aims to enhance the resilience of commercial and governmental satellites. Furthermore, the Council Decision on the security of systems and services deployed, operated and used under the Space Programme 4 lays down operational provisions to respond to threats upon need. 1 OJ L 170, 12.5.2021, pp. 69–148, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/696/oj. 2 OJ L 79, 17.3.2023, pp. 1–39, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/588/oj. 3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52025PC0335. 4 OJ L 170, 12.5.2021, pp. 178–182, ELI: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dec/2021/698/oj/eng.”
  EU competences on space policy
• 2024-11-07 “P-002464/2024 Answer given by President von der Leyen on behalf of the European Commission Cooperation with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is a key priority for the new Commission and the recently announced EU-NATO High Level Task Force is a recognition at the highest political level of the importance to further reinforce the existing EU-NATO cooperation. This Task Force will not be a decision-making body, but a forum to discuss strategic issues and steer the work on the implementation of the Joint Declarations of EU-NATO cooperation. Elements of EU’s defence and security policy falling within the competence of the Commission will be discussed with the European Parliament as part of the ordinary legislative procedure. Further, in line with the Commissioner for Defence’s Mission Letter and his commitment in the confirmation process, he will organise regular dialogues with the relevant European Parliament committees on defence matters. The High Representative/Vice-President, senior officials of the European External Action Service as well as Commission officials as appropriate will continue to update regularly the European Parliament on issues related to security and defence, including the Common Security and Defence Policy as well as the state of play of EU’s strategic partnership with NATO.”
  Relations with NATO · EU competences on defence
• “Furthermore, this will hamper oversight and predictability for final beneficiaries. It also reduces the budgetary authority ability to steer accurately policy priorities in the annual budget procedure. We recommended fixing Indicative sub envelopes in the basic act to increase predictability, transparency and accountability. Thirdly, in our budgetary assessment, we recognize that flexibility is an important feature of the Commission proposal and the necessity for the research and innovation program. There is also the need to ensure predictable and sufficient annual resources for Horizon Europe programme, considering the long term nature of the financing financed projects. A proper balance between predictability and flexibility could be achieved by setting indicative budgetary allocation for each item of the programme. This would ensure predictability for final beneficiaries without depriving the budgetary authority of its prerogatives. Fourth, in the last point, I propose that all research decommitments should be fully reused to help strengthen the Union's research capability without artificially capping the amounts. Furthermore, in my proposal. The Reflows from financial instruments funded by Horizon Europe programme should stay available within this programme. Finally, I would like to thank the shadows, the Secretariat and the assistants, and especially the rapporteur, Christian Ehler, for their precious support during this budgetary assessment. Thank you so much.”
  EU research funding
• “Thank you. Chair. Dear speakers, dear colleagues, it is really a pleasure to be here and to hear you concerning the different experiences related with the I. In my view, the artificial intelligence should not be seen as a threat, but a tool. And I see a lot of times used to say that it looks like a coin has two faces, the good face and the bad face. It's my approach. Our role is to ensure that this tool serves creators rather than replacing them. And it is important. Unfortunately, many authors and performers are forced to accept the total transfer of rights for fixed amounts defined at an early stage when it is still impossible to know the true potential of the work. European legislation already provides the transparency, proportional remuneration and adjustment mechanisms, but the concrete application is uneven, fragile and sometimes symbolic. So I will start by asking Professor Alexandra Bensimon, how can we ensure that the copyright contracts are more balanced, limiting transfers to what is necessary and ensuring that creators benefit from the success of their own works? And the second, second part of my first question is, uh, should we move towards American law when authors receive their rights at the time of the creation and then forget them? It's it's a question. The second one would it's addressed to Mr. Bjorn Ulvaeus. It's a really pleasure for me to be here and to hear you, um, as a creator and president of Cisac, who has been reflecting on the cultural impact of artificial Intelligence, I ask, in this new digital ecosystem where artificial intelligence is beginning to play a role, creation itself. What path do you see for authors not to not only adapt, but also to strengthen themselves? How can I be not an obstacle, but an opportunity to give creators back their role and back their autonomy? Because it's really necessary to keep the autonomy for creators. Thank you so much.”
  Artificial Intelligence
• “President, Commissioner, Minister, colleagues, in difficult times like these, where we have uncertainty and instability in the world, approving the budget for 2026 is a very positive signal from the European Union to the markets and to European citizens. Given the current constraints on our budget, this agreement does safeguard the interests of European taxpayers. It strengthens investment in research, in particular in competitiveness and in security, and it also guarantees stability and budgetary predictability. My colleagues, Mr. Nemec. Well done on the good agreement that you achieved. Taking on board all the points from the Council and the Commission, and securing an additional €372 million for programmes and measures to improve the lives of European citizens and increasing competitiveness and facing challenges in security and defence. I'd like to highlight the funds for programmes like Horizon Europe, the interconnected facility for Europe, um, the The European Civil Protection Mechanism, Erasmus+, Creative Europe and military mobility. These are all so important, so dear to this Parliament. Also measures to promote agricultural products, particularly incentives for young farmers. And I'll finish by saying that it's absolutely crucial that the Union Budget continues to respond to the aspirations of Europeans and those of our companies, and it should continue to be the instrument for public investment and private investment to, uh, to go hand in hand with them. Thank you very much.”
  Size of EU budget
• “Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm going to also speak Portuguese. Firstly, I'd like to congratulate the two rapporteurs for this fantastic job they did and that they've done up to now. In addition, I have two points. Firstly, the initial commission proposal. Uh, which melts all the shared management funds into a financial instrument with a reduction of financing for different political objectives, which don't take on board mechanisms for geographical. There's no geographic fairness in this. So this is terribly negative because reducing funding for cohesion policies and reduction national plan money for national partnerships and the guarantee fund will be used to suit certain objectives. But the governance model, the situation is very alarming and and not including a certain geographic equality mechanisms in the European Competitiveness Fund and Horizon Urine Europe, uh, actually is going to call into question equal opportunities for all member states. Secondly, we need to establish a fair balance between flexibility And predictability. And in this framework, I think all programs must guarantee minimum amounts of finances in every area of intervention, which should correspond at least to 50% of the endowments. Now, as a rapporteur for centralized agency, I'd like to stress how important it is to guarantee that those instruments and organizations should be given the proper resources so they can carry out their mission. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• “Thank you. Thank you. Chair. The shadow rapporteurs. The representative of the European Commission. Dear colleagues, the bankruptcy of Casa in March 2025 led to 416 workers losing their jobs in Belgium, mainly in the retail and logistical logistics sectors in the province of Antwerp. This is not an isolated case. Unfortunately, Belgium has experienced a significant rise of bankruptcies since 2022, leading to the loss of around 45,000 jobs in the past 18 months, mainly in the region of Flanders. Behind these numbers are workers and families facing uncertainty. It is on such occasions that Europe must continue to show its commitment to solidarity. The current proposal will allow the mobilisation of €1.9 million from the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund, covering 85% of the total costs. This proposal will finance targeted and personalized measures with a clear goal to support and to reintegrate these 416 workers into the labor market as quickly as possible. Nevertheless, we must underline that the fund is a limited and complementary instrument. It is not a structural economic policy tool nor a substitute for competitiveness. It is a design to respond to major restructuring events, not to replace national responsibilities or compensate for structural weaknesses. The Casa example is also a strong reminder that Europe must strengthen its economic resilience. Our companies face intense global competition, rapid digital transformation and changing consumer patterns. We need a business friendly environment in Europe, which promotes innovation, supports technological developments, strengthens competitiveness, reduce unnecessary regulatory burdens and simplifies bureaucratic procedures. Strong and competitive businesses are essential to sustain high quality jobs, drive economic growth, promote territorial, economic and social cohesion, and reinforce Europe's strategic resilience. Therefore, the solidarity must be accompanied with with responsibility and with public policies that enhance Europe's long term competitiveness. For these reasons, and to conclude, while recognizing the exceptional character of this mobilization, we support the proposal and call for its rapid, effective and responsible implementation. Thank you.”
  European Globalisation Adjustment Fund
• “Thank you very much for the question. You always see the glass as half empty. I always see the glass as half full. Portugal is exemplary in Europe and globally in terms of innovation and development. Portugal has centers of excellence for innovation and development. For instance in the field of health. Champalimaud foundation, for instance, and the innovation and development of research into cancer. Combating cancer, for instance, is very much at the forefront. Portuguese researchers there will also be making use of this prerogative to choose Europe for science in order to improve and take their careers further, so that they will have glorious careers. And I very much hope they will. And by linking this to what is happening in the business community, it can only improve both sides.”
  Research priorities within the EU
• “President. Commissioner. The Mercosur agreement is a fair agreement, a balanced agreement, and a good agreement in geopolitical, economic, and social terms. There are no doubts this is a good agreement for industry. We need to have guarantees. However, for the agri sector, we have additional guarantees. In the ultimate iteration of the agreement, there will be a gradual phasing in of the implementation. There will be maximum trqs, uh, for beef meat and there will be potential support. If farmers were to be affected, There will be special protection of some 350 goods and special treatment of Mercosur goods that don't comply with our SPS and, um, environmental rules. Then it also includes provisions on the Paris Agreement and on illegal logging. The Commission has done a really good job. It took us 20 years to get this over the finish line. So now stop with your lies. Let's speed this up. Let's sign this agreement.”
  Trade relations with Mercosur
• “Concerning the third point, the transparency and accountability to improve clarity, transparency and accountability, I proposed that the agency's annual activity report include a detailed breakdown of costs covered by fees versus those funded by the contribution of EU budgets. Fourth, the financial reserve. The Commission proposes the creation of a financial reserve, since the ECA has difficulties to accurately predict the income from fees and charges, even with the most advanced statistical statistical techniques. After several meetings with ECA and with the Commission, I acknowledge this problem and I agree with the principle of creating this financial reserve. The reserve will increase the agency resilience and capacity to respond to the possible future crisis. Promotes the long term sustainability of the financial financial model of ECA, meanwhile protecting the financial interests of the EU budget and taxpayers. To conclude, chair, However, I see two structural problems in the commission proposal. First, the creation of a reserve risks setting a precedent for other decentralised agencies. And second, I disagree with both the size and the structure of the reserve as proposed by the Commission. The suggested cap, approximately 12,000,000 in 2026, is too high, and inclusion of the EU contributions to the agency in the calculation of the reserve cap is problematic. Therefore, I propose a cap around five €6 million exclusively related to fee income. Thank you so much for this additional time, but I think it's a very important issue. Uh, thank you sir.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “Thank you sir. I will speak in Portuguese. Um, President Carro. Uh, Madam Chair Bogdan. Colleagues, uh, representative of the commission. I'd like first of all, to thank the rapporteur for this analysis of the budgetary impact and thank them for the excellent work for the protocols for, um, these, uh, partnership agreements between, um, the public of Democratic Republic of Sao Tomé and Principe and the European Community. Now, we've had two in the past that were good ones and very similar. And colleague colleagues have already given a description of that. Now, these are another contribution to help with the food security of the European Union and are also, uh, to support fishing. The fisheries sector in the European Union. It it strengthens uh the Union's position for the countries of the African African countries and the Pacific, and it strengthens the human rights, uh, aspect and and also supports the geostrategic, uh, relations. We talk a lot about the European presence in South America, but we often forget, uh, Africa. And as a Portuguese member, I would wish to express my solidarity with Africa. It's very important from our point of view. So I'd say that we agree with the proposal made by the rapporteur, generally speaking. But we do have to we have tabled a number of small amendments, and I'm very happy to cooperate with the rapporteur so that at the end of this we get a better compromise compared with the excellent version that we first got is Angelin.”
  Fisheries access for developing countries
• “Madam president. Commissioner. Colleagues, ensuring an appropriate and predictable funding for the EU is one of the main factors that we have to guarantee the effectiveness and success of the European budget. Introducing new own resources is absolutely crucial. It will mean that the EU can tackle a new challenges and needs and meet the expectations of the citizens and businesses in order to implement both traditional and new political priorities. It is crucial to raise new resources, but without asking for more contributions from national budgets, nor increasing taxes for European citizens or businesses. At the moment, there are economic sectors which manage to enjoy the advantages of the EU single market, but contribute little or nothing to its smooth workings. Therefore, we'd like to send out a clear message that we would support three four new sources of own resources. We are currently looking at those. Today one of these own resources would be a tax on online betting and gambling. Now this is. Untaxed sector. At the moment we believe it comes down to a question of tax fairness because offline gambling and betting is already taxed. And this could feed into our EU budget so that all of those who enjoy the benefits of the EU project contribute to its smooth working.”
  Own EU resources
• “Thank you very much. Thank you. I'll be speaking Portuguese, Madam Chair. First of all, I'd like to congratulate the European Commission. The Agora EU proposal brings two novel features and I think is a leap forward. Less fragmentation and a more generous budget. Some of the questions that I was planning to ask have already been asked. So that means that I'll only ask one question. As a former chair responsible for local and regional authorities. I'd like to know what role local and regional authorities can play in implementing Agora EU. I think that local authorities and regional authorities are the authorities that actually most invest the most in culture. They're really the main investors in the cultural sector. So for me that is the main question. And the European capitals of culture are very important. On many occasions we've talked about the paltry funding that there is and how there isn't enough incentive for towns and cities to apply to become European capitals of culture. So I think we have to look to these projects. I think that they add so much value on a local level, regional level, but also on a country and EU level. So I'd like to know whether Agora EU will be more involved in the whole European Capital of Culture project. Thank you very much. Once again, congratulations to the Commission.”
  EU and national cultural identities
• “The implementation of the Recovery and Resilience Facility, and regarding cohesion funds from the exchange of views with the Minister of Defence. I would like to point out the debate regarding how deep and safe and the relation between NATO and EU spending on defence and what can be improved in this point. I also highlight the remarks from the Latvian military officer about the Baltic Defence line. It is a really important design, which is a joint project of Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania to prevent and an invasion with the ground forces from the eastern border and the proposed East Shield EU flagship project supported by the Baltic states and Poland, to protect the border from hybrid to conventional threats, proposed to be financed under EDP or the current MFF. The last point I want to mention is to is the visit to the international defense and technology company Patria Latvia, allowing us to understand the capacity of the EU defence industry to fulfill the EU needs and to exchange views regarding the latest EU proposals on defence investment. I mean, EDP Safe and Rearm Europe. We also had the opportunity to visit the production line and experience transportation in a common armored vehicle system produced in Patria. This was a good opportunity, in my point of view, to better access the connections between EU funding the industry and the defense challenges. Challenges on the ground. On behalf of all the members of the mission. Thank you all.”
  Defence spending
• “09:04 – 17:12:51): Okay, thank you, Cheryl. Only to add some points to the brilliant intervention of our chair of mission, Nicolas Della Parte. And as Nicolas already said, the mission objective was to assess on the ground how Poland and the Czech Republic are preparing to respond to the Union's challenges in the area of defense. I would like to emphasize that Poland, which is currently the largest per capita investor, approximately five percent of GDP in defense, has its primary objective to defend itself by land, sea, and air against the possible attack from Russia or its allies, building an eastern shield. And we took a look on the implementation of this shield. We observed a significant capacity for the production of weaponry and defensive infrastructure as well as strong links to both the US and South Korea in terms of imported equipment. And I think it's necessary also to emphasize these two strong links coming from Poland. Regarding the armed forces, we visited an armored brigade which is still in process for formation in terms of personnel and equipment. All equipment is up to date and the personnel are motivated. In terms of production capacity, state-owned companies, as Nicolas already said, dominate and largely control the logistic chain. Regarding SAFE, they have a commitment to invest around forty billion, but there is some opposition from the political opposition in Poland regarding this decision. There is a need to—and I would like to emphasize this and I fully agree with Nicolas—that there is a need for further development aspects of joint procurement, a single defense market, and a strategic partnership because I think we, the European Union or the European Parliament side, need to emphasize this point because I think we have a very long way and path to run. Regarding the Czech Republic, and I would like to thank our colleague Aleksandra Vondra because Vondra was the first promoter of this visit, the visit focused entirely on the defense industries, particularly the private ones. They demonstrated a great capacity for innovation, having learned lessons from the war in Ukraine, with cutting-edge equipment in the areas of drones, UAVs, and as well the radar. We visited a gunpowder and nitroglycerin factory where the issue of energy costs was heavily emphasized. And this issue of energy costs, I think, is a transversal issue that is touching in the old European member states. To conclude this visit for me and I think for the rest of the colleagues, it was very important and I thank the SEDE team and the share and all the colleagues who participated for their fantastic collaboration. It was an honor for me to be part of this visit. Thank you so much.”
  Defence spending
• “(12:03:43 – 12:06:34): Okay. Thank you, chair. First of all, I would like to thank the rapporteur for their work on this important file and for the constructive cooperation with, opinion giving committees throughout the process. The cult committee adopted, its opinion today, and I would like to briefly highlight some of the key priorities and contributions that emerged from our work. We are pleased to see that the draft report already included a number of elements that are closely aligned with the priorities of the cult committee. In particular, the inclusion of heritage in the article 3 among the specific objectives represents an important recognition of the contribution of culture and heritage to European values, social cohesion, and territorial development. Among the key contributions adopted by the cult, I would highlight our proposal to strengthen article 2 in the general objectives through references, lifelong learning, and equal access to quality education and culture. In the article 3 specific objectives, we added the greater visibility to to areas such as support to educational, cultural, and sports infrastructure, cultural heritage, media, and AI literacy, cultural tourism, vocational training, and youth sports. We also proposed stronger references to to democratic engagement, media freedom, and fight against disinformation. The committee also considered it important to strengthen the link between the preparation of the NRPPs and the investment in human capital. Recent discussions on Europe Europe's competitiveness have rightly highlighted the importance of skills, education, and lifelong learning. We therefore believe that these priorities should be more clearly reflected in the objectives of the funds and in preparation of the plans. Finally, I would like to briefly mention the discussion on article 10, paragraph 5, concerning the the, 14% budget allocation for social objectives. As many colleagues know, I have generally been cautious regarding earmarking, in my role as member of committee on budget. However, after our our discussions in cults, I came to view that a dedicated allocation of 2% within this 14% for culture, particularly given that this sector is often less visible in the other governance's framework, including the European semester. Thank you, Cher, for this additional time. And, okay. Thank you so much.”
  EU and national cultural identities
• “Chair. I'll speak Portuguese, if I may. Let me also thank the speaker for being here. I second what other colleagues have said. The work of Olaf is so important. However, more of a technical question. Although it is political in nature, it's about access to data and the quality of that data. So the member states are distributing the funds, and so each member state has to have its own control and inspection software to check up on the money that has been spent. So when at central level will we have a standardised, harmonised, uh, software model? Then the Commission and Olaf will hopefully be able to access data in real time. Then those organisations wouldn't have to depend on the kindness and the goodwill of the member states. You know, we're talking about billions and billions of EU money here. Is it therefore not possible to find a few pennies, a few cents to have a centralized approach to software, and that will hopefully allow us to carry out the inspections that we need.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “Thank you. Thank you, chair. And thank you, dear colleagues. I would like to, uh, to express a special thanks to the to the, the the rapporteur of the committee, the Christoph, thank you for your remarks and for your precious collaboration during this process. And I of course, I reiterate my availability to work with you in the upcoming process and in the future negotiations with the council, because it will be very important. Uh, step. However, I want to stress the importance of the committee to include our amendments coming from the Budget Committee in the final report. And furthermore, I'm so sorry to say that, but I want to to also to ask you to reconsider your position and withdraw your amendment 31 on article ten, paragraph three, because I, I need to emphasize that it is a clear, um, matter, uh, related with the Budget Committee. And we need also to to raise the awareness concerning this point and concerning the the shadow rapporteurs and the representatives of the Commission. I would like also to thank Lupo and the other colleagues, um, and only to, um, share their share. I would like to, to, to try to clarify my, uh, thanks to the colleague of patriots, because the service provided by the Echa is a direct or an indirect service to the European citizens. And I'm sure if you if you have this this information, maybe you can reorganize your opinion concerning this file. And I look forward to work closely with the with all of you in the next steps for this proposal. And to conclude, I want to thank the budget, budget Secretariat for all the committed work and the Special Assistant assistance in the drafting of this budget reassessment and the special thanks for the Commission, especially DG growing DG budget for the precious cooperation. Thank you so much.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “Thank you. Chair. Dear Commissioner, Commissioner, I have three short questions. First of all, I welcome the increase. I mean, the huge increase, as you said, in the level of payments for the heading two cohesion. I would like to ask you whether this increase already accommodates, in addition to the entry into the increasing speed of cohesion programmes, new initiatives such as Step and Restore and the results resulting from the mid term cohesion review with ongoing, as you said concerning the culture, culture is my flag. I'm sorry to to address you this this question and especially Creative Europe programme, what is included in the 2026 2026 budget? The same amount of money less or more. Finally, in terms of revenue, the Commissioner, the Commission is launching countermeasures on US imports into the EU and there may be more to come, I guess, or we guess. What would you say about potential additional revenue and how will it be taken into account and what this subject in the latest, the latest UN Resources Advisory Committee. Thank you so much.”
  Size of EU budget
• “Thank you. Thank you. Chair. The shadow rapporteurs. The representative of the European Commission. Dear colleagues, the bankruptcy of Casa in March 2025 led to 416 workers losing their jobs in Belgium, mainly in the retail and logistical logistics sectors in the province of Antwerp. This is not an isolated case. Unfortunately, Belgium has experienced a significant rise of bankruptcies since 2022, leading to the loss of around 45,000 jobs in the past 18 months, mainly in the region of Flanders. Behind these numbers are workers and families facing uncertainty. It is on such occasions that Europe must continue to show its commitment to solidarity. The current proposal will allow the mobilisation of €1.9 million from the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund, covering 85% of the total costs. This proposal will finance targeted and personalized measures with a clear goal to support and to reintegrate these 416 workers into the labor market as quickly as possible. Nevertheless, we must underline that the fund is a limited and complementary instrument. It is not a structural economic policy tool nor a substitute for competitiveness. It is a design to respond to major restructuring events, not to replace national responsibilities or compensate for structural weaknesses. The Casa example is also a strong reminder that Europe must strengthen its economic resilience. Our companies face intense global competition, rapid digital transformation and changing consumer patterns. We need a business friendly environment in Europe, which promotes innovation, supports technological developments, strengthens competitiveness, reduce unnecessary regulatory burdens and simplifies bureaucratic procedures. Strong and competitive businesses are essential to sustain high quality jobs, drive economic growth, promote territorial, economic and social cohesion, and reinforce Europe's strategic resilience. Therefore, the solidarity must be accompanied with with responsibility and with public policies that enhance Europe's long term competitiveness. For these reasons, and to conclude, while recognizing the exceptional character of this mobilization, we support the proposal and call for its rapid, effective and responsible implementation. Thank you.”
  European Globalisation Adjustment Fund
• “Thank you very much indeed. As the rapporteur for the cult Committee, I would like, as other colleagues have done, to thank the Court of Auditors for this important report. And I would like to highlight that the conclusions are absolutely crucial for education, for youth, for for communication, for culture in its broadest terms, this proposal, as we see it brings together and merges very, very different political issues education, agricultural, social rights, employment, internal security and And defense. This might make sense on paper, but in practice, without separate budgetary headings, these priorities will end up competing amongst themselves. And when this happens, culture, education and youth are very often the first to fall to lose visibility. Despite the fact that they should play a key role in economic and social cohesion and territorial development, and in democratic life, on the single national plans, cultural and education policies are flourish on a local level. It depends on the regions, the universities, schools and cultural organisations. If these were to become more centralised and depend on centralised government, we run the risk of losing the ties to our territories and regions. We lose this benefit and we will no longer be able to provide what people on the ground actually need. My question for the commission would be the following. In your opinion, how would this proposal, how could this proposal be improved in order to better the situation for the cultural and education sectors? Secondly, it looks that we're looking at very short time periods and fast and quick expenditure, which means that it will end up with projects which are very quick to implement. However, in culture and education, the most useful projects are long term projects building cultural and education, not infrastructure. Developing projects over the years, setting up cultural networks. So the question is clear how can we guarantee that this fund will only provide funding for one off short term projects, but will able to contribute to overcoming structural divisions which exist across Europe as rapporteurs.”
  EU and national cultural identities
• “(14:46:45 – 14:48:25): Thank you, chair. Dear commissioner, thank you so much. I would like to start by thank you. Thank you for your very clear presentation in the beginning of this, this session. And thank you again for your sensitivity related with the Erasmus plus and the Creative Europe. I mean, the increase in both greater than 5% inside this very difficult budget, I think it's represents a great effort from your side. I have 1 question related with the EU decentralized agencies. I have the responsibility, in the budget committee related with this file, and for me, the EU decentralized agencies are our operational harms. If they fail, the EU fails. And currently, several EU decentralized agencies face financial or human resources constraints for the fulfillment of their mandates or to comply with security and cybersecurity requirements. How is this issue being tackled in the 2027 draft budget, to ensure that you as a modern public administration suite to fulfill its role? And, of course, I have 2 detailed questions. How will you justify the huge reduction in, agency of drugs and in the in the agency of chemicals? Thank you so much.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “Thank you very much, Commissioner. Colleagues. There are multiple challenges facing the EU, and that shows that the context for the MFF negotiations means, uh, we need to have the right resources to meet the challenges, uh, to help our citizens. The next Mff has to be sufficiently ambitious. It has to guarantee the stability and autonomy of current policies, including, uh, cap and cohesion policy. It also needs to Provide responses to defense, to security, to civil protection amongst others. So it's important in the negotiations for the next MFF that we take a comprehensive perspective. We need to find new own resources without overburdening our citizens. With additional taxes. We will not be able to respond properly to these challenges alone with public investments. So we must see more private investment as well. Thank you.”
  Own EU resources
• “Thank you very much indeed. Chair, I would like to start by congratulating the rapporteur colleague, Bogdan, for the excellent work that he has done in this report on the role of EU policies in shaping the European sport model. This is a really important contribution. It has a vision of sport as a public good, which is essential for promoting health and social cohesion. As has already been said, it's an excellent report. I would like to just recall one subject which is linked to sport. That's the problem of organisers of sporting events in the States. I'm talking about online piracy and the amount of money that's lost by the organisers and member states could be channelled into further fostering and encouraging sport. So a recommendation from the commission is unfortunately not sufficient. We really need to act before the commission approves that and if the rapporteur agrees, I'd say this is a very important subject. This report also appears a very welcome time in Portugal. We've had a report from the w h o which says 78% of boys and 91% of girls between 11 and 15 years old do not meet the minimum recommendations of daily for daily physical activity. So we fully support a very ambitious European approach to foment solidarity, integrity. And I very much congratulate the rapporteur. Once again, thank you.”
  Broadcasting of sports events
• “The third, transparency and accountability. To improve clarity, transparency and accountability, I propose that the agency's annual activity report includes a detailed breakdown of costs covered by fees versus those funded by the contribution of EU budget, and it is a really important point. The fourth Financial Reserve, the Commission proposes the creation of a financial reserve. Since Echa has difficulties to accurately predict the income from fees and charges, even with the most advanced statistical techniques, I, uh. As the majority of the presidents, I acknowledge this problem and I agree with the principle of creating this financial reserve. The reserve will increase the agency resilience and capacity to respond to the future crisis. However, I see two structural problems in the Commission's proposal. First, the creation of a reserve risk, setting a precedent for other decentralised agencies. And we need to do that. Uh, secondly, I disagree with both the size and the structure of the reserve as proposed by the Commission. The suggested cap approximately 12,000,000 Millions in 2026 is really too high, and the inclusion of the EU contribution to the agency in the calculation of the reserve cap is problematic. Therefore, I propose a reduction a cap around five 6 million exclusively related to fee income to review the rules related with reserve.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “It's always a pleasure to have you here. And to the speakers, Rubio and Mrs. Benedetti. It's great to have you here. And I would like to congratulate you and to thank you for your brilliant presentations, the control of investments and support. After natural disasters are funded by various programs and instruments of the Union. Sometimes it seems to me that there are perhaps too many programs and instruments doing the same thing. And in this regard. Regarding the current program, I'd like to ask you what is your view as to the current financing under the CFP compared to the needs? We know that the funding originally provided for was very quickly exhausted, and as regards the current CFP and the amendment has allowed the situation to be improved. But what are the limits that are still there? Because we know that the financial framework goes on until 2027. So what would be your recommendation for the current financial framework and whether we need to speed up the reimbursement of the sums outlay? Now, if you would allow me to chair one further question for the upcoming financial framework. Mr. Rubio has given us some ideas, but I would like again to ask the same question and to hear the other speakers do on this and the Commission, in particular on possible improvements and how to better explain the role of national budgets and the private sector in relation to insurance, because I think insurance is an important role to play here.”
  Conditions to access EU budget
• “Thank you. Chair, and good afternoon for everyone. I would like to thank the European Court of Auditors and Mr. Christoforo for this insightful special report, because I think all the interventions, uh, support that. It is a really important and a good report. It proved that while it was a dynamic, innovative and helpful instrument, oversight is still needed and our calls listened to the report. I have two questions to direct questions. The first one is the following. The report mentions that the court analyzed EIB group data for all Efsi operations and the reviewed sample of projects. Uh, as my colleague said, we need all the time to link these FC with the investor, and I'm the rapporteur also for the investor in the budget committee in the EPP. And the question is the following. Do you consider this approach a model for assessing future EU budgetary guarantee instruments like investeu? As I said, and are there methodological methodological improvements you would recommend for evaluating such investment programmes going forward? And secondly, how will the Commission and the EIB Group ensure that only disbursement funds to final beneficiaries count towards our mobilised investment targets? What governance or contractual changes are needed to mandate real time disclosure of disbursement Status, so we don't report funds that haven't actually paid out. Thank you so much.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “The, uh. Dear colleagues? Um. Short intervention, but only to share with you that our responsibility in this committee is to ensure that these changes respond to a strategic need while being effective, transparent and budget supported. I fully support the proposal of the Commission and also the position of my colleague, Christine Heller. And I therefore propose that the clause be included, urging the Commission to present a comprehensive assessment of the budgetary impact of these changes by the end of the current MFF. We need to know how much has been redirected, where it has been channelled, and what concrete results it has produced. It is my it's my point of view. Facilitating and redirecting funds to defence is a useful, necessary and urgent decision. But flexibility is not synonymous with opacity. Transparency and evaluation of results are essential to guarantee the trust of citizens and the legitimacy of these redirection funds. This package should be an example of good budgetary governance, not an exception to the good rules followed by this House. Thank you so much.”
  Defence spending
• “Madam President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, we are debating the assessment of the Recovery and Resilience Facility at a key moment given how close this instrument is now to conclusion. The state of implementation of these programmes is clearly below what was expected and desirable, and has not even reached 50% of implementation rates in some Member States. It is therefore key that we guarantee that the financial effort that is being made by all of us through the RF really materially becomes a transformation of Europe. Let us not give up on the RF. We need to therefore guarantee that national RF plans maintain or extend initial ambitions. We need to speed up the implementation of this instrument by giving Member States confidence. And in order to do that, we need an 18 month extension, as is suggested in this report. The Recovery and Resilience mechanism is a clear and unique opportunity that we must not miss out on. Thank you.”
  Conditions to access EU budget
• “Thank you. I speak Portuguese again. What I've often said to myself is that we can only manage something if we can measure it. And that applies here because we're talking about a very important own resource. It's an important own resource in terms of value, but also in terms of creating environmental incentives. And other colleagues have said something similar. So I really welcome the important work of the European Court of Auditors. If you've worked on the ground, if you're like me and I used to be a mayor, you'll know that this plastic issue is a major issue that needs to be resolved. So I have a few questions to the EC and to the Commission. So the first question is about the penalties That the member states must pay if they fail to comply with this directive. Second question what are the incentives in and for the Member States to implement the directive? No, it's carrot and stick. But, um, it's very important to look at the carrot and stick because the member states have a cost when they're implementing this. But there needs to be more on the incentive side so that there's greater yield. Third point, what is the annual value of the own resources that we're potentially squandering because we're failing to implement this directive? And my final question is about the following matter. You know, it's also based on my previous experience. And we used to talk a lot about the export of waste, particularly the export of plastic waste. I want it to be clear that we also import waste from third countries, don't we? So in the light of that, what should we be doing about the imports of waste coming into the union? Because couldn't we levy additional fees on those imports? Because it would be sending a signal. And a final matter I want to know when we revise this directive in the future, could there be additional penalties or fees for imported waste? Thank you very much.”
  Own resources (plastics)
• “Furthermore, during the mission, we could assess budgetary priorities for 2026 budget and the next MFF. This visit to Latvia gave us the opportunity to know in local the specific challenges that member States bordering Russia face. Highlighting the importance of financial and other support and commitment to security and defence as a priority of the Union. Other main inputs were. First, work needs to be done to improve the accessibility of cohesion funds to border regions so that those most in need are reached second, on top of improving the accessibility of cohesion funds. The setting up of the dedicated Instrument of Programme could be explored in the next MFF to support exclusively the regions bordering Russia and Belarus, following the model of the Brexit Adjustment reserve. Third, investments in defence should be made at both EU and member state level, with the EU supporting joint projects, infrastructure and mobility, favouring the development of European supply chain geographically, geographically spread across the EU. Fourth and the last one preparedness. Preparedness efforts need to include all actors of society, including civil society and EU funds should be accessible to them from the particular meeting with the Minister of Finance. I would like to highlight the commitment of Latvian government for its pledge to reach 5% of GDP in defense investment in the next year until 2028, and how the EU could support such effort, for example, through the euro bonds. In this sense, I also pointed out the fruitful exchange of views regarding the question of new own resources for the EU.”
  Defence spending
• “Madam president, Commissioner, colleagues, if we want developed prosperous and sovereign Europe, then we need to put research and innovation at the heart of our common project. The Choose Europe for science project is a crucial step in the right direction. For the first time, researchers will have access not only to robust financing from the EU, but they will also have some guarantees of longer term contracts from institutions. In this way, they will have some continuity in their scientific careers. Cofinancing initiatives will also allow for institutions based in regions with fewer resources to participate without leaving anyone behind. We need to dream. We need to be even more ambitious. We need to put the EU at the forefront. Global leader for research and innovation, for open, well-funded research with cohesion and with a very close link to the business community. It's vital that that happen. Thank you.”
  EU research funding
• “President, Commissioner. Colleagues, war has returned to our continent and to our neighbourhood. And we see now very late in the day that supply chains are extremely vulnerable, and external dependence really pose a risk for our security. Faced with this fact, one thing has become clear we cannot continue with a market for defense that is fragmented. Where 27 member states develop, produce and purchase in isolation, often duplicating capabilities and wasting resources. The report that we're discussing today has understood this diagnosis. The objective is very simple. We need to identify and remove administrative barriers and regulations that still prevent Europe from really fulfilling its potential for its industrial technological base. But the report also makes one point very clear. Strengthening the European defence market is not about taking powers away from the member states. If Europe wants to shoulder more responsibility for its own security, it will need a defence industry that is stronger, more integrated and more competitive. Despite the importance of national interests, we must understand that on our own we cannot defend our interests. So let us then defend European interests as well. Thank you.”
  EU competences on defence
• “Dear Rapporteur Christof. Once again, thank you so much for your precious cooperation and collaboration. Dear Commission representatives. Our analysis focused on the estimated financial impact and the modification to the establishment plan of the proposal and its impacts on budgetary and governance aspects of the agency. We we consider that at this stage, the proposal provides for sufficient financial and human resources for the planned changes. And however, we point out that and I fully agree with some colleagues that already spoke about that, if additional responsibilities be granted to the agency during the negotiations, their financial implications must be assessed and included in the final agreement on the legislative proposals. I would like to detail the main elements of our budgetary assessment. First, the creation of a single budget line. I support also the creation of a single budget line, replacing the segregated budgets and establishment plans. Second introduction of the codecision procedure to strengthen Strengthened Parliament's rights as reach was adopted prior to the Lisbon Treaty. I believe it is due time to reform it and further align the agency's governance with current institutional standards. I therefore propose a of course, it's to negotiate with the with the Council and the Commission. I propose that the fees collected by the agency be defined in the process of codecision, especially for the new fees ensuring Parliament's rights.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “Thank you very much indeed. I will follow on in the same line as my colleagues are saying that this agreement on the table between the EU and the UK is really an excellent step forward. Today and over the weekend and yesterday, we've had excellent news coming in areas such as youth areas such as education and culture. These three areas that can never be forgotten in this bilateral agreement between the UK and the EU as far as Erasmus+ is concerned. Then, of course, as far as we're concerned, we have to better understand what the UK still needs to understand about this. To understand how fundamentally important Erasmus+ can be for them. It's our flagship programme. They made so much use of it before Brexit and we cannot stop insisting that they reconsider. I would also like to ask the commission what is the financial value on the table? What's the money involved in re-establishing this agreement? No, it's a very broad agreement. There are various areas we've looked at 2 or 3 areas youth, culture and education. I just, uh, the ones that I'd like to know. What is the financial package that will be made available to support these? Thank you.”
  EU volunteering programs
• “Thank you very much indeed, Madam Chair. I also consider that this, uh, European Court of Auditors report shows very clearly that, uh, in despite the fact that since 2005, we've been insisting on rules, particularly the directive on recognition of professional qualifications. The application of this continues to be patchy and limited. And that's why many citizens today are facing unnecessary obstacles, slow processes, uh, excessive red tape, different costs from one member state to another, and information that's not very reliable. Now, this is very worrying when the report clearly states that only 6% of people in mobility actually use this recognition, and therefore the Commission must guarantee that this directive is applied in a uniform, simple way, but also an effective way across the board. I would also say that the council, we haven't mentioned the council at all or hardly, but I think the council can also help to bring uniformity to the fees and the costs that all European citizens have to pay to in fact be able to. Make the most of this possibility. The question I would just leave you with is. I think there's also an information deficit to the citizens. And I think I'm wondering what you think can be done by the Commission and the member States with the Commission to improve the flow of information to citizens, because so many people are unaware of this possibility that they can actually apply for this, uh, recognition of, uh, their diplomas to, uh, to be applied in different member states. So I think we do need to make up this, this information shortfall.”
  EU regulation of cross-border and posted workers
• “Thank you, chair. And dear friends, as you said on behalf of our colleague Danusia Nerudova, let me remind you that the Business in Europe framework for income taxation, we call it proposal, was presented by the European Commission in 2003. The European Parliament began working on a report during the previous term, but it was not brought to a vote in the current term, the Econ committee has resumed, resumed work on the file, and our committee has been tasked with preparing the budgetary assessment. The Parliament has long supported initiatives such as the C.c.c., TB, I mean, Common Consolidated Corporate Tax base, the Digital Services Tax and the OECD pillar one approach. The main objective of the proposed Buffett Framework is to improve transparency and reduce revenue leakage in the corporate taxation and important issue from a budgetary perspective. In this context, it is important to recall that the Interinstitutional Agreement roadmap explicitly includes the introduction of a corporate tax based on resources as part of a broader reform of EU revenue. Our budgetary assessment focuses particularly on this dimension, as it is expected to play a key role in defining a workable and harmonised tax base for such a new own resources. It could provide a viable and stable long term source of revenue for the EU budget, which is especially relevant given the current pressure from debt repayment obligations and growing financial needs linked to emerging priorities. At the same time, it is crucial to ensure that any new own resource does not result in an increased tax burden for companies or citizens. The main goal of Buffett should be to help in harmonizing corporate tax systems across member states, while reinforcing the single marketing market and strengthening the global competitiveness of EU businesses. The responsibility now lies with the Member States to agree on and adopt new own resources, which are urgently needed to finance the repayment of next generation EU debt and to secure the long term sustainability of EU policies. Once again on behalf of our colleague Danusia. Thank you all.”
  Own EU resources
• “President, Commissioner. Colleagues, war has returned to our continent and to our neighbourhood. And we see now very late in the day, that supply chains are extremely vulnerable and external dependence really pose a risk for our security. Faced with this fact, one thing has become clear. We cannot continue with a market for defense that is fragmented. Where 27 member states develop, produce and purchase in isolation, often duplicating capabilities and wasting resources. The report that we're discussing today has understood this diagnosis. The objective is very simple. We need to identify and remove administrative barriers and regulations that still prevent Europe from really fulfilling its potential for its industrial technological base. But the report also makes one point very clear. Strengthening the European defence market is not about taking powers away from the member states. If Europe wants to shoulder more responsibility for its own security, it will need a defence industry that is stronger, more integrated and more competitive. Despite the importance of national interests, we must understand that on our own we cannot defend our interests. So let us then defend European interests as well. Thank you.”
  EU competences on defence
• “Thank you. Thank you. Chair. I will intervene on behalf of my colleague Mark. That could not be present here today, and only to emphasize that the mobilization of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund in support of the 267 workers made redundant at Tupperware is fully justified in our opinion. In such circumstances, time is critical. Workers must have rapid access to concrete measures focused on active labour market policies and personalised services. Job search assistance, reskilling and upskilling. Targeted training and professional reconversion with a clear objectives, swift and sustainable reintegration into the labour market. This is particularly important given that nearly half of the affected workers are over 54 years old. For them, job loss too often leads to long term exclusion from employment. Tailored support and reinforced follow up are therefore essential to prevent lasting de-skilling and to secure stable professional pathways. It is equally important to ensure effective monitoring and evaluation of the measures implemented, uh, more broadly. This case underlines the need to anchor the EGF in a wider strategy of European competitiveness and industrial resilience, developed in close cooperation with the Member States. A strong and resilient European economy remains the best way to prevent large scale redundancies and reduce reliance on emergency instruments. Thank you.”
  European Globalisation Adjustment Fund
• “President, Commissioner, we are facing a huge challenge when we talk about the next. On the one hand, we need to safeguard the traditional policy areas of the EU, for example cohesion policy or the Common Agricultural Policy. These remain. These remain are policy areas which are extremely important so we can ensure that balance, autonomy and territorial cohesion across all regions of the European Union. At the same time, we also need to ensure funding for new priorities, for example competitiveness and innovation. The response to crises or security and defence. So how do we meet all these aims? Well, we need to define new own resources so that we can strengthen our budget. We need to ensure that strengthening the budget does not mean more taxes for European taxpayers. So we need to redefine the MFF for the post 2027 period. We need to make sure no one is left behind. We need to make sure the EU is not left behind. European citizens are not left behind. I'd like to congratulate the rapporteurs.”
  Own EU resources
• “Thank you. Chair. Once again in the. Dear colleagues, to share with you the the objectives of the the mission and the objective of the Committee on Budget. Recent mission to Latvia, as you said, which took place on the 1416 April 2025, was to learn more about the budgetary implications of enhancing the EU preparedness, particularly focused on defence spending due to the recent geopolitical shifts in the area, as conflicts do not only materialise in conventional forms, but also in hybrid threats. Significant financial resources can be required as defence spending and across various domains to this effect. The meetings held in Riga and in Latgale, a region bordering Russia with the Latvian Parliament, I mean Saeima, the Ministers of Finance and Defence, the State Audit Office of Republic of Latvia, local and regional authorities, the Latvian Platform for Development Cooperation, and civil society representatives and local agents in the border ensured that we have a broad understanding of the issues at stake, including from a regional and local perspective. In addition, the visits to the Riga Hydroelectric Power Plant to the International Defence and Technology company named Patria Latvia and to the border crossing points, allowed us to have a proper assessment of main issues from the ground. The main conclusion of the mission is that while investing in defence is and will be key for the coming years at global EU level, targeted financial support should be provided to member States and regions bordering Russia and Belarus due to the particularly challenging situations they face as they defend their external EU border.”
  Defence spending
• “Thank you. Chair. Two short questions. Given the strategic importance of bolstering Europe's defence capabilities and tackling the affordable housing shortage, how can the invest you better support projects in these critical sectors? What adjustments or new initiatives, in your opinion, must be done to ensure that Europe's key priorities projects receive the investment support they urgently need? The second one in order to cut the red tape. And we spoke in the first panel to in the red tape and speed up deployment. In your opinion, will the will the Commission propose amending the investor Regulation to introduce a one stop digital portal for both applications and reporting, so that SMEs and smaller project promoters can access funding more quickly and at a lower cost? Thank you Cheryl.”
  Conditions to access EU budget
• “Introduce and to reinforce the point of our cyber vulnerability in the areas of energy and water networks, because these two networks for me are very close to the to the security and defense today in Europe. European companies are being replaced by Chinese companies in the installation and production of energy and water systems. We are ceasing to install European equipment due to the low price subsidized by the Chinese government. And we need to emphasize that because the Chinese are not only doing so. So in cars, also in this kind of critical systems, but also in the this critical areas such as energy and drinking water, instead of the installation of a wind turbine from the Danish company Vestas, for example, I received Vestas this week. We are acquiring Chinese wind generation generators instead of installing an electrical transformer from German company Siemens. We are installing Chinese equipment. These are two bad examples that increase our vulnerability. And these equipment can be controlled remotely. And our vulnerability is evident. What is the question? What is your view on the mandatory installation of European equipment? Does conditioning the market with the aim of guaranteeing our security and sovereignty? For me, it's a critical issue and we need to open in a very clear way our eyes because we are in a really bad, bad path. Thank you so much.”
  "Buy European" provisions
• “(14:46:45 – 14:48:25): Thank you, chair. Dear commissioner, thank you so much. I would like to start by thank you. Thank you for your very clear presentation in the beginning of this, this session. And thank you again for your sensitivity related with the Erasmus plus and the Creative Europe. I mean, the increase in both greater than 5% inside this very difficult budget, I think it's represents a great effort from your side. I have 1 question related with the EU decentralized agencies. I have the responsibility, in the budget committee related with this file, and for me, the EU decentralized agencies are our operational harms. If they fail, the EU fails. And currently, several EU decentralized agencies face financial or human resources constraints for the fulfillment of their mandates or to comply with security and cybersecurity requirements. How is this issue being tackled in the 2027 draft budget, to ensure that you as a modern public administration suite to fulfill its role? And, of course, I have 2 detailed questions. How will you justify the huge reduction in, agency of drugs and in the in the agency of chemicals? Thank you so much.”
  Discharge of EU institutions and agencies
• “After four years and to review the need of the reserve after four years, I think it's a good practice to conclude share their share. I reiterate my availability to work with you in the upcoming process, and however, I want to highlight the importance of the committee to include our amendments in the final report, Safeguarding the Institutional Balance Between Budget and Envy committees. I know it's your file, but I'm trying to to help and to give the best input from our side, ensuring a strong Parliament position in the future negotiations with the Council. Thank you so much. And once again, thank you for the for the Commission especially to to to DGs, DG grow and DG budget for their precious contribution because they, they they they supported me and and my cabinet and also my team during this very difficult process. For me it's the first time as a standing rapporteur also to to face and to deal with this kind of of, of files. But it was a really, really interesting file. Thank you so much for this additional time. But I think it's my first opportunity here in envy as a budget.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “Today I do not accept the blue card because Mr. Oliveira only published the questions. And he don't never publish the answers. And it's the third time. Dear colleague in Portuguese is. No. It's just not fair. I don't accept it.”
  Transparency requirements of EU institutions
• “Okay, thank you, chair and dear rapporteurs. Dear colleagues, dear representative of the Commission, I would like to highlight, as the chair already mentioned, that the main focus of the budgetary assessment are the financial and budgetary aspects of the proposal and to ensure coherence between the legislative and the financial aspects of the proposal. Having said that, I would like to start with my first point regarding the overall amount proposed by the Commission for Horizon Europe. In my humble opinion, is not enough to ensure the European economy the needed innovation boost. Therefore, we consider that the financial envelope allocated to this program should be increased in line with the amounts to be defined in the MFF Interim report. We must be ambitious to guarantee a good starting point for the negotiations with the Council. Considering the central role of this program to safeguard EU future competitiveness. I would like to point out that the sufficient human resources must be available from the outset and throughout the entire programming period to ensure an effective implementation of this program. Second, our draft expresses concern with the lack of the predictable budget for many actions and the lack of detailed budgetary nomenclature as proposed by the Commission. This would give the Commission great latitude to shift and decide on spending priorities during implementation, without any added value for the researchers, innovation, innovators and SMEs.”
  EU research funding