Dario NARDELLA

Policy topics Dario NARDELLA is active on

What Dario NARDELLA has said (49)

• 2026-03-19 “Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 13.5.2026 Written question The Commission acknowledges the significant pressure that EU farmers face due to increased energy and fertiliser prices, exacerbated by the ongoing geopolitical tensions in the Middle East which have constrained global supply chains, underscoring the critical need to bolster the EU’s strategic autonomy. The Commission is closely monitoring developments. Regarding fertilisers, work is accelerated on an Action Plan, to be presented in the coming weeks. This plan will elaborate short- and medium-term measures to strengthen the EU production capacity and reduce high-risk strategic dependencies, to ensure the availability, affordability and stability in the supply of fertilisers to EU farmers. Recent measures have already been implemented such as the adjustment of default Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism values applicable to fertilisers, applying a flat 1% mark-up, and the proposal to temporarily suspend most favoured nations (MFN) duties on imports of other than Russian and Belarussian origin of several key nitrogen fertilisers and inputs for their production (ammonia, urea) up to a certain volume of imports into the EU. The Commission remains committed to continuously assessing the situation and is ready to take action, including through the application of competition law instruments, where appropriate . The Commission is exploring whether additional support mechanisms are needed for farmers in the short term, drawing upon available instruments under the Common Agricultural Policy. Concerning state aid, the Commission adopted on 29 April 2026 a state aid framework [1] to enable Member States to support the sectors most affected by the Middle East crisis including agriculture. [1] https://competition-policy.ec.europa.eu/state-aid/legislation/metsaf_en.”
  Use of fertilisers · Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1)
• 2025-10-31 “E-004284/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Mînzatu on behalf of the European Commission The Italian authorities have the obligation to apply the rules of Directive 2005/36/EC to the recognition of professional qualifications obtained in other EU and European Economic Area Member States. In accordance with the information provided by the Honourable Member it appears that the Italian authorities comply with this obligation. The competence to establish the rules governing holders of Italian masseur-physiotherapist qualifications working in Italy lies with the Italian authorities. As a result, in case that Italian masseur-physiotherapists trained in Italy are discriminated compared to masseur-physiotherapists qualified in other Member States this issue would not be covered by EU rules which do not prohibit reverse discrimination. The Commission has no competence to intervene in this area.”
  EU competences on health · EU competences on social policies
• 2025-10-23 “E-004188/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The Commission is aware of the information referred to by the Honourable Member, which first appeared at the end of 2024 in a number of local Tunisian media outlets. However, the Commission has no competence to verify or intervene as regards the related domestic Tunisian issues. The Commission constantly monitors olive oil markets in the EU 1 . Imports from Tunisia up to August 2025 stand at 131 000 tonnes, an increase by 11% compared to marketing year 2023/24 and by 7.3% compared to the last 5-year average. On average, 58% of these imports are re-exported from the EU to third countries. The average price of Tunisian imports decreased from EUR 5.48/kg in November 2024 to EUR 3.48/kg in August 2025. This average price decline is in line with general trends in olive oil prices in Spain or Greece, as the global availability of olive oil has improved over the last marketing year 2024/25. Member States carry out very frequent controls on the quality and authenticity of olive oils imported and marketed in the EU. These controls are based on a risk analysis, including price and country of origin aspects. 1 https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/data-and-analysis/markets/price-data/price-monitoring-sector/olive-oil_en.”
  Import of agri-food products in the EU
• 2025-09-19 “E-003637/2025 Answer given by Mr Jørgensen on behalf of the European Commission The European Affordable Housing Plan will be accompanied by an analysis 1 of key factors influencing the lack of affordable housing across the EU, including the impact of short-term accommodation rentals on the property and rental markets, in particular in highly touristic destinations. An assessment on the form and content of any initiative will likely follow in the course of 2026, including on the basis of the data that will be generated via the Short-term rentals Regulation 2 , which will be applicable from May 2026. The timing is indicated in the Commission Work Programme 3 and will be referred in by European Affordable Housing Plan. 1 In form of a Commission Staff Working Document. 2 Regulation (EU) 2024/1028 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 April 2024 on data collection and sharing relating to short-term accommodation rental services, OJ L, 2024/1028, 29.4.2024,https://eurlex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1028/oj/eng. 3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52025DC0870.”
  EU housing policy · EU regulation of short-term rentals
• 2025-09-15 “P-003534/2025 Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Kallas on behalf of the European Commission On 17 September 2025, following the State of the Union 2025 1 address and to respond to the rapidly deteriorating humanitarian situation in Gaza, the Commission adopted and presented a package of measures to the Council. It includes: 1. The proposal to suspend certain trade-related provisions of the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement between the EU and Israel 2 . In practice, the suspension means that imports from Israel to the EU will lose their preferential access to the EU markets and that these goods will be charged like any other third country with whom the EU has no free trade agreement. This proposal would require qualified majority in the Council. The Commission is engaging with Member States in various Council formations to ensure the qualified majority vote. 2. Building on the High Representative/Vice-President’s earlier work with Member States’ Foreign Ministers, a reinforced sanction package was presented to the Council 3 , including further sanctions against Hamas, as well as against extremist ministers of the Israeli government and violent settlers. This proposal requires consensus in the Council. 3. In parallel, the Commission has taken the necessary steps to put on hold the bilateral support to Israel, without affecting the work with Israeli civil society or to fight antisemitism and foster Jewish Life (through the support to Yad Vashem 4 ). Concretely, EUR 14 million of already allocated funds for programmes in the period from 2020 to 2024 are directly affected. In addition, until further notice, the Commission will not proceed with the future submission of future yearly allocations for 2025 and beyond. This decision takes effect immediately and does not require any additional steps. 1 https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/state-union/state-union-2025_en. 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:L:2000:147:FULL. 3 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_25_2112. 4 https://www.yadvashem.org/.”
  Relations with Israel - Palestine
• 2025-09-01 “E-003345/2025 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission As the Commission noted in its reply to written question E-003566/2022, a risk assessment for Callinectes sapidus was approved in March 2022 by the Scientific Forum established under the Invasive Alien Species (IAS) Regulation 1 . However, bearing in mind that this species is currently being fished and commercialised in some Member States, the Commission has not proposed it yet for inclusion on the list of invasive alien species of Union concern. As regards support to the fishing and aquaculture businesses, the EU provides for the funding of national initiatives under the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF) 2 . Several Mediterranean Member States have identified the threat posed by nonindigenous species (NIS) and put in place measures to combat them. Italy’s EMFAF programme provides financial support for NIS-related projects. In addition, EUR 22.9 million of State aid was approved for blue crab-related national support measures. Some Italian regions have also mobilised additional resources. The Marine Strategy Framework Directive 3 requires Member States to address and correct marine environmental damage in their waters 4 and reach ‘Good environmental status’ (GES). Descriptor 2 of GES refers to non-indigenous species which adversely alter the ecosystem. It is a Member State responsibility to prepare a ‘programme of measures’ listing national actions allowing to reach GES. Research on possible mitigation measures is also ongoing at the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean research programme 5 , to which Italy is a partner. 1 Regulation (EU) No 1143/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2014 on the prevention and management of the introduction and spread of invasive alien species, OJ L 317, 4.11.2014, p. 35– 55. 2 https://oceans-and-fisheries.ec.europa.eu/funding/emfaf_en. 3 https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/research-area/environment/oceans-and-seas/eu-marine-strategyframework-directive_en. 4 Each Member State must prepare a marine strategy to ‘protect and preserve the marine environment, prevent its deterioration or, where practicable, restore marine ecosystems in areas where they have been adversely affected’. 5 https://www.fao.org/gfcm/activities/fisheries/scientific-advice/research-programmes/blue-crabs/en/.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries · Nature protection and restoration in the EU · Funding for fisheries and aquaculture
• 2025-06-20 “P-002482/2025 Answer given by Mr Dombrovskis on behalf of the European Commission While implementation and disbursements under the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) have been fast, notably for non-repayable support, implementation needs to be accelerated in most Member States. Common challenges behind the delays include supply chain disruptions, the energy crisis and limited administrative capacity. Since all milestones and targets need to be completed by 31 August 2026, the Commission recently 1 put forward options available to Member States to safeguard the Recovery and Resilience Plan (RRP) allocation, in particular the grant component. Member States now need to assess the achievability of all outstanding measures. Meanwhile, the Commission will support Member States to simplify and streamline their RRP. Italy is progressing with the implementation of its RRP, with seven payment requests positively assessed and disbursed by the Commission so far. The Commission remains in close contact with Italian authorities to foster a smooth finalisation of the Italian RRP, including through the identification of projects at risk. Italy has also been proactive in expediting implementation while maintaining a sound governance of the plan. The use of NextGenerationEU funds (of which the RRF is part) is strictly limited to NextGenerationEU-related spending. All Member States are urged to review their plans so that only measures that can be achieved by the August 2026 deadline are kept in. If, at the end of the NextGenerationEU programme, any borrowed funds remain unused, the surplus will be temporarily kept in the liquidity buffer until it is used to repay maturing debt. At the same time, to avoid raising more funds than necessary, the Commission plans its borrowing according to the expected disbursement needs, based on information from the Member States. 1 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council NextGenerationEU - The road to 2026, COM(2025) 310 final/2.”
  Size of EU budget
• 2025-04-22 “E-001605/2025 Answer given by Mr Serafin on behalf of the European Commission In line with the Communication of 11 February 2025 on ‘The road to the next multiannual financial framework’ 1 (MFF), the Commission will ensure that the upcoming MFF is simpler, more focused and aligned with EU priorities. Food security and nature protection are recognised as vital for Europe's quality of life and the Communication emphasises, in line with the ‘Vision on Agriculture and Food’ 2 the need for a fit-for-purpose Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) that provides support to farmers who need it most, enhance environmental and social outcomes and foster thriving rural areas. In doing so, it should become simpler, targeted and find the right balance between incentives, investment and regulation while ensuring that farmers have a fair and sufficient income. As per the political guidelines 2024-2029 of the Commission 3 and the mentioned Communication, at the core of this modernised budget there would be a plan for each country with key reforms and investments, focusing on EU joint priorities, including promoting economic, social and territorial cohesion, and designed and implemented in partnership with national, regional and local authorities. The next MFF will continue to support Cohesion policy and CAP to deliver on their respective objectives in the most effective way. The European Parliament will have an important role in shaping the next MFF. Its consent is required for the Council to adopt the MFF Regulation at unanimity. As a co-legislator and as per the Interinstitutional agreement on cooperation in budgetary matters 4 , the European Parliament will also be able to influence the future instruments during the negotiation of the sectoral basic acts, in the same way as it did for the current MFF. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52025DC0046. 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52025DC0075. 3 https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/e6cd4328-673c-4e7a-8683-f63ffb2cf648_en. 4 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32020Q1222(01).”
  Agricultural funding · Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1)
• 2025-04-17 “E-001571/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 1. The Commission has received multiple complaints regarding a proposed amendment to the Italian law on public security that would restrict the movement of hemp inflorescences or products containing such inflorescences. The Commission understands that while this amendment is under examination in the Senate, the Italian Government has recently adopted a decree-law which includes similar provisions 1 . As the investigation of the complaints is ongoing, the Commission is unable to provide the Honourable Members with further information in this regard. 2. The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has held that the non-notification of a technical regulation under Article 5 of Directive (EU) 2015/1535 2 entails the risk of creating hindrances to intra EU trade and that a national court is required to refuse to apply a national technical regulation that was not notified under that provision 3 . As mentioned in reply to the first question, the Commission is currently assessing the compliance of the Italian measure with Union law. 3. National courts are tasked with implementing EU law and have the power or even the obligation (courts of last instance) to refer a matter to the CJEU if a case pending before them raises questions involving the interpretation of EU law 4 . It is up to the national courts to review the decisions taken by national authorities in individual cases; the Commission has no authority in this regard. For more information on how the Commission ensures the application, implementation and enforcement of EU law and the tools at its disposal to this effect, the Commission refers the Honourable Members to its communications ‘EU law: Better results through better application’ 5 and ‘Enforcing EU law for a Europe that delivers’ 6 . 1 The decree-law in question (Disposizioni urgenti in materia di sicurezza pubblica, di tutela del personale in servizio, nonche' di vittime dell'usura e di ordinamento penitenziario) was published in the Italian Official Journal (Gazzetta Ufficiale) General Series no 85 of 11 April 2025 (GU Serie Generale n.85 del 11-04-2025). 2 Directive (EU) 2015/1535 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 September 2015 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical regulations and of rules on Information Society services, OJ L 241, 17.9.2015, p. 1–15. 3 Judgment of the Court of 30 April 1996 in Case C-194/94, CIA Security International, ECLI:EU:C:1996:172, para.55. 4 See Opinion 1/09 of the Court (Agreement creating a Unified Patent Litigation System) of 8 March 2011, EU:C:2011:123, paragraphs 80 and 83. 5 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=oj:JOC_2017_018_R_0002. 6 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52022DC0518.”
  Sustainable use of seeds in EU policy
• 2025-04-07 “P-001397/2025 Answer given by Ms Kos on behalf of the European Commission During the High-Level Economic Dialogue between the EU and Türkiye, the Commissioner for Enlargement stressed that adhering to the rule of law and high democratic standards were essential for Türkiye as a candidate country and expressed concerns about recent political developments. The Commissioner for Enlargement made clear that while Türkiye is a key partner of the EU and enhancing economic cooperation is a joint ambition, only a relationship based on clear commitments to democratic values and freedoms will unfold its full potential. The EU is carefully considering engagement with Türkiye and recalibrate as necessary depending on political developments. This is in line with the November 2023 Joint Communication 1 , calling for a progressive, proportionate and reversible approach, which underlines that Türkiye’s own constructive engagement will be instrumental in advancing the various areas of cooperation. The Commissioner for Enlargement raised EU concerns bilaterally and cancelled a visit to the Antalya Diplomacy Forum, planned for 11-13 April 2025. The Commissioner for Enlargement will continue to raise matters of concern related to the rule of law, as reconfirmed in a speech at the European Parliament's Plenary on 6 May 2025 2 . 1 https://enlargement.ec.europa.eu/joint-communication-european-council-state-play-eu-turkiye-politicaleconomic-and-trade-relations-0_en. 2 https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/CRE-10-2025-05-06-ITM-014_EN.html.”
  Trade relations with Turkey · EU-Turkey relations
• 2025-02-21 “E-000811/2025 Answer given by Mr Várhelyi on behalf of the European Commission As the Commission pointed out in its answer to the written questions P-001801/2019 1 , P003709/2017 2 , E-001443/2017 3 and E-001484/2017 4 , the Commission does not have a position on the issue of assisted dying. Responsibility for healthcare, including care for terminally ill patients as well as related ethical questions, rests with the Member States. Therefore, the Commission has no general powers to intervene with the Member States in this area. 1 https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-8-2019-001801_EN.html 2 https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/P-8-2017-003709_EN.html 3 https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-8-2017-001443_EN.html 4 https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-8-2017-001484_EN.html”
  EU competences on health
• 2025-02-05 “E-000504/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Ribera on behalf of the European Commission The Commission does not have detailed information on the case, thus, a reply can be only general. Direct awards of public contracts or concessions, without a public call for tender, might infringe EU competition law or other applicable provisions of EU legislation, namely Directive 2014/23/EU 1 , Directive 2014/24/EU 2 or Directive 2014/25/EU 3 , depending on the nature, the subject matter and the value of the contract. Port services are subject to Regulation (EU) 2017/352 4 , which applies to all maritime ports of the trans-European transport network. Under Article 6(4) of the Port Services Regulation, where the managing body of the port, or the competent authority, decides to limit the number of providers of a port service, it shall follow a selection procedure which shall be open to all interested parties, non-discriminatory and transparent. Under EU competition law, a case-by-case assessment is required. Failure to comply with a legislation adopted by a Member State cannot constitute a per se violation of Articles 101 and 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). However, the behaviour arising out of such failure to comply with a national legislation might also cause an infringement of Articles 101 and 102 TFEU. If a State measure causes an infringement of EU competition law, the Commission may start proceedings pursuant to Article 106 TFEU in conjunction with Articles 101 and/or 102 TFEU. Similarly, in case of finding of a breach of the applicable EU rules on the award of public contracts or concessions, the Commission may initiate an infringement procedure against a member State under Article 258 TFEU for failure to comply with its obligations under EU law. 1 Directive 2014/23/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on the award of concession contracts, OJ L 94, 28.3.2014, p. 1–64. 2 Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC, OJ L 94, 28.3.2014, p. 65–242. 3 Directive 2014/25/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on procurement by entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors and repealing Directive 2004/17/EC, OJ L 94, 28.3.2014, p. 243–374. 4 Regulation (EU) 2017/352 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 February 2017 establishing a framework for the provision of port services and common rules on the financial transparency of ports, OJ L 57, 3.3.2017, p. 1–18.”
  EU Competition policy · Decarbonisation of maritime transport
• 2024-10-24 “P-002244/2024 Answer given by Ms Kyriakides on behalf of the European Commission The procedure of Article 8 of Regulation 1925/2006 1 has to be initiated where substances other than vitamins and minerals are added to foods or are used in the manufacture of foods under conditions that would result in the ingestion of amounts greatly exceeding those reasonably expected to be ingested under normal conditions of consumption of a balanced and varied diet and/or would otherwise represent a potential risk to consumers. The Article 8 procedure is not used to systematically harmonise the use of other substances in food at EU level. Instead, the procedure is applied selectively only in well justified cases. Since the entry into application of Regulation 1925/2006 in 2007, the Commission has initiated this procedure in eight cases following consultation with the Member States and a thorough assessment of whether the conditions for initiating the procedure have been met, in accordance with Regulation 1925/2006 and Article 3 of Regulation 307/2012 2 . The Commission is well aware of the impact of the application of the procedure of Article 8 and wishes to highlight that the primary objective of this procedure is to ensure the protection of human health. The addition of a substance to food or its use in the manufacture of foods is prohibited when a harmful effect on health is identified, following the assessment of the safety of the substance by the European Food Safety Authority. 1 Regulation (EC) No 1925/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 on the addition of vitamins and minerals and of certain other substances to foods, OJ L 404, 30.12.2006, p. 26. 2 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 307/2012 of 11 April 2012 establishing implementing rules for the application of Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 1925/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the addition of vitamins and minerals and of certain other substances to foods, OJ L 102, 12.4.2012, p. 2.”
  GMOs
• 2024-09-18 “E-001747/2024 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Šefčovič on behalf of the European Commission 1. The Commission had contact on the situation in the Orbetello lagoon and the resulting damages with the Managing Authority of the European Regional Development Fund 1 Regional Programme (ERDF RP) for Tuscany to explore potential interventions. 2. The Commission has not received any request from the Italian government concerning this situation. In the framework of the ERDF RP for Tuscany 2021-2027, there are no interventions planned to repair damages to the fishing sector and tourism. The ERDF RP for Tuscany is focused on risk prevention, including on the construction of infrastructures to prevent natural risks (hydraulic, hydrogeological and drought). Competent authorities can consider mobilising financing from the European Maritime Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF) 2 allocated to the Italian Programme to provide support to the fisheries sector, while enhancing its capacity to manage and respond to such risks in the future. The activation of EMFAF financial support should be in line with the objectives of the Italian EMFAF Programme as agreed between the Commission and Italy. The affected parties should coordinate with the relevant Italian authorities to apply for such support. 1 https://commission.europa.eu/funding-tenders/find-funding/eu-funding-programmes/european-regionaldevelopment-fund-erdf_en 2 https://oceans-and-fisheries.ec.europa.eu/funding/emfaf_en”
  Water pollution · EU policy on water management · Funding for fisheries and aquaculture
• “Thank you and thank you for this very important exchange of views. I want to know what is the average time today for the presentation of a request for the obtaining rights over vegetable plants, and how what are the plans of the of the office to reduce the waiting times? Then there is a reference to SMEs. Dealing in this area, but which encountered great difficulties. Very often in accessing the system. I'd like to ask here what type of issues have you encountered and how would you envisage facilitating access to the system by small and medium sized farmers like Mr. Dorfmann on Ncties? I see that the current. System is adequate to the task of looking at ncties. Do you think that it's adequate, or do you need to adapt your system for the future in terms of the dues criteria? Do you think modifications will be needed to this in the future. Finally, digitalization. What steps are you taking in the office in the Community plant Variety office to digitalize the examination and registration? And what will be the major challenges facing you in the decades ahead? Thank you.”
  Sustainable use of seeds in EU policy
• “Good morning, dear Minister. First of all, I wish you all success for your presidency, and I'm switching to my language. Italian. In the work programme. The Danish presidency has underscored the importance of the bio economy and bio based solutions as key factors for sustainable production and farming. At the same time, promoting science based innovations that provide new economic priorities, but would also bring about simplification. Now, many times you mentioned the word simplification. We know that Denmark is a strong supporter of innovation. It has paid a lot of attention to the EU Biotech Act. Furthermore, you have underscored the importance of having an EU protein supply when it comes to plant based food and supporting diversification of funds to favour the transition towards a more sustainable food system. And you have said that you would draw up an action plan in this regard. So I have four questions and I will try to be brief. First of all, which measures do you intend to adopt to promote the Simplification and reducing the administrative burden, thereby supporting innovation when it comes to bioeconomy. Secondly, how do you intend to carry out work on the Hungarian presidency? Stalled? A lot on that, but the Polish presidency took up the work again. Thirdly, how does the Danish presidency intend to implement the EU BI Tech Act, maintaining safety standards at the same time. And my final question is what will the main phases be in developing and implementing this joint action plan, as well as the European protein strategy to improve protein supply in Europe? Thank you and I wish you every success.”
  New Genomic Techniques
• “Thank you, chair. Well, unfortunately, the American. President Trump's. Scenario of trying to stage issues in the Persian Gulf to avoid us talking about other things is a problem. We're seeing a clear violation of international law, and we, the Europeans, are footing the bill for all of this, starting first and foremost with the price of fuel, but also the cost of food. Now, people haven't spoken about this a lot. The issues of the Persian Gulf, that is a, a, an absolute crucial center of trade for these issues. We're seeing. 30 to 35% of world production of urea that goes through this and ammonia exports as well. Then we have the problems of fuel for fertilizers. We don't have any strategic reserves which are coordinated at international level. And all of this has an effect on prices. Prices have skyrocketed for rice fruit cereal. The FAO has a report on the impact of the war on the whole global agro food system that says that farmers incomes could be reduced in very short space of time by 200%. Uh, and this is something that's going to affect them directly. So I have a question. Why isn't the commission immediately reacting by establishing an emergency plan for the agro food sector? This isn't a commodity. It's a strategic asset of European interest. Why not, uh, accelerate the fertiliser plan? Because we have a dire need for that at this stage. Thank you.”
  Use of fertilisers
• “Thank you. Chair, I will I will speak in my language in Italian. Uh. I would like to say how delighted I am. With this. With the prize and the prize winner. This was an initiative. A joint initiative from the European Parliament and the foundation, the Charlemagne Foundation. Starting from when this began in 2008, we've seen so many young people that have won this prize, and we've seen extremely interesting projects, innovative projects, often helping to reinforce cooperation in Europe. And also in this case, we are. We have looked at and you have looked at this, um, rural identity and solidarity in the European Union. And I would like to also emphasise what we've heard from our guests, the importance of looking ahead and being optimistic about European cooperation, and also to think about a dimension that it really is multi national. And which involves many different countries. I'm very pleased that these young guests and I would like to say good luck to you and well done because I think it's wonderful to see how passionate they are, and I hope that they can spread that out to their fellow, their fellows, as it were, their fellow young people in their country. The. It's particularly young people that believe in Europe. It's new generations that have more faith in European institutions than their elders. And we really do need to support them and encourage them. We need to. Encourage them. Encourage them to look towards the horizon, towards the future with a lot of optimism and hope. And I really hope that. Well, I know that the future is yours, but actually it's not just the future, it's the present. The present is yours already, so you shouldn't have to give up anything. And we really are very grateful and happy with what you've achieved.”
  EU and national cultural identities
• “President. Commissioner. The agri programmes are a fundamental part of the EU budget for 2026. The S&D Group has focused on generational renewal, which is a question of survival for farming today and to many regions. The average age of farmers is over 57 years of age. Any young person that wants to take over them runs into huge obstacles. We have asked for an increase of 23 million for additional support income, support for young people compared to the first proposal. That's a first step, but it's not enough. We also need to instil trust in income and perspectives for a new generation. Without them, we won't have food security. The green transition or any future for our rural areas. Moreover, it is unacceptable for the food agri promotion programmes were brought to zero. These funds have supported EU export, the reputation of our products and our consumers. Therefore, it's wonderful that they've been reinstated. Promoting a European food means that we defend work, our territories and the EU.”
  Agricultural funding
• “Thank you very much. To The rapporteur for this very interesting presentation. I think he's made it very clear to us that the farm sector is facing a very complex transition at the moment. It's not just a question of the environment, it's also a question of economic and social policy, to which we've discussed many times in the past. Regenerative agriculture. In this context, context represents not only a collection of innovative practices, but also a strategy for improving and enhancing the fertility of the soil and reducing the need for fertilizers and chemical inputs. It's a model which is different because it focuses not just on the immediate production levels, but also on the medium and longer term. And I absolutely agree that this is important and we should be supporting this kind of approach because it is very much a thing for the future. I would like to just look upon, look at 1 or 2 different things, how it relates to the bioeconomy. You using of natural products, production of biogas, for example, biomethane and how these can be produced from. Agricultural waste so that we can create better circular economy structures. But this is something that isn't just going to happen of its own accord. It's not enough just to create a technical definition and a few details of defining regenerative agriculture. We need experts and farmers and many others on board, and we need people to buy into the strategy and the implementation thereof. So, chairman, this is an important initiative I think we should be supporting it, and we need to be operating in a number of different ways at the same time. Targeted incentives in the Cap, investment in research and development, and second, focusing on the bioeconomy and making the most we can of that. Thank you.”
  Agriculture (green)
• “Thank you, Madam Chair. Well, I would like in particular to thank the rapporteur, my colleague, for his work on this important report on promotion policy for the EU. It's a balanced text which takes a constructive approach, which I would support. It contains specific recommendations intended to improve this sector. One first point, which I think is crucial to this, is that of simplifying access conditions for these programmes. So many times when we've been talking with farmers and producers, they've talked about the difficulty of knowing about the programs and having access to them. And that's a priority which can no longer be delayed. Our procedures are too complex. They penalize, in particular SMEs, which don't have the necessary professionals or the instruments to understand the details of the procedures. But yet there's still the very heart of our own productive fabric. Simplifying means also broadening the range of beneficiaries and participation. It's also important to introduce rapid instruments for adaptation of the funds, because international markets change very quickly, as we know, and as we see, the geopolitical context, particularly in third countries, is increasingly unpredictable. And we're seeing that now more than ever before, which means that we need to have flexible instruments. It's not a luxury. It's a guarantee of resilience for our productive systems as well.”
  Export of EU agri-food products
• “Thank you chair. We speak in Italian. I wanted to thank the rapporteur from the Court of Accounts for the count of auditors for this report, but we are discussing a green transition towards a new type of budget. But at the same time, we have to ensure that scientific transparency is at the very focus of environmental policy. The court, in its opinion, raises various critical points about the tree. The three level system for the coefficients proposed by the Commission. The court affirms that the values proposed for tracking expenditure on climate and the environment are still in excess, and a very obvious example is shown. Energy infrastructure on a cross-border basis are seen as a 100% green by the commission, whereas for the court, their real contribution is a mere 40%. So how is it possible that there is a 60 percentage point difference between the Commission's assessment and that of the court? Also, these calculations continue to be based on provisional forecasts and not on expenditure that has effectively been made. So we are facing a blind system which awards bureaucracy based on national plans, but doesn't check the real impact of measures in the field. Sustainability has to be very specific and it has to be quantifiable. If €1 from the budget is labeled as green, then it has to produce real, verifiable benefits for biodiversity, ecological transition, climate resilience for our farmers. So my question is, how can we ensure our consumers, the European citizens, farmers, operators, how can we guarantee for them that the budget is genuinely transparent if we don't use rigorous methods in the regulation and corrections based on real costs, rather than just putting up with the simple estimates on paper and in documents? Thank you.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “Mr. president Commissioner, without a multi without an MFF, the European Union cannot possibly face up to any of the major challenges it is faced with. Look at the economic crisis. Look at the international competition. Look at the tariffs. We need a clear budget which allows Europe to play a leadership role at worldwide levels. So therefore we need to get more own resources. It is also a good thing to get instruments such as common debt, which the Draghi report, uh, Asks us to carry out and make our businesses more competitive, and to improve the quality of life of our citizens. Let us say no to the centralisation of a budget based on national plans. Now we want there to be funds, cohesion fund, agricultural fund. All these must be protected after 12 years of cuts. We cannot accept further limitations to the cap. We need a strong budget. European citizens. European businesses will fail. Thank you.”
  Size of EU budget · Own EU resources
• “Member Pabon, you said that this plan is late and doesn't do any good, but I actually think it's a good basis for our work. Rather than refusing these tools, which are designed to deal with the emergency. We should be putting forward concrete proposals. I haven't heard anything tangible from you, but I'd like to ask you, the forces more on the right of this House criticise Cbam because they would prefer to be dependent on foreign gas and fertilisers. But what Cbam is doing is just compensating for things which are cheaper to produce outside of the European Union. Why do you have such contradictory ideas? Thank you.”
  Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM)
• “Thank you Chair. I will be speaking in Italian. I would like to thank the commission and rapporteur DeMeo for this initiative. I think it is not only useful. But very timely given the international context that we are currently living in. I just want to make a brief initial reflection and then I will ask a few questions. So first of all, my reflection, as de Mayo has already said, we are faced with a crucial worrying situation internationally speaking, due to the protectionist policies of the new Trump administration and the risk of significant tariffs on all exports, particularly our agrifood sector. 30% of tariffs would be an unacceptable percentage, but even 20 or 15. These percentages of tariffs would be absolutely unsustainable, unacceptable for the sector. So we need to open up to new markets. Very soon we will be called on to vote on Mercosur. Mr. quick spoke about trade agreements with Indonesia, India and other countries. But faced with Americas protectionism, Europe needs to open up. But we can't open to new markets if we're going to cut resources for promotion policy and promoting our own products. This cut. Is a significant cut, which means that we can't talk about a real promotion policy, particularly when it comes to exports and exporting from our European countries. Now, as my colleague asked to the three speakers here today. How can we improve access for SMEs to the promotion policy system? And how can we better include sustainability policies, all the while promoting high quality products like meats and cheeses, as we've already seen in the organic sector? So how can we open up to other, more specific sectors? Now, I think these are quite specific questions, but they are linked to a more general overview.”
  Export of EU agri-food products
• “I'll speak in Italian. Thank you very much. You've said that short term rentals are not a problem for the emergencies that exist on the housing market, but you know very well the situation in cities like Barcelona and Madrid and of course, in my country, Florence, Venice, Rome. This is a scourge. 30% of housing in the historical center has been now has fallen prey to this type of system. In other words, short term rentals. And this is totally unregulated, so I can't imagine that this isn't a problem. Or do we want to pretend that the problem doesn't exist? Is that what you're suggesting?”
  EU regulation of short-term rentals
• “Thank you. President. Commissioner. Colleagues. Now, if there were a 15% cut to the cap, we would have less than 217 billion a year. I just wanted to clarify our concern about a potential cut to the cap under the incoming MFF, and it appears that we share this concern with the Commissioner. Without resources, the income of our farmers will be at heightened risk. The sustainability of our farms will be at risk. The rural development of our regions will be at risk, and therefore we will not accept any cut or any reduction or limitation of the legislative autonomy of the Cap through a negotiation Model based on national or a unified EU approach. Now we have been clear we want sustainable farming. We want to support small farmers, we want to improve the conditions for consumers and for the sectors. That's why we stand with you, Commissioner, in a battle that we are going to have to wage together, because farming is a pillar of European integration. Thank you.”
  Agricultural funding
• “President. Of the front proposed by the concern. The procedure small farm legislative. The proposal for the simplification pack a few weeks. The new pack. Lessons. Of programming new. General confusion and NE farmers NE citizens and NE recipients of these rules. A perspective that of the new pack operates. The last chapter of what and this and much confusion. The second place. Nationals reducing in the role of the protagonist. Of the European Union, for example to the Appiani strategy Nationals simplification. We think that the simplification legitimate fortune not go as understood of the clause conditionality social. Thank you.”
  Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1)
• “President. Commissioner. Colleagues, if we really want the Cap to serve farmers in future, we really need to tackle the problem of simplification. Right now, farmers are spending more time on red tape than they are in the fields. We need to support income, simplify regulation and the balance between member states. And that doesn't mean having fewer controls. It just means giving farmers time, dignity, and trust back. Simplifying the cap doesn't mean reducing social conditionality, which is absolutely vital. Obligatory written contracts will be a step forward in addressing the imbalance which has. Affected farmers badly for too long. It will mean that each euro spent on processed goods, currently by a consumer, only $0.05 is going into the farmer's pocket and we need to address that. We need to ensure that price definition is carefully monitored to ensure that there is a level playing field, and we don't have unfair competitive practices. The challenge of food sovereignty and of farmers income needs tackling to ensure that young people will want to go into the profession. We also have significant improvements in not, uh, in, in having a prohibition on, uh, plant products. There are growing innovative, uh, sectors that we need to address. We need to ensure that the European market is a fair one. I'm grateful to the rapporteur. I know that there are many different sectors that we have to stand up for here in order to defend the future of the farming industry.”
  EU policy on farmer–buyer relations in the agri-food supply chain
• “Thank you chairwoman. And I'd like to thank our guest speakers under the second panel. I'd like to just address something that was touched on. Done. By one of our speakers, specifically Mr. Landini. So this link between. Promotion and, um, food education. Could we perhaps have more detailed promotion? When it comes to the European regulation? On a, um, on, um, uh, school canteens and hospitality. And how can we use promotion policy within the education sphere? Should this work be carried out at a national level, for example, with strategic national plans, or should this remain at a European level? I think that this relationship is very important because promotion is fundamental for education. We need to have this link between producers and consumers that functions. And so I would be interested in having a few more details in that regard. Thank you.”
  Nutrition
• “Thank you very much. And thank you, Commissioner, for that presentation of the new strategy for the generational renewal in agriculture. We've always appreciated this, and we have known that what's important is to have a beefed up action to actually create a turnaround in European farming, because there's the digital transition, there's innovation, fight against the climate emergency. We need new professions. We need to bear in mind energy constraints. This requires a different thinking. And then I wanted to ask what type of tools. Or what do you see is is there a link between the generational renewal strategy and the current tools provided for in the Cap to try and promote young people in farming? I imagine that there is a strong link, but I'd like to hear from you. And then what could you do in terms of national competencies when it comes to the management of land And ownership. How can you make it more efficient on a European level? Ways of increasing access to land for farmers. It's important many colleagues have mentioned it. Mr. Dorfmann as well that it's important to have a European level coordination. Put it under the auspices of Europe. And whether we're talking about gender or whether we're talking about ageing in farming. These two things need a European input. And it does, of course, affect the whole of the European Union in that context.”
  Gender roles, equality and inclusion
• “Thank you chair. I will speak Italian. This free trade agreement represents an emblematic case in terms of how we should assess the European Union's trade policy, not just in terms of volumes traded, but also in terms of the social impact, as well as the regional and environmental impact when it comes to our international relations. The shift in Morocco towards trade liberalization began with the association agreement with the EU in the year 2000, and there have been some macroeconomic results of this. The amount of trade in the country's GDP has increased in some sectors. However, if we look in greater depth, we can see a different picture next to large exporting groups which are fully integrated into global value chains. The main part of the Moroccan agricultural sector is made up of small scale farming, and they represent most of the labour force in rural areas. And they haven't really benefited in the same way as others from trade liberalization. This imbalance is not just about Morocco, it's also about our side as well, because our trading agreements have to be assessed in terms of their economic advantages, but also in terms of their ability to promote balanced development and fair conditions for competition. How does the Commission then intend to more effectively Monitor the impact on the parts of the European agricultural system which are most exposed to the results of this agreement, but also in terms of what's going on in agriculture in Morocco. There are serious imbalances there as well. It's important that we have agreements which are not just focused on opening up markets, but also focused on sustainable development, which will help people on both sides and also protect productive systems in the European Union and its member states. Thank you.”
  Trade relations with Morocco
• “Thank you. Chair. I will speak in Italian. First, I'd like to thank the chair and the colleagues. And before the vote, briefly, I'd like to thank the shadow rapporteurs for the constructive spirit and the collaboration they showed in this work. I think the opinion today we're putting for a vote reflects, well, the shared priorities of all the committee. And a big effort was made to take on board all the different sensitivities. I thank the Secretary Secretariat for the technical support. We have in particular, reaffirmed our very strong concern about the cuts in the agricultural promotion programme, in particular the direct supports which could penalise the competitiveness of all the European agro food sector. And we regret the large reduction in margins in the European Guarantee Fund, which reduces the flexibility of the European Union in responding to shocks, and the text also talks about the need to tackle the intergenerational challenge in European farming, more efficient and management, and more sustainable management of water resources and strengthening measures of animal welfare with coordinated measures at European level to combat animal diseases. Finally, but not least, we underline the importance of the continuity of the programmes for the for the ultra peripheral regions, the outermost regions. We think that this would be a this will be a major contribution to the 2016 budget. And we think that with the compromise amendments, this can send a strong signal of support to the European farm sector and prepare the basis for our common battle on the Multiannual Financial Framework. Thank you all.”
  Agricultural funding
• “Mr. president, Mr. Vice President, we are facing a new protectionist policy by US President Trump, supported by the right wingers in this chamber. Instead, we must respond as protagonists by strengthening multilateralism and opening Europe to new markets. This is why the document on competitiveness is important, but in many aspects it is still incomplete and generic. The reference to the Draghi and later reports for investments in strategic sectors and the strengthening of the European single market is correct. But the fundamental question is how do we finance all this? How do we find the €8 billion per year until 2030 that the Drudge Report defines as necessary? In addition to aiming for cooperation between states and the saving market. We must make the issuance of a Eurobonds permanent to make the essential strategic Investments has already done for the next generation. You stop to generic slogans. It's time for responsibility, vision and courage to truly, truly relaunch the European economy. Thank you very much.”
  Own EU resources
• “President. President. Commissioner Hanson. The plan that the Commission is presenting for fertilisers needs to be a real paradigm shift. Fertilisers aren't just any old commodity, they are essential for food security and strategic autonomy. This isn't something we should just remember during crises in 2024. The European Union imported 2 million tonnes of ammonia and 6 million tonnes of urea. Now, with a war in the Middle East and global tensions, those prices have gone up even further. Urea. Ammonium phosphates. These are just a strategic as oil and gas, and we all know how that will end. Farmers are on their knees, and then consumers can expect prices to rise for fruit and vegetables, pasta and bread by 10 15. 15%. That means 45 million people are at risk of hunger because of this war. We need to think here of what all of this is costing. We need to recognize fertilizers as a crucial input, have storage, make sure that there are good sources of supply and energy security as well. There's the issue of digestate, which we've talked about. There need to be the right environmental guarantees. Then it can replace some of those chemical fertilisers which are being brought in to then be a valuable nutrient in the circular economy. This is something that we also need to think about in terms of farmers incomes. Without affordable fertilisers, there won't be competitive agriculture. Without competitive agriculture, we won't have strategic autonomy. Europe needs to move from an emergency policy to a sovereignty policy, and it needs to do it right now. We can't wait for another crisis, so I wish you all the best with your work, Commissioner.”
  Use of fertilisers
• “I wanted to highlight the urgency of supporting generational renewal in the sector, something that we were just discussing earlier. I also wanted to strengthen support for start ups and access to funding under the Cap strategic plans with regard to sectoral programmes. The opinion highlights the strong concern about the removal of funds allocated to promotion programmes under direct management. These programmes have played a key role in supporting EU agrifood exports and ensuring transparent information for consumers. We therefore strongly call for the restoration of adequate funding to safeguard the competitiveness and reputation of European products. Another point we wanted to include is the sustainable management of water resources. The modernisation of irrigation systems and soil resilience. These are key elements to be included in the Cap strategic plans, particularly in light of the increasing climate variability and increased drought risk in several European regions. As regards the individual budgetary amendments, we are completing the definition of the priority categories in areas that we believe should receive a boost in 2026. I intend to put forward the following proposals. First of all, A 5 to 10% increase in the budget for young farmers. The fruit and vegetable sector and the olive oil sector. This is a sector that will continue to face severe market pressures, with price volatility, rising production costs and the impact of extreme weather conditions. This is why it is therefore necessary to ensure continuous and targeted support under the EGF to maintain its economic viability.”
  Agricultural funding
• “Secondly, we need to boost the school fruit and milk scheme to promote healthy eating habits among young people. I will propose an increase that aims first and foremost at mitigating the negative effects of inflation. The school curriculum, as we have said many times here today, is one of the EU's flagship initiatives funded by the Cap for the younger generation, and so it is therefore essential to maintain its funding capacity. Thirdly, the allocation of at least €50 million for multi promotion programmes which are currently not covered. We spoke about the significant cuts that are currently underway. Fourthly, and finally, an increase in research and innovation funds, which are essential tools to accompany the ecological and digital transition of Europe's farming world. Before concluding, I would like to remind you of the time frame. The deadline for tabling amendments to the opinion and budget is the 16th of July at noon. The technical meetings will take place in the first half of September, and the final vote is scheduled for the 24th of September. I hope that this document can represent a shared foundation. Dear colleagues, and it is open to all of you. Before closing, I would like to thank the Agri Secretariat as well as our advisor for their important support work. Together with my office, I remain at your disposal. Should you have any comments and proposals for amendments? But this budget proposal obviously will feed into the MFF mid-term review, so we need to keep both of those things in mind. Thank you.”
  Agricultural funding
• “Colleagues. Commissioner. Well, we have a new geopolitical framework subsequent to the US elections, and, uh, the Chinese are getting more assertive. But I think that means that we have to boost our commitment to international markets. We have to be leaders in trade. Europe lives off trade. 30% of our GDP is linked to exports, and that is even more the case for my country, Italy. So therefore, in theory, the Mercosur agreement would be a useful tool, particularly for industrial sectors chemicals, cars, machinery. However, Commissioner, there may well be serious problems here for agriculture so that there are things that the Commission needs to do. We need reciprocity. We need checks with European customs. And then we also need promotional resources. You can't cut the CFP and promote Mercosur. In addition, this billion euros compensation fund, is that going to be there or not? We also need respect for environmental standards. We need this agreement to be a good one. Thank you.”
  Trade relations with Mercosur
• “Thank you for a number of questions. One is access to animal vaccination. The you talk about access to vaccines. And I want to know which regions are are most disadvantaged in terms of access to vaccinations and what are the main barriers. Are they financial or regulatory? On antimicrobial resistance. This is my second question. And the global reduction of 5% in the use of antimicrobials between 20 2020 and 22. What political practices were most effective in bringing about that reduction? And how can this trend be maintained? A third question concerns the way in which the World Animal Health Organization will monitor progress in the measures proposed in the report. What monitoring methods exist? Do you have specific indicators for this? And fourthly, the new regulation that we're negotiating the trilogue on trade in cats and dogs in Europe. Whether you have any studies or research on the health of animal, of dogs and cats, particularly in relation to the illegal trade and mistreatment in illegal breeding facilities, thank you very much.”
  Antimicrobial resistance
• “I really appreciate the focus on monitoring of the allocation of resources between the simple and multiple programs. We need to strike a fair balance between transnational cooperation and support for SMEs, and I'm happy to see that the report addresses carefully this issue. I feel that the rapporteur has been able to translate ambitious aims into clear objectives. We have to support the competitiveness and sustainability of our European products, and that's something that the Commission needs to work on. That said, there are certain aspects, Madam Chair, on which the s D group will be making some targeted amendments. First and foremost, the question of simplification. Yes, we share the aim, but we want to take this even further. We think it's important to introduce specific support measures for smaller organisations. Pre-funding conditions which are more accessible and structured is important. Because it's not enough to simplify procedures if the barriers remain. And to conclude, we have to strengthen the importance of geographical indicators, which are a strategic promotional instrument. Finally, we propose greater harmonisation between national national bodies and the organisation through the exchange of good practices. So we have to assess competitivity accessibility quality. Thank you.”
  Overall simplification of regulation in the EU
• “Thank you very much. I'll speak in Italian. First of all, I'd like to thank the minister. For her presentation and I wish you the best of luck in the course of this Cyprus presidency. Uh, it's a difficult semester with many challenges. Uh, and there's a lot of work to be done with regard to the new, uh, Common Agricultural Policy to be adopted by 2027. The new structure of the MFF, as well as that concerns agriculture. You'll know, of course, Minister, that as the S&D group, we've expressed repeatedly to Commissioner Hansen, our concern and our perplexity, um, as concerns the um regional Partnership as well. The national and regional partnership, and the various dimensions of it that concern agriculture, social policy, internal policy as well creating a confusion and nationalization of agricultural programs in individual member states, which could result in huge diversification of priorities from country to country, kind of weakening the common agricultural approach by the European Union, if you like. Now, uh, having listened to what you had to say about the beginning of your work, work which will be done, uh, and which will have a continuum after the Cyprus presidency as well. Now, references to the fact that an increasing number of member states in the last, Agriculture Council requested a revision of the regulation. Of that 2011 regulation on information provided to consumers. It plays a key role as far as determining the origin of products, the labeling of products. This is important, of course, for the competitiveness of European producers, and I'd like to find out if the presidency could right now provide us some sort of indication with regard to the place of origin, the and of course, the generic issues as well. And what sort of policies will be adopted on this particular front during the Cyprus presidency? Furthermore, as concerns the, the um, uh, dairy sector, there are numerous problems there. And perhaps if you could touch upon those issues as well, it would be useful. Thank you very much for patriots.”
  EU policy on country of origin food labelling
• “Well, thank you to the rapporteur from the e c for his opinion. Critical points mentioned are the same that we ourselves have raised within the committee. First and foremost, the financial amount planned under the next MFF, which is totally inadequate. Now, this isn't a technical point. It's a political choice, which particularly given the very, very uncertain and risky international context, can only get worse. Where food is not a commodity, it's a strategic asset, strategic asset for European security. Add to that a structural concern, which is just as serious. And that's the breakdown of the two pillars CFP model. We have to come back to the meaning of the second pillar so that we can really promote rural development. So alongside those critical issues, the opinion from the ESC has certain important points that we would share and support. One in particular. I'd like to flag up. And that's the increase from 3 to €5000, the annual payment for SMEs. It's common sense and it's moving in the right direction. We also share the idea of having a dedicated budget for young people and also strengthening social conditionality. And finally, we support the favorable opinion on the introduction of a ceiling on the direct payments established at €100,000. That was always our struggle as well, which supports small scale producers. On digression, our position is a little bit different from that of the ESC. We understand the problems about income erosion, but we support it. So thank you to the rapporteur. Linz. We're doing some excellent work together and we have a lot of shared objectives. Thank you.”
  Agricultural funding
• “Thank you. Mrs. President. Rapporteur. Commissioner. We have a complex, invisible grid, 11,000,000km, 66 million individuals and companies right across the EU. And we have a historical Challenge crime. Meet the challenges of climate neutrality by 2050. So yes, we want to make it affordable, but we also want a grid package by 2026 to ensure we have a cross border structure which is more secure and efficient in terms of costs providing safe, clean, affordable energy to the citizens and companies of Europe. But we'll see a 60% increase in energy consumption by 2030. So we need robust smart grids. €600 billion investment by 2040. Where will we get that from? 99% of investment will come from private operators. So from citizens through the tariffs. And that risks are significant inequalities. So we need a European grids fund and clean bonds for that long term planning for investment. Thank you.”
  EU energy infrastructure integration
• “We appreciate the commissioner's efforts and we see some positive proposals, for example, decoupling or the putative decoupling or um, emergency management or contribution, for example, to assist farmers. However, were we to apply a 2% inflation rate, that would be an average rate each year. Today, the cap two for it to have the exact same amounts as it had in the previous period. We would need €419 billion and that is not the case. The 10% for the rural target is not enough. And 45 billion, as announced by the president of the Commission, are, um, funds that will be paid forward and be subtracted later. Therefore, we ask, what kind of a Europe do we want after these ten years? Do we want a more united one or more fragmented, more cohesion, less cohesion, more income from our farmers, or less income for our farmers? For the time being, we do not have a positive answer, and therefore there is much left to be done over the course of upcoming months. Thank you.”
  Agricultural funding
• “Madam president, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to wish the president. The best of luck for the Cyprus presidency. They are full of challenges, risks and dangers. A little while ago, we would have never imagined that the main political and economic threat would come from the United States, with Donald Trump at the helm. We can no longer respond to this threat with, uh, just statements. The European Parliament needs to suspend the EU, US trade agreement. We can no longer accept the fact that the US is calling into question the political, economic and strategic autonomy of the EU and our Member States. But if we are to have a strong Europe, we need a multiannual budget that is truly a genuine multiannual budget. The NRP, the National Regional Partnership plans, will not help us be united when it comes to cohesion and agriculture. So we need to call into question European governance. And the issue of the right of veto. And we need to implement the Draghi report because competitiveness and decarbonisation need investment and a common approach. We have no time to lose. We have to start reacting.”
  EU-US trade relations
• “Not easy, but I will try. I'll speak Italian. Commissioner. Colleagues. Thank you. We, uh, in the S&D stated that we did not want a single fund where the Cohesion Fund and the Common Agricultural Fund would be watered down. Instead, you now set out a single fund with €875 €5 billion. Based on regional and national plans, a fund which you hope will be strengthened through contributions from national governments. But who is going to guarantee us today that the national governments are indeed going to make additional contributions available to strengthen this single fund you talk of? And I too would like to look at the figures. And again, maybe I've misunderstood to €300 billion commissioners. Serafin in another committee talked about €302 billion for the cap. Well, in the past it was more. Currently it's €386 billion. And the one you're putting forward now is of €302 billion. From an objective point of view, where how is this a success story? Where is the real increase. And we're quite worried about. The regulatory, economic and financial autonomy at play here. We know that there are ring fenced parts under this single fund, but we don't understand how you can guarantee that the objectives are going to be achieved and there are positive objectives. Now we also welcome the simplification efforts. But that doesn't mean nationalisation. Simplification does not mean reducing resources. That's not in the interest of farmers or food security on our continent.”
  Agricultural funding
• “Thank you very much, chair. I am the coordinator on behalf of the S&D Group in the Agri committee, and over the course of recent days, um, we will set the shadow rapporteur these and our completely shift the European budget, the shape of the European budget. And as it's been presented, we are not convinced. We've said that from the outset and we're stating it yet again. Despite the two amending letters that have been presented by president von der Leyen, we do not want to see a weakening of the cap. It is a common agricultural policy, common, and we do not see the strength of this word common, considering the nationalisation or the approach to nationalisation of the Cap, with 27 different negotiations with member states that will have 27 different political agendas, with 27 different priorities. And then there is a reduction of the overarching sums and a potential conflict between the cap and cohesion policy. And those two should, on the other hand, be closely coordinated. Moreover, it's going to be hard to have oversight, and indeed ECA stated this because of the coexistence with of two different of many sectors when it comes to the Cap specifically.”
  Agricultural funding
• “Thank you, Commissioner. We value the efforts you have presented here in terms of creativity for young people, for income support on the crisis reserve. But we maintain our opposition and a very strong opposition as Social Democrats to this cap structure, which is being proposed by the Commission with the single Fund and the merger of the Cohesion Fund and the world supports. This is not a cap, but it's just a list of budget lines. There's no vision, it's just accounting measures. It's not a relaunch of resources, which we by and large majority had called for in the parliament. But a cut which is cutting 200, resulting in €293 billion in the single fund. So we say no to the single fund, to the dismantling of the two pillar structure, because the cap cannot can become a mosaic of fragile national programs, which destroys the whole sense of a shared European strategy. It's not an evolution, it's a dissolution. We know that you are very much concerned about this, and we will support you if there's a radical change in this structure. We have presented as Socialists and Democrats a position paper which we sent this morning, where we emphasize certain points which you have picked up on. But we also ask that until the proposal for a strategic dialogue is made for a separate fund to deal with the problems of climate change without burdening the cap for farmers. And finally, we ask, how will this increase in the reserve work? How will the partnership plan work in the balance of direct payments? And how will the mandatory nature of the bilateral of the organic support work? But as it stands, we in the S&D cannot support it to continue.”
  Agricultural funding
• “Thank you, dear chair. I will speak in Italian. President. Colleagues, I am very pleased to be able to present to you today the agri committee draft opinion of the EU budget for the financial year 2026. This is a document which I decided to structure into six separate sections. That way I could cover in a comprehensive and targeted manner the main macro themes affecting the agricultural context. Now, I wanted to transmit some key messages related to the management of the agricultural budget in a context that we know is deeply influenced by complex external factors such as rising production costs, the instability of supply chains, persistent geopolitical tensions that continue to have a significant impact on the economy of rural and non rural areas, as well as on food security. So against this backdrop, we express strong concern regarding the reduction of the EGF, the European Agricultural Guarantee fund to only €76 million. This figure significantly reduces the EU's ability to intervene when it comes to unforeseen shocks such as extreme weather events, animal diseases or large market fluctuations. Furthermore, although compared to 2025, we have seen an increase in allocation of financial item eight. Agriculture and maritime policy. This increase is barely 0.8%. We welcome the increase in the crisis reserve, which has gone back to the usual allocation of €450 million, compared with the €280 million of last year. However, we stress in the text the urgency of improving the mechanisms for activation and access to these funds so that the EU's response can be swift, effective and genuinely supports farmers, particularly in critical moments. Stressing the lack of a visible increase in the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development, the EAF allocations for young farmers.”
  Agricultural funding