Antonella SBERNA

Policy topics Antonella SBERNA is active on

What Antonella SBERNA has said (45)

• 2026-07-09 “(11:36:47 - 11:37:57): Thank you, president, colleagues. Now we have thousands of small businesses in our countries which spend far too much time on red tape rather than growing and innovate thing. Now this, 28th regime needs to simplify the lives of those who build, invest, and create jobs. That's the main objective that we all share. But in order for it to be effective, it needs to be voluntary, and it shouldn't create complexities that will then cause problems for member states and would undermine what we're all trying to do. We need to try and create the appropriate conditions to increase competitiveness and produce value added in Europe, but centralizing things is often dangerous. Harmonizing tax bases, doing away with unanimity in fiscal matters, and codetermination may well derail a project that is a good 1 and potentially very useful. So we should focus on what businesses want a single digital register, single European VAT, and less red tape. We don't want to see obstacles to all of this prior to even getting started.”
  Overall simplification of regulation in the EU
• 2026-07-08 “(15:28:54 - 15:29:42): Let's move on then, colleagues. Next point on the agenda, the parliament statement, future of EU support for Russian democratic forces, anti war actors, and repressed civil society. We would have 1 speaker per political group, and, there will be no catch the eye, no blue cards. I'd also like to remind all speakers that given the new, plenary, setup and the fixed, timings for debates, you have to be very disciplined when it comes to speaking time. Madam Kaneti, please. Colleagues, it is hard to, deal”
  EU-Russia relations (from March 2022)
• 2026-06-17 “Thank you, president, commissioner. Today, 1 out of 4 children, is almost addicted to their phone, and 1 out of 10 Europeans are asking us to act and to act now. We've got to do it, and we've got to act properly. And to act properly doesn't mean that we should come up with bounds that people can, find ways around. It's not just 1 tool. We shouldn't have smartphones in schools. There should be parental controls and apps, and there should be law, on social media and access to social media in parliament at the moment. Now the European Commission needs to be ambitious based on the basis of a clear principle. What, is valid offline should be valid online. If there is a harmful or offensive content may be generated by AI but not labeled, if it harms someone, then the platform is, liable or co responsible. We have banned, new defying apps that affect young people and others, without their consent. We need age verification that respects privacy, and we need platforms that are obliged to be safe for children from the outset from when they are designed. Age, verification and thresholds are important, but it's not enough. We have to protect our children.”
  Safety features & content control for child protection online
• 2026-06-16 “01:16 – 15:03:12): You so much. I'd like us to move, to the next item on the agenda. We've got a con scrutiny session question, time. I welcome commissioner Dombrovkis for this question time. The time is on the stage to end the time of this question is the state of play on the European Commission's pledge to reduce reporting burden in particular for SMEs. The length of this debate is about 60 minutes. You have a minute to put a question and 2 minutes for the reply. For the 1st round of speakers, there will be the possibility to ask a supplementary question of 30 seconds with 2 minutes for the reply. I remind you that the possible supplementary question is granted only if it is strictly related to the main question and does not consist of a new question. If you wish to ask a question, I invite you to register your request by using the catch the eye function on your voting machine after having inserted your voting card. During the question time, the members will take, the floor from their seats And I invite all the speakers to stick to the allocated speaking time. Colleagues may need a few minutes moments to register their request to ask a question via the voting machine. So I ask you again to put your request now and we will start with the 1st question. Thank you. So why don't we start? Mister Warburton, you have the floor. 1 minute.”
  Overall simplification of regulation in the EU
• 2025-06-13 “P-002401/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Fitto on behalf of the European Commission In December 2024 the RESTORE regulation 1 was adopted allowing investments for reconstruction in response to major or regional natural disasters occurring between 1 January 2024 and 31 December 2025. ‘Natural disaster’ is defined in the first and second subparagraphs of Article 3(1b) of the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) Regulation 2 . It is for the managing authority to ensure that the proposed operation falls within the scope of the Fund concerned, complies with the programme, is in line with applicable law, and presents the best relationship between the amount of support, the activities undertaken and the achievement of objectives. If the managing authority so decides, a programme modification would be needed, introducing a new specific objective. The ERDF may support research organisations to enhance the regional research ecosystem and under the conditions set out in Priority 1 of the regional programme. The European Social Fund+ can fund initiatives such as promoting equal access to and completion of quality and inclusive education and training 3 . The regional programme Lazio ERDF 2021-2027 includes technical assistance which can be directed to programme authorities, as well as other involved regional, local authorities and beneficiaries 4 . Management of both funds is shared between the Commission and the relevant Member State authorities. It is the responsibility of the latter to assess the coherence of projects with the strategy of the programme and the types of actions included. The local authorities are invited to contact directly the managing authorities of the relevant national and regional programmes. 1 Regulation (EU) 2024/3236 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 December 2024 amending Regulations (EU) 2021/1057 and (EU) 2021/1058 as regards Regional Emergency Support to Reconstruction (RESTORE). 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/1058/oj/eng. 3 Art. 4(1)(f) of Regulation (EU) 2021/1057 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2021. 4 Regional Programme ERDF Lazio – https://fesr.regione.lazio.it/struttura/autorita-di-gestione/ ; National Programme Research, innovation and competitiveness for green and digital transition 2021-2027 – https://www.pnric.gov.it/organizzazione/governance; Regional Programme ESF+ Lazio – https://www.lazioeuropa.it/pr-fse/fse-struttura-organizzativa/fse-autorita-di-gestione-adg/.”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• “Ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, this is a story seen again and again in Europe. Somebody has a great idea. They work on it hard, they want to develop it. It seems there's a possibility. Then you get the first question. Where am I going to open this company? Which rules should I follow? And then should it be subject to national rules? And because of this, many people give up not because they don't want to, but because the rules stifle them. Two diverse rules too confusing. The 28th regime has been born from this, that the idea is to give companies a possibility that Europe doesn't become an obstacle, that you have a simple legal regime that's optional. It's harmonized. That will lead to less red tape wasting less time and money, allowing us to be more competitive. Having common rules to allow the internal market to thrive. More than 15 years Brussels has been talking about this, and let's make sure that this is the right time and that this goes through and on digital ideas as well. It's important that this goes through. This is the time to do it.”
  EU Single Market harmonisation
• “(16:45:02 – 16:47:25): Thank you, Chair. I'd like to start by thanking the rapporteur for all of the work she's done over the past few weeks, recognizing then the commitment that is under this new programming period, which will lead to a more integrated approach and results, even though there are a number of challenges when it comes to the implementation of all of this. Now we'll work together on this, of course, as we've done in the past. We've already had talks about this, but we want to make this a courageous proposal and we need to state what it is that we want European funds to go to over the next few years. So this is an important opportunity and I believe that our committee can do some excellent work on this. Now just a couple of quick points. First of all, we should broaden our view not just towards the East, but also to the South. We have very vulnerable borders also to the South. The text should recognize this and should also draw attention and resources to the South where there is also a lot of geopolitical tension. The second point I'd make is that we should use the European rural development fund to meet the real needs that people have, housing, mobility, neighborhoods that are simply not working properly. So structural funds need to be applied in an urban context, not just as part of a green transition, which is mentioned, but also as a lever to improve one's everyday life. Then on Interreg, I really think we should protect what works. So therefore, clear and stable rules, adequate pre-financing, not just technical details really, but true precondition for projects to get off the ground to get started and therefore having clearer and more certain programming for those who are applying for funds. Now these are some of the proposals that I would like to submit for your attention. We can also do that in a more formal way, but hopefully we can find shared support from other colleagues on those points. I hope we all have some good work ahead of us, and I hope to really get to work on this for the benefit of our citizens.”
  EU cohesion/structural-fund architecture: consolidation vs ring-fenced separate funds
• “Thank you very much, chair. I'm very sorry that I wasn't here to listen to the first part of your presentation, but thank you very much for being here. The European water resilience strategy is a first step, an important first step, and that we've been eagerly awaiting. We have been waiting. We have been working on this for many months. Uh, uh, quality and access and overhauling the infrastructure are challenges that everyone face, but in some regions, it's even more urgent. I'd like to talk about Latvia, where I come from. For 20 years we've had a very difficult situation because in many volcanic areas in Latvia, among others, Drinking water has had too much arsenic and fluorine. This is an industrial pollution. This is linked to natural sources of pollution because of the composition of the soil. There is a new plant, a new wastewater treatment, a new water treatment. And this means that now we have better levels. So you talk about vulnerable areas, about tailored solutions, a basin based approach and helping vulnerable groups. These volcanic areas not only have to be included in these priorities, but it is necessary. So are you planning to focus on these areas, on areas that have these natural, um, contaminants such as arsenic and fluorine? Um, are you planning to take a clear approach and then can there be a European program that has digital monitoring of water quality and also looks at water leaks because I know this was mentioned by others and affects certain regions. Water leaks actually account for 40% of the water in the network. Your proposal is very ambitious, but we want to understand whether these guidelines also include the areas that I talked about.”
  EU policy on water management
• “So once again, we can't ignore that particular facet as well. And that dimension, uh, we need regulation. Uh, but there has to be that opportunity there for development to take place. Tourism development at the local level, uh, Meloni and her government have promoted this type of tourism. And, uh, we do feel that it is a way to offer to offer to local communities as well. Uh, uh, and with this in Italy, what we're trying to do is we're trying to offer, uh, new possibilities, in other words, serving the need of housing on the one hand, but offering the possibility for developing and promoting tourism and the local level as well. So now, of course, we. There are a number of different instruments that are out there that have to be deployed. We can't have some sort of improvisation. It has to be very concrete and clear, so that Italian citizens and citizens throughout Europe feel a sense of security. The housing crisis isn't only because of tourism, it is related to numerous different structural, structural. Problems that exist. And for that particular reason, we need a regulation that will respect, first of all, the various needs that exist out there for housing of our citizens, but also offering the possibility, once again for local development, digital instruments could be employed deployed as well in order to be able to put together a system that's more effective. And we do feel, let's not forget that 9% of the GNP GDP in Europe depends on construction, and construction is a sector that has to be supported as well and taken into consideration this entire debate.”
  EU strategy for tourism development
• “Thank you. President. I will speak in Italian. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you, colleagues and greetings. Commission. Today I'd like to introduce this draft opinion on the regulation instituting Connecting Europe facility for 28 2034, which is a new, uh, which will have a more central role in the new financial framework for security and safety and resilience. Now, there's an explanatory statement, which is quite important and gives a summary of priorities where we can, uh, help you understand our position, hopefully welcome it. This is a preliminary phase, and we're hoping our technical partners will offer some useful contributions and give more impetus to some very basic proposals and to, uh, adopting the approach. This is a strategic instrument having direct impact on European, European capacity to be connected and united in a geopolitical situation, which is quite different to the previous program. Now, the text we'd like to put forth, uh, it came out from the preparatory meeting before we actually started drafting the relations. Uh, and the shadow rapporteurs have made some very useful contributions to this text. And I was very pleased to. Keep these points and solidify the territorial and regional aspect of the program, which is what we're presenting, and complementarity with the cohesion policies and their complementarity with national policy policies. So this is an instrument for European competitive, but without cohesion, competition, competitiveness is not sustainable. And this is why we specifically refer to article 174 of the treaty, saying that territorial aspect is an integral part of your legislation now.”
  EU cohesion/structural-fund architecture: consolidation vs ring-fenced separate funds
• “Mr. president, Commissioner. Ladies and gentlemen, according to Eurostat, one European of 3 in 3 live in urban areas. Densely populated. Others live in rural areas and less populated areas. So we're looking at the whole of the European Union here that needs to be covered. It's very difficult to do that because you have small local authorities have difficulty in having those sort of connections, but there has to be a specific ability to move around to, to have transport. You have public service and obligations. And the legislation brought in in 2023 brings in rules about not just having economic criteria for tendering. However, to make this these public service transportation obligations possible, we have to have other norms as well. They need to be minimum standards for urban transport, interurban transport as well. But social aspects are important too. In financial terms, there's a question of the money that's set aside for this. And if you're having multi-level governance between the European Union and the member states, this needs to be integrated and you need to bring on board the small local authorities as well, especially if they're in internal locations in the States. So we need to have fair mobility, and that's needs to be done with the territories concerned, not just for them. So we need to have inclusion. We need to have freedom.”
  EU cohesion/structural-fund architecture: consolidation vs ring-fenced separate funds
• “With respect to nickel from New Caledonia, huge efforts have been made. Whereas this dome contains 25% of the world's nickel resources and Europe, paradoxically, is still depended at 95% on Chinese nickel. Now, I asked for an appointment with Commissioner Stefan twice to discuss this, but unfortunately he has more urgent matters to deal with. And then there's inconsistency with the cohesion policies. The domes are not areas to be exploited but to be promoted, which of course requires investment in research and development. Consistency between the university and their local environments. Connectivity, infrastructures and digital transition, as well as the enhancement of the fabric of the SMEs. Of course, this all would require a great deal of political will so that the European Competitiveness Fund will be strongly connected to these territories. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm going to speak Italian now. Firstly, I'd like to thank the rapporteur for his work that he's done in this completely Strategic dossier for the future of the union, which is in all of our hearts. This European competitive funds is one of the central pillars of the next MFF. It's not just a financial instrument, but an economic and political choice. Europe would like to build this over the next few years now. My group, I say we are willing to work in a constructive way with you, uh, with institutional responsibility, so that the work that we do in this committee can really represent the views of RGGI.”
  Funding for OCTs and outermost regions
• “Thank you very much, Mr. Lazaros. **Luis-Vicențiu LAZARUS: Chair. Colleagues. Europe's sovereignty does not exist. We only have each member state's sovereignty. This is different from Europe's sovereignty. So my question is if the sovereignty of a single state is affected, isn't Europe's sovereignty also affected if you follow your logic further on. Don't you see that the European Commission is always breaching the sovereignty of EU member states? For instance, when it came to the pandemic, we were forced to buy vaccines worth billions. Now on the economy, you're controlling everything we do. The deficit thresholds, production, imports and exports. You're also forcing us to pay all sorts of taxes and VAT and so on. Now, with the Safe programme, you're imposing how much we should borrow and what to do with the money. So you are always mixing in our choices. Now, let me tell you, we are not yet the United States of Europe. You are not a governor. Romania needs a president that should be democratically elected. And on a digital matter, you need control the Microsoft.”
  EU political integration
• “Thank you. President. Vice president, colleagues, the housing crisis today is one of the worst crisis in Europe at the moment. The numbers are clear. According to Eurostat, 7%, well, more than 7% of Europeans are spending more than 40% of their income on housing. In some countries, the figures are much higher, and without accessible affordable housing, young people can't build a family and the workers don't have somewhere to live and places are being depopulated. So we need to take key decisions here. And Commissar, what we can see is that these funds are becoming more flexible, less capacity, and then they're not able to respond to these needs. What we need to do is harmonize all of the instruments that we have. We need to look at the review of the RR, and we also need to look at the review of the cohesion policy. And we need to think about this program for housing as well in Italy. The Meloni government has launched a national housing plan, and it wants to change housing into an area for growth and innovation. I think that this is something that must and should be, uh, challenge that we should all take up in Europe. We need to think about the cohesion policy. It needs to be able to tackle depopulation in areas, and it needs to be able to stand up to demographic problems as well, because what we don't want is something that is a building and something for an institution. What we need is a house where people can put down roots.”
  EU housing policy
• “Thank you. President, vice president. Dear colleagues, the competitiveness compass is what it is. Over recent months, we have seen just how useful it could be to ensure more growth and competitiveness. Slashing red tape is the most significant signal being sent.”
  Overall simplification of regulation in the EU
• “Thank you. President. Commissioner. Colleagues. We want a European budget that's future looking properly anchored in people's needs without ambiguity and with more certainty. The amendments that we've seen have been taken up. Firstly, families are a pillar of growth for Europe, including the fight against depopulation, particularly in rural areas. If we want to deal with the demographic drop, then we need to have proper structural changes that put at the heart of everything people that are the most important, the family. We can't talk about cohesion without talking about who really knows these areas. People in the regions and some steps forward have been made with smart, sustainable growth, not only energy and transport, but water and digital instruments. A principle that looks simple but isn't. Is simplification. Get rid of red tape. Give open access to people who want to invest on the ground, and we need to make sure that we're properly competitive. And that is the cornerstone of working together for a true budget, for a stronger Europe that's closer to citizens in more concrete.”
  EU cohesion/structural-fund architecture: consolidation vs ring-fenced separate funds
• “Thank you chair. I will speak in Italian. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. And thank you to our guests for being here. The OECD's work, in particular on the issue of affordable housing and the link between housing and social rights, offers us an analytical basis to tackle the housing crisis From the data you've presented, it's clear that and this is something that we share, that housing has become a structural economic factor with direct effects on employment, the mobility of work, demographic demography and land. When housing is not affordable, people don't move. Companies find it hard to find workers and entire regions lose competitiveness. Another central point in your analysis is that just intervening in demand is not enough. And you said that very clearly. So without strengthening supply, we may be spending a lot of money for for very little. So we should work on urban regeneration using existing housing stock, looking at the conditions that encourage investment in housing. The Italian experience shows how important it is to work regionally. Housing needs Change drastically between urban touristy areas and rural areas. So it's important to have that perspective that you can, of course, help to facilitate access to funding. But we can't substitute regional management. So we need more subsidiarity. And we think that's the path to tackle the housing crisis, especially given the facts that you've presented to us. So my question is looking at the Italian case, the OECD. What kind of policy levers would the OECD think that could be strengthened to increase supply of affordable housing at the same time, employment and territorial cohesion? Thank you.”
  EU housing policy
• “The transport sector does not have a quota for cohesion and it's based on territories. We. The staff, must support inland Ireland and insular regions and remote regions to keep the cohesion. If we don't have the appropriate infrastructures, there will be no possibility for citizens and businesses to build their future in their territories of origin. So we need to be able to make a choice. Uh, I'm thinking of the southern and peripheral regions, and this represents a strategic border, and enhancing their connectivity will help guarantee their resilience, their energetic energy resilience, and give them more security with respect to the outside borders. That. Will give out value added to cross border projects, but we can't just limit ourselves to this institutional aspect of trans border projects. Their projects on the territories to guarantee the functional aspects of the Ten-t corridor and multimodal transport. And this, of course, will contribute to the development of the programme. And we must evaluate the consequences. We want to enhance its strength and its role in the urban areas, and it is very important for all the Ten-t networks, because they have to be totally functional with their creation and their functioning. The urban sector will have to have the best connections and multi modal infrastructures where we see a lot of congestion, The inefficiency and a lack a lack of performance, which, of course, uh, impoverishes our corridor.”
  EU transport infrastructure integration
• “Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you very much to the rapporteurs for their input. And thank you to for the commission for their presentation today. We know just how vital the Ucpmb is for prevention, preparedness and emergency responses. Over the years, it's provided assistance assistance both within and outwith the EU. I come from Italy and starting with Doctor Giuseppe Zamberletti, we have been involved in civil society in ensuring that everybody does cooperate so that the EU can contribute so that everyone can contribute. And this is a proposal for a regulation which is trying to set things in order to actually look at what kind of disasters, catastrophes, health emergencies we have looked at in the past and had to deal with and what might be the possibility in the future, and to ensure, therefore, that we have the proper operational framework now. There's so many articles. What's the difference between a catastrophe and a crisis, and how do you activate a mechanism for a crisis as opposed to for a natural disaster or catastrophe? Now, I think that's something that we're going to have to think about, because clearly these are details that are covered in the regulation and then the involvement to of the question of civilian and military responses, which is outlined. But again, technical issues, then we've got the third countries, we've got health emergencies, and that's been looked at more from the regulatory level rather than the economic level in this proposal, I think. So all of these are issues that need work, and we are more than prepared to contribute to that, to find a solution that will suit everybody whilst respecting the specificities of these issues, which I think at the moment in the first draft aren't perhaps fully covered.”
  EU policy on criminal justice
• “Commissioner. Well, of course more needs to be done to change these statistics. They make your blood boil. It's frustrating. The pension gap has long been very, very different between men and women, but for different reasons because women have family responsibilities and the what we say that should be done is not to penalize motherhood, not to penalize, uh, women's choices. No company must do more so that they can really reconcile all these different facets of their lives. More childcare, more and better opportunities, and better access for women to additional healthcare. But we need to be in a cultural situation in which men understand, they have to share the burden. And the European pact on family and fare and demography is something we need to support that's more coherent, more consistent, so that it can really make sure that we continue to sustain our society in demographic terms, because there's a split right now. And that split is caused particularly by our demographic problems here. And we need to address those needs.”
  Support for families
• “Thank you. President, Commissioner, colleagues, the ECI that we were discussing today raises an issue that thousands have brought to us with the strength and conviction. European instruments must be built to support territories better specifically for the inland areas, the hinterland. And we know that the Commission has instruments, for example, partnership, Non-discriminatory clauses and cultural heritage. All of these tools mean that we can, uh. Protect the distinctive, uh, cultural and linguistic realities if we look at our regional realities. It's not just a an economic tool, but it is a cultural tool that assists in filling gaps and making sure that we have equal development and quality of life. And so strengthening the instruments that we have, simplifying procedures, enhancing the realities as a resource. That means that we would have real cohesion, that is decentralized and that is based on shared responsibility. The work that we need to continue to do is to be vigilant, to have a better homogeneous application so that no territory is left behind with economic, sustainable economic growth and respect for cultural specificities, then we will be able to have a stronger, more inclusive Europe. The MFF post 2027 will have to factor in these demands, making cohesion all the more closer to the citizens and to their identities. Thank you.”
  EU cohesion/structural-fund architecture: consolidation vs ring-fenced separate funds
• “Thank you president, I speak in Italian. I should like to begin by thanking Miss Berger for being here with us this morning and for the presentation of this report on cohesion funds, which is one of the most important aspects of the European Union budget. This report gives us Significant information for us in the work that we will be doing in upcoming weeks and months, and will assist us in effectively assisting the richest regions in coming closer to the poorest, which is what we all want now when we are at the end of the conclusion period of 2014 to 2020. And now we're looking at 2021 to 2027, we know that. We're looking at the rules for the following MFF. Now, we saw that there was an improvement in the error rate, but there are still some inefficiencies, meaning that we are very far from the 2% as a target. That means that member states are going to have to make further efforts to simplify, and to have strengthening of their administrative capacity. Other colleagues have pointed to this as well. Now the Italian government recognizes that there are limits in the previous programming period, and therefore we will have a technical program with 1.3 billion earmarked for that to assist in training young people as they leave school to become good administrators. Now, a few figures, we can see that there's the court of the auditors and there's a divergence with the commission. So why are there divergences between the figures between the two? Thank you.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “Thank you, Chair and colleagues, I'd like to thank the Chair and the coordinators for having included this debate on the agenda of this committee in a week where the Parliament is promoting this initiative and so play a role in this. You've seen that in other opportunities we have dealt with the issue of talent and we've selected this theme for debate this year. The right to stay is really a pillar of the relaunch of the cohesion policy in the medium term but also for the future cohesion policy because it concerns the opportunity for every person to be able to live or choose and stay in the place they come from. I think this is essential for the European Union that is to create the best possible conditions which therefore justifies the creation, the promotion of the cohesion policy which should guarantee freedom creating economic and social conditions which are better. And we have areas where craftspeople, micro companies of farmers, as a representative of the Commission was saying, are essential and women are very important in terms of production. We've seen that in rural areas in the European Union sixty nine percent to seventy percent of the working population are women. So it means that we have responsibility with regard to efforts to be made in this area. I have noted three priorities and I'll move to questions very briefly. First, through digital infrastructure, access to credit and training, these are conditions for access as administrative simplification and cooperation among territories and efforts within cohesion to sustain the vitality of rural areas because local craftspeople and farmers have a key role to play in transforming knowledge which results in economic growth. Questions with regard to having more decisions with regard to local production, development of territories and crafts is a key strength. So what efforts can be made in support of those people and in the right to stay in developing the new MFF? Could there be a plan to lend greater value to local producers particularly with a focus on women? **Dragoş Benea (Romania, S&D) @Chair: Thank you, van der Walle.”
  EU cohesion/structural-fund architecture: consolidation vs ring-fenced separate funds
• “Thank you. Online. Now we're seeing things moving so fast that we can't tell what's true and what's fake anymore. And we're seeing a huge exponential increase in fake images. Many deepfakes include sexual content, which are used to humiliate, undermine, damage the image and reputation of women, including minors. So we need to ensure that existing legislation is applied with a determination. But it's not enough. Given this changing dynamic online within our criminal code in Italy, we now have illicit dissemination of deepfakes as an offence dealing with new forms of online crime. We're seeing organic growth of this kind of crime, so we have to keep up with it. We have to keep up with it. In EU law. Two, if we're combating illegal content and deepfakes, we're standing up for dignity, but also for our ethics. In the online sphere, we need smart, targeted legislation that will allow for creativity and innovation from people, but not people rather than algorithms, and we need to ensure our legal framework allows.”
  Transparency and oversight of AI-generated content
• “Thank you, chair, and thank you to the Commission for this opportunity for debate. I've listened to the concerns and comments from colleagues, and I agree with Mr. Fiocchi banning ethanol completely, uh, because it's toxic to reproduction and is carcinogenic would mean that it couldn't be used in any product. So, uh, there are, um, products which, uh, it should be perhaps looked at for, um, because it is a problem for public health.”
  EU policy on pesticides
• “Thank you. President. Commissioner. Ladies and gentlemen. Do you know what we're talking about here? Do you know if those who want to open a business in Europe want clear rules? Less obstacles, less red tape. The numbers say it all. €80 billion is spent every year by small Italian companies to carry out administrative procedures. If we bear in mind the impact of this on families and businesses, it's €225 billion. Europe can't allow itself to do this, nor indeed can Italy. The first omnibus package represents a somewhat late recognition of what's going on, but it's necessary. We've got the threshold of 220 to 1000 businesses. That would lead to 80% of businesses being excluded from the scope of this directive. Red tape is like an invisible tax. You don't pay customs duties, but it's a tax on businesses and this drops investment. It blocks growth. Investment opens up a road. But it's not enough yet. The time has come for a turn. Words into practical action. Thank you.”
  Overall simplification of regulation in the EU
• “Thank you very much, Commissioner. I have a couple of comments which I wanted to mention regarding the strategy. And, of course, I realize that we need to use biological resources, and we need to adopt a constructive approach to the bioeconomy. Italy, as you know, like other countries, um, is a center of excellence in terms of the organic fractioning of urban waste. So we have a consolidated system, which is meant that it has been possible to improve the sorting of our waste And we are able to ensure that 90% of the population can recycle their organic waste, their wet waste, and this therefore contributes to compost and the production of biogas and biomethane. I have a couple of comments I would like to make now by supporting this strategy. What about the Commission's position regarding this specific topic? Could the Commission also think of measures which would enhance the management of organic waste and the content of this organic waste, and whether within this strategy, the strategy which the Commission is adopting? What about carbon sequestration in agricultural land? This is being done according to the CRC provision. Could compost and the use of Of compost be promoted, particularly with regard to urban carbon farming. Thank you.”
  Use of fertilisers
• “Can we restart? Pursuant to our agenda. The next item is the joint debate on the European Semester. We have the report from Mr. Peter Hanson. European semester for Economic Policy Coordination 2026 and the report by Miss Reel. European semester for Economic Policy Coordination. Employment and social priorities for 2026. We'll start the debate with the rapporteur's. Miss Hanson, you have the floor.”
  European Semester (social dimension)
• “Mr. President. Commissioner. Distinguished colleagues, this is an important day, an important day for our businesses, for our entrepreneurs, and for our citizens. We want a cohesion policy, which is flexible. We want to simplify it. And we want to make sure that measures are tailor made for our regions because it is the prime instrument we have to boost growth. So this policy must adapt to crises and must cater to the requests and needs of local authorities and citizens. We've got housing, water and we need simplification and modernisation. We need to face up to challenges boldly, and we need to act with flexibility when required by the circumstances. That is the way we put in place a necessary precondition for the future, and we can build the kind of future that we want and that so many are clamouring for. And the European Parliament is doing its bit to make sure that this happens quickly and that it happens properly.”
  EU cohesion/structural-fund architecture: consolidation vs ring-fenced separate funds
• “Thank you, Madam Commissioner, and welcome to our housing Subcommittee. I have a question for you in relation to the directive and the energy efficiency of public buildings. Now, we've been told that there will not be any significant change, because it will be the result of a sort of shared approach. Now, as you know, I come from Italy and we have real worries here. The directive stipulates that by 2030, any new building needs to be zero emissions and the existing buildings have to achieve energy class E at least, and then by 2033 they have to get up to D. Those are the steps in the directive. But in our country, you know, we have a historic, um, building heritage. One of the most important, uh, building heritages in Europe. And it means that we would have to restructure, refurbish 60% of all buildings in Germany. That would be 45%, in Spain, 20%. But these are, you know, buildings owned by large European families and a one family home under the directive in Italy would cost more than €100,000, and an apartment in an apartment block would cost 50 to €60,000. Now, if there aren't sufficient funds or any derogations available or more realistic timelines, then the directive risks increasing the inequalities that already exist. Social inequalities. Because some people with low incomes, small municipalities and rural areas will not be able to meet the requirements of the directive, they will not be in compliance with the directive. And you recently said something very important. You pointed to the difference between European competences and what local and national rules can do. We have the sovereign tendency when you refurbish a medieval old building in a historic centre which is owned by a noble family, then, apart from meeting the requirements of the directive, you also have the difficulty of obtaining authorizations from the authorities in Italy. So I'm asking this question here because, you know, it is important, but. Uh, we appreciate that. It's a laudable cause. But if you look at the time, the time available and the deadlines, then, you know, in trying to comply with environmental directives, you end up creating social inequalities and social discrimination.”
  Energy performance of buildings
• “Thank you chairman. Good morning Minister. I would also like to thank you for joining us today versus different member states, including my own. Italy have asked to speed up the regulation, the review of the regulation regarding CO2 for vehicles with the option of including biofuels as a main option when it comes to road transport. The approach put forward is designed to guarantee technology neutrality. In other words, not to promote a single solution, but to leave room to all for all technologies which could help us achieve our climate objectives. So that's the role of biofuels in this context. We would like the Polish presidency of the Council to adopt a position representing those requests from member states, promoting a balanced approach, promoting a sustainable transition for all. Moreover, under von der Leyen's presidency, as part of the strategic dialogue with the automotive sector, we have a real opportunity to promote these substances so as to reach an energy mix which is in line with Member States positions. My question what role do you think the Polish presidency can play when it comes to promoting the take up or the integration of biofuels in upcoming talks in the Council?”
  Powertrain choice: EV-only pathway vs. equal support for hybrids, e-fuels, H2 · Biofuels (RED II)
• “We'll start again. The minutes and the text adopted yesterday are available. If no comments are sent in, then the minutes are adopted. Next on the agenda is the report by Mr. Negrescu and Mr. Muresan, implementation report on the Recovery and Resilience Facility. I'll start by giving the floor to Mr. Negrescu for four minutes. Go ahead please, sir.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “President, thank you very much. President. Commissioner, thank you. Thank you for having introduced this European plan for affordable housing. Having listened to the interventions, I think indeed we have to focus on the written version as well and know what are to be expected. So we need, um, clear issues of subsidiarity have to be considered, of course, and that regions, cities, countries as well ought to be able to conduct their particular affairs. But there has to be that coordination as well. We have to offer real solutions to, uh, dealing with individuals, uh, young people, uh, workers, uh, families that are all those that are particularly vulnerable to offer to them European affordable housing. Indeed. So we have to have a particular approach. Uh, and I hope that it will not only be something that focuses only on cities, but also the regions as well, because regions have this problem as well. It is not something, uh, which is only in urban areas, and it would be a display of cohesion policy as well, if we take into consideration development in these particular regions as well. We want some sort of equilibrium between cities and regions as well. And we want a plan that doesn't confuse, uh, European, uh, the European orientation and European endeavors with those which are taking place at the regional level. We don't want that type of redundancy, which is so characteristic, characteristic in other policies. This is very important. And I'm also I do hope that we'll find a plan which doesn't ignore, uh, the issue of the issue as a problem providing to those who are in need above all. So we don't we do hope to be able to deal with this problem with a text which is balanced, which takes into consideration the idiosyncrasies, idiosyncrasies, urban uh areas, provincial areas as well, so that we can arrive all together to a situation where all have access to affordable housing. Thank you.”
  EU policy on urban development
• “Thank you. President. Commissioner. We all agree with the strategic importance of infrastructure and ten-t interconnections between ports, rail, road, etc.. But my question is as follows. After all of this programming and planning that you've done, are there funds to complete the last mile as it's called? So those last few kilometers, smaller infrastructure that will link up tend to with the core corridors, for example, the Adriatic um, corridor where there's ten kilometers making because the Scandinavian uh, link, uh, isn't there for the last ten kilometers or so. Um, in Italy and in other areas. My question is, um, given how strategically important this is and important to our competitiveness, um, to the whole of Europe, are you planning a specific fund? Um, in light of, um, the, um, the, um, the commission that was elected last July to complete these corridors. Thank you.”
  EU cohesion/structural-fund architecture: consolidation vs ring-fenced separate funds
• “Thank you, chair, and thank you to the rapporteurs for the draft report, which we can support in many aspects. As already mentioned, there was a unanimous support yesterday in for its opinion, and I think this is a good omen for our discussions as well. We as ASN support a strong European economy because it's the foundation of stability, innovation and security. To achieve this, infrastructure must stay at the centre of our policy. Economic growth depends on efficient cross-border connections between member states. This means investing in roads, rail networks, ports and airports, as well as strengthening and integrating European energy grids to ensure reliable and efficient energy distribution. At the same time, we must support research and innovation. Technological progress is a key driver of growth and essential for prosperity. This being said, decisions on national energy mixes must remain at a national competence and instruments such as Seth must remain focused on their core purpose. Without an additional political agenda like climate goals, we need technological openness, not political prohibition. Finally, a modern infrastructure policy must also include a strong digital infrastructure and common digital standards. Fragmenting digital funding risks weakening Europe's competitiveness, which is not in its best shape right now anyway. We want a prosperous and secure Europe. To achieve this, we must prioritize, prioritize infrastructure, strengthen innovation and give member states the flexibility to decide how to develop their infrastructure within its territory and with its neighbors. We are looking forward to the consultations, and thanks again to the rapporteurs.”
  EU transport infrastructure integration
• “Commissioner. Well, of course more needs to be done to change these statistics. They make your blood boil. It's frustrating. The pension gap has long been very, very different between men and women, but for different reasons because women have family responsibilities and the what we say that should be done is not to penalize motherhood, not to penalize, uh, women's choices. No company must do more so that they can really reconcile all these different facets of their lives. More childcare, more and better opportunities, and better access for women to additional healthcare. But we need to be in a cultural situation in which men understand, they have to share the burden. And the European pact on family and fare and demography is something we need to support that's more coherent, more consistent, so that it can really make sure that we continue to sustain our society in demographic terms, because there's a split right now. And that split is caused particularly by our demographic problems here. And we need to address those needs.”
  Gender roles, equality and inclusion
• “The competitiveness compass. Over recent months, we've asked for it to actually contain something useful to kindle growth and innovation. Slashing red tape is a clear signal. It's the most important signal being sent. It is vital a clear signal be sent to ensure innovation and growth for businesses on the world stage. The compass hones in on innovation as a dynamo for competitiveness. We must invest in R&D and create a helpful environment for businesses businesses to grow. This will put our companies at the forefront on the international stage. There is no growth without people. If Europe fails to fight against the loss of population, the demographics which we will not be able to maintain our lifestyle. Europe should be a breeding ground for competitiveness and attracting investment. Bureaucrats and politicians should work hand in hand. We must work hand in hand on the provisions, provisions to enact this plan. We are waiting for the Commission to do more work on the omnibus, so that we have a Europe which really tackles global challenges and provides a steer to others on the global stage.”
  Overall simplification of regulation in the EU
• “Thank you chair. Happy New Year everyone and welcome back Commissioner. Thank you very much for coming back to speak to us and for giving us an opportunity to look more in depth at the document that you presented in December. The plan that you presented is a series of ideas, Projects. Good intentions to strengthen coordination to provide greater flexibility. But it's a self implementing instrument. So for member states. Um, we're really more looking at the framework that would be available for it. And it's difficult to use the financial tools that are available. So you have to decide between, uh, how quickly you want to go or um, whether you want to go slower. And so this brings me on to the comments that I wanted to make. One, in terms of content, the distinction between social housing and affordable housing. Social housing has a clear legal basis. It's for the most marginalised people who otherwise wouldn't have access to the market. And as this committee requested in lengthy discussions, you've suggested a broadening this to affordable housing. These are sometimes our middle class families who can't, wouldn't currently be covered by social housing, but still can't afford market rates. And of course, it's correct to respect the principle of subsidiarity and allow member states to define who would have access to it. But in allowing member states to exercise this, it's important to ensure that the EU ensures that there is proper access to stable statehood to ensure both public and private investment in this. And the second comment I wanted to make was about genuine mobilisation of resources. Yes, the EIB cohesion funds are important tools, but simplification, certainty about timescales, these are not merely, um, secondary, but they're absolutely essential to ensure proper supply. So my questions are how does the Commission intend to properly provide support for Member States in properly implementing state aid to ensure that they can move forward with this. And what type of flexibility? Flexibility measures and simplification measures do you intend to introduce to ensure, um, authorisations and, uh, a reasonable time frame for use of the funds?”
  EU housing policy
• “Commissioner. Well, of course more needs to be done to change these statistics. They make your blood boil. It's frustrating. The pension gap has long been very, very different between men and women, but for different reasons because women have family responsibilities and the what we say that should be done is not to penalize motherhood, not to penalize, uh, women's choices. No company must do more so that they can really reconcile all these different facets of their lives. More childcare, more and better opportunities, and better access for women to additional healthcare. But we need to be in a cultural situation in which men understand, they have to share the burden. And the European pact on family and fare and demography is something we need to support that's more coherent, more consistent, so that it can really make sure that we continue to sustain our society in demographic terms, because there's a split right now. And that split is caused particularly by our demographic problems here. And we need to address those needs.”
  Gender roles, equality and inclusion
• “Thank you. The report that we're voting on today on the housing crisis is an important milestone in the debate on housing for a long time. We looked at it from the social dimension, looking at public support instruments, and we looked at how to protect those who needed it. We're still keeping that focus, but we're also we're broadening the scope. And that's why it's important that the final text also includes some very clear principles, thanks to some extent as well to the amendments that we tabled on this. It's about protecting property rights, condemning squatting, because if we protect property, then it means there will be safety in our neighborhoods. And of course, member states and local authorities play a very important role. And we've bolstered this. It's because of the principle of subsidiarity. We've often forgotten realities in the debate, such as medium sized towns and the need to support young families and students that more often than not, find it difficult to access housing. Last but not least, the text says that if there isn't innovation and if there isn't less red tape and more affordable housing, we won't be able to tackle this crisis. And this is the path to take, as has been done in some member states with national policies. Giorgia Meloni has been doing this. Uh, she has brought so many new dwellings into the market, unused dwellings. And that means that there is more supply. So defending the right to a home is tantamount to protecting freedom, family safety, and property. Commissioner, I hope that our work will not remain dead. Letter and that will be taken on board when looking at the affordable housing plan.”
  EU housing policy
• “Thank you. Chair. First of all, I'd like to thank the Commissioner for being here with us today and also for the presentation of this regulation. We want to see a constructive approach in defining the laws here. And so we need appropriate financing for civil protection in Europe. In Italy we have a model that would work at European level, looking at crises over recent years where we have departments of civil protection, where we've used PNR funds. Uh, ah. Um. And uh, I was very interested in reading in your draft law. So perhaps you could explain in a little more detail about certain things. You think that there should be a center for coordination crisis in the member states, where they'd be able to provide coordination services across various areas. What is the specific function of this center and when it comes to response emergency response? Uh, we need to look at added value from member states and for member states. Uh, we can see that there needs to be cooperation, maybe between civilian and military capacities to achieve this. So we need to bolster cooperation. But maybe we're bringing in more complexity than is necessary in the governance systems. And finally, uh, we've looked at the possibility of having this single fund to bring cohesion funds and horizon together. But what sort of synergies are being achieved here? Uh, of course we want to have simplification in the programs, but will it be efficient?”
  EU law enforcement cooperation in criminal matters
• “But if the sitting is open, the first item on our agenda is the report by Miss Vidal and Mr. Niinisto, phasing out Russian natural gas imports and improving monitoring of potential energy dependencies. We'll start the debate with the rapporteurs, starting with Miss Vidal.”
  EU approach to energy security (home-made vs import sources)
• “Thank you very much. Thank you very much for this opportunity. I'll be brief, but I felt very strongly about this. And I wanted to thank the transport committee and the relevant teams for this. I'd like to thank those in the committee that unanimously voted to back the opinion that we're delivering. Through this opinion, we would like to tell you about certain points of view in the committee. Of course, we know that you are the lead committee. This is a very important file for the future of Europe, especially at this critical moment. Both Co-rapporteurs have talked about this. But I think it's important to mention this unanimous vote in Reggie. We have voted on four key aspects. First of all, infrastructure has dovetails with cohesion. It's in urban areas and in other more far flung areas. And when I say far flung, I'm thinking about the role of CEF because we have to make sure that the corridors are interoperable. Now the description here is very clear. From an energy point of view, interconnections are very important. Energy interconnectivity is of vital importance. Now on co-funding, we wanted to increase the figures, which were rather stingy, I would say. I don't think the commission was very generous. I think we have to be very realistic. So yes, of course we it would have been very easy to put everything back to 100%. We didn't do that. But 85% is our proposal. And we really wanted to say that local and regional authorities play a very important role on interconnections. There were the words synergy and interconnections. These were buzzwords that were mentioned. And they're very important. And I hope that the work that we've been done will be taken on board, because I think that this can really help the regions that we represent. Thank you very much for this opportunity, and good luck with your work.”
  EU funding for transportation
• “Can we restart? Pursuant to our agenda. The next item is the joint debate on the European Semester. We have the report from Mr. Peter Hanson. European semester for Economic Policy Coordination 2026 and the report by Miss Reel. European semester for Economic Policy Coordination. Employment and social priorities for 2026. We'll start the debate with the rapporteur's. Miss Hanson, you have the floor.”
  European Semester (social dimension)
• “Thank you very much, president. Thank you very much, Commissioner, for being with us this morning to listen to our particular concerns and our suggestions as well. Now, um, now, of course, the situation right now we find ourselves in a housing emergency right now in Europe. Uh, and we should have taken into consideration a number of different issues on the welfare front and of course, the cohesion issue, the offering citizens a system that's viable for them. Uh, so, uh, you know, uh, so there's a lot that's said about cohesion, about doing Europe and this, that and the next thing, but something that is absolutely key, like housing has to a certain extent been neglected. So the ECR Group in the last legislature supported the new legislation for short term rentals. We felt that it was balanced, that there was it offered an element of transparency as well. And, uh, but on the other hand, we can't use transparency to penalize the market. So we have to strike a very, very careful balance there. And now short term rentals, uh, it's an issue that is a reality. It's a reality that we have to deal with and we have to find some sort of balance once again. Uh, but once again, we cannot cause any sort of market distortions. On the one hand, it's something that exists in numerous different areas, particularly in larger metropolitan areas, but in other areas as well in Italy as well in rural areas, and there are numerous different, even larger estate type homes. Uh, small chateaus, if you like, that, offer this type of short term rental situation. That's in Italy. And of course it has contributed. It has contributed to socio economic development in those particular areas.”
  EU regulation of short-term rentals