Benedetta SCUDERI

Policy topics Benedetta SCUDERI is active on

What Benedetta SCUDERI has said (29)

• 2026-06-17 “@CHAIR (15:05:00 – 15:06:05): the 7 biggest fossil fuel companies in the world. $3,000 a 2nd. Remember that number when we are told that electrify electrification is expensive, when we're told that it's not convenient. Our people, our population are paying bills which are incredibly high, and they are earning $3,000 a 2nd. We can't fill our cars, and they're earning $3,000 a 2nd. There are people here who are going to tell you that electrification is a nightmare, that it isn't convenient, and probably because for them, it's all very well and good that, profits are earned by fossil fuel companies while normal people are paying ridiculously high bills. Our role here is to ensure that we can make electrification convenient, and we can incentivize it. It means more renewables. It means better grids. It means working for people and not for the pockets of fossil fuel companies. Thank you very much. And now madam.”
  EU approach to electricity market and prices
• 2025-10-23 “E-004184/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Séjourné on behalf of the European Commission The Clean Industrial Deal 1 highlights the need to create lead markets for low-carbon industrial products, including by developing a voluntary label on the carbon intensity of industrial products, starting with steel. Such labels will allow producers to distinguish the carbon intensity of their industrial production and benefit from targeted incentives. The Clean Industrial Deal highlights the need to continue working on developing comprehensive lifecycle assessments, building on the Industrial Accelerator Act’s voluntary label, where relevant. The Commission aims at securing a resilient pathway for all European steelmakers to achieve decarbonisation, while fostering competitiveness. To this end, the Commission is carefully considering several options to develop a label on the carbon intensity of industrial products, in the Industrial Accelerator Act, including but not limited to the concept of a sliding scale for steel. The Commission will seek to propose a transparent methodology designed to promote competitive decarbonisation for both primary and secondary steelmakers and will form a building block for the forthcoming label under the Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation 2 . 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52025DC0085. 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:02024R1781-20240628.”
  Carbon leakage support · Ecodesign & durability
• 2025-09-16 “E-003569/2025 Answer given by Mr Dombrovskis on behalf of the European Commission 1. Pursuant to Article 22 of Regulation (EU) 2021/241 establishing the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) 1 , Member States are primarily responsible for protecting the financial interests of the EU. In Italy, the body designated to audit the RRF funds is distinct and independent from the Italian Court of Auditors. This body is the Organismo indipendente di audit del Piano Nazionale di Ripresa e Resilienza (PNRR), (Ufficio XIII), within Ispettorato Generale per il PNRR, located within the Ministry of Economy and Finance. Nonetheless, the Italian Court of Auditors is part of the governance of the national recovery and resilience plan. The Italian Court of Auditors may carry out ex post audits on a risk basis and on the expenses linked to the RRF (not on the satisfactory fulfilment of milestones and targets). The Commission will assess the compatibility of this reform, which aims to boost the effectiveness of administrative action by mitigating the chilling effect associated with the risk of liability 2 , with obligations laid down in Article 22 of the RRF Regulation once the bill is adopted. 2. Once a Member State adopts provisions that may relate to its audit and control arrangements, the Commission reassesses these arrangements in light of the requirements established by the Regulation, and may launch system audits, review reports or corrective measures if needed. If these arrangements are considered inadequate, the Commission may downgrade the rating of the RRP from ‘A’ to ‘C’ against the criteria 2.10 of Annex V of Regulation 2021/241, in which case no more payment can be made to the Member State until the related weaknesses or deficiencies have been addressed. 3. See the reply to the second question that provides an overview of supervisory and intervention tools at disposal of the Commission to assess Member States’s audit and control arrangements. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/241/oj/eng. 2 https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/9ccf6a60-8e2f-4193-868b30a24c9e37e0_en?filename=16_1_63949_coun_chap_italy_en.pdf.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• 2025-05-22 “E-002067/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Ribera on behalf of the European Commission Within the Italian Resilience and Recovery Plan 1 , 5G connectivity is supported under Measure Mission 1 Component 2 Investment 3: Fast Internet Connections (Ultra Broadband and 5G). This includes investment in 5G networks to ensure adequate coverage across the Italian territory. On 25 April 2022, the Commission adopted State aid decision SA.100557 2 – Italian 5G Plan – declaring compatible with the internal market a measure to support, among others, the deployment of 5G networks providing speeds of at least 150 Megabit/second download speeds under usual peak times conditions. According to the Commission decision, the aid can only be granted for the deployment of such performant 5G networks in areas where existing or planned mobile networks, including 5G networks, do not provide, or were not expected to provide by 2026, at least 30 Megabit/second download speeds under usual peak times conditions. The Italian authorities carried out a comprehensive mapping exercise and a public consultation to determine the target areas for the measure. The mapping was conducted between 10 June and 31 August 2021, followed by a public consultation from 15 November to 15 December 2021. Stakeholders were invited to comment on the results of the mapping, including the list of intervention areas. The Commission decision approving the measure was not appealed, and the State aid covered by that measure is considered as existing aid. The Commission, together with the Member States, keeps existing aid systems under constant review. 1 https://commission.europa.eu/business-economy-euro/economic-recovery/recovery-and-resiliencefacility/country-pages/italys-recovery-and-resilience-plan_en. 2 https://competition-cases.ec.europa.eu/cases/SA.100557.”
  5G · EU industrial funding
• 2025-05-19 “E-001999/2025 Answer given by Mr Hoekstra on behalf of the European Commission The EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) benchmarks have been updated to provide a level playing field for all primary steel production technologies, and to provide incentives for the transition to low-carbon technologies, in particular if these are based on hydrogen, or could use hydrogen in the future. In line with the revised ETS Directive, ETS benchmarks continue distinguishing between primary and secondary steel production. Primary producers in third countries using low-carbon technologies will equally be incentivised through a reduced Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) obligation. The Commission is assessing whether this could cause imbalances in the future with respect to EU secondary steel producers compared to third-country primary steel producers and will explore potential solutions if needed. As of 2026, secondary steelmaking will also benefit from the revised rules on free allocation. This will further strengthen the position of low-carbon producers, alongside the gradual introduction of CBAM. Besides the CBAM, the Commission is currently working on promoting circular steel such as the potential setting of recycled content targets for steel in vehicles. As announced in the Steel and Metals Action Plan 1 , no later than by the third quarter of the year 2025, the Commission will propose a trade measure replacing the steel safeguards as of 1 July 2026, providing a highly effective level of protection against negative trade-related effects caused by global overcapacities. 1 COM(2025) 125.”
  Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM)
• 2024-12-10 “E-002848/2024 Answer given by President von der Leyen on behalf of the European Commission Racism has no place in the EU. The Political Guidelines for the Commission 2024-2029 1 make clear that action to combat racism remains a priority and commit to proposing a new EU Anti-racism Strategy as one of the main initiatives to be taken forward. It is for each institution to determine its own administrative organisation. Within the Commission, all services are committed to the same priorities, and work under the leadership of the President and the College of Commissioners. The coordinators on combatting antiMuslim hatred and on combatting antisemitism and fostering Jewish life, together with the coordinator for inter-religious dialogue, are now part of the Secretariat-General, ensuring cross-policy coordination on inter-faith exchanges and working together to ensure that the EU is a safe place for everyone, including Jewish and Muslim communities, in line with the priorities set out in the mission letter of the Commissioner for Internal Affairs and Migration. At the same time, combatting racism remains firmly embedded in the Commission’s work on equality. The new EU Anti-racism Strategy will address all forms of racism under the lead of the Commissioner for Equality, and the anti-racism coordinator will continue to be based within the Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers, working in close cooperation with all relevant Commission services. The Commission also remains fully committed to implementing the EU strategic framework for Roma equality, inclusion and participation. 1 https://commission.europa.eu/document/e6cd4328-673c-4e7a-8683-f63ffb2cf648_en”
  Jewish culture and antisemitism · EU policy on integration and ethnic, racial and religious discrimination
• 2024-11-08 “P-002485/2024 Answer given by Mr Tzitzikostas on behalf of the European Commission The Commission adopted on 7 October 2024 its decision on the selection of projects following the 2023 calls for proposals for grants under the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF), Transport sector 1 . The decision includes CEF funding for a study which is part of the Global Project that aims to build a rail-road bridge over the Messina strait, to connect the Region of Calabria and the island of Sicily. Whereas the Global Project concerns the construction of the bridge, including the preparation of the single executive design, the CEF project addresses only the executive design of the rail infrastructure, namely of the railway permanent link between Calabria and Sicily and its connections with the existing railway network on both landsides. The project’s Grant Agreement (GA) between the European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency and the beneficiary (Stretto di Messina S.P.A), entered into force on 10 October 2024. The CEF grant is EUR 24 750 000, i.e. 50 % of the project’s total eligible costs. On 13 November 2024 the Italian Ministry of Environment and Energy Security issued the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of the Global Project, with overall positive conclusion and several recommendations. It is expected that the process of updating and approval of single final design (which is not within the scope of the CEF project) will soon be finalised, leading to the start of the GA’s tasks. The beneficiary will need to ensure that all procurement rules and other applicable legislation are duly respected. 1 Commission Implementing Decision C(2024)6940 final of 7.10.2024: https://transport.ec.europa.eu/document/download/744ad3f3-22e7-411f-9f0465b20170a1c0_en?filename=C%282024%296940.pdf”
  EU funding for transportation · EU transport infrastructure integration
• “(15:28:24 – 15:31:27): Yes, thank you so much. Thank you Kjell. Thank you all to all the speakers, sir, for the very interesting contributions and the passion again that you put into this subject. Also thank you to all the rapporteur and the shadows for the work that we are all doing on this file which I truly agree is extremely important file for the future of Europe and we have a great responsibility of dealing with it in the best way. Just to go to the point on the questions, I have a few questions on the governance. I agree like at the moment we have quite broad policy windows and with very, very small earmarks and a lot of capability from the Commission after the approval of the fund to be deciding on where and how the projects will be funded and what would be funded and where the money are gonna go. So I have a more general question to all the speakers which is how do you foresee a more comprehensive governance system where we have also maybe a foreseen from the Parliament but also the inclusion of different stakeholders as you were also saying about the experts being included and the necessity of having this? How this can work and how we can project this in a situation where we also don't want to make it, don't want to make it overcomplicated but we want to make it fair and we want to have a good governance that is actually making it putting the money where they should go. I have a specific question on governance for Mister John's, sorry for the mispronunciation, I'm very bad with names, so what kind of award criteria would you foresee for the selection of projects and how do you evaluate the indicative budget allocation between policy windows considering the wide and concentrated sector of themes? I have another point and question on fossil and non-fossil investments. So I completely agree with the analysis done by Eidri on how many money are going now into the fossil import and how many damage we have to pay for climate related events and the climate investment gap we have. So we have a big responsibility that the ECF money are going into investments that are looking at the future, are looking at the climate transition, are looking at decarbonization and non-fossil investments. How will we do this? Finally, again to all the speakers, I really believe it's been said a few times the money are not that much but we need to make the best of it. So how we make sure that we have a multiplier effect of this money? How we make sure that the money that we are investing, we are not investing it in something that would be finding investments anyway but we are investing it in something that we need for the European competitiveness, for social and environmental justice and most of all for something that would not have seen an investment otherwise? Also how in this scheme we are making sure that we take everyone on board including workers and of course SMEs that need to play a big role because of the big role they play in our economy. Thank you so much.”
  EU policy on sustainability criteria in public funding
• “(10:29:30 – 10:31:16): you. A single market, how many times do we use this buzzword in our speeches? We portray it as a great achievement of the EU, but if we don't have rights, if we don't have tax alignment, if we don't have single energy prices, if we don't have, the same protection for male and female workers, what is the point? We cannot build a single market on social dumping. We have to build it on quality jobs, decent wages, and clear rules for 1 and all. The single market and competitiveness have to be the means and not the end, the means to the end of social justice. Let us protect all those who work no matter what member state they, live in. Let us make sure there is no exploitation. Let us provide public support for care work. We have to fight for, fair jobs for everyone, including women, migrants, and young people. This has to be a means to an end, and the end is climate transition. We have to move ahead with renewable energy, sources and reduce energy prices so that families can pay their utility bills. We need to become more autonomous. We need an industry that can, produce steel, heat pumps, and so much more. That's what we need for our green transition. We have to look at AI, digital transition, and we need to be autonomous. The single market has to be at the service of Europe and our population and not at the service of those who want to rake in profits. Thank you. Demiral. Thank you, missus Demiral. Thank you”
  EU regulation of cross-border and posted workers
• “Iran, Venezuela. Afghanistan. What have they got in common? Well, they have oil and gas. They have fossil fuels. We can never build on peace if we attack countries that have fossil fuels. If we keep importing oil and gas, we will have global crisis after global crisis. So today, the price of energy electricity has gone up by 60% in Italy. So we get we're paying twice as much as before. And therefore the cost of living is going up. So we need more renewables. We need new energy efficiency, proper insulation and to allow citizens to share their energy through energy communities. Prices go down and the costs of the environment will remain within the community, and. This would also make it possible to prevent those to. Influence us, that is the Putin and the Trumps of today. So in Italy, by 2030 we should have five gigawatts of energy, um communities. But the figure is much lower today. So we're running out of time basically. **Nicolae ȘTEFĂNUȚĂ @Chair: Mr.. Sean Kelly's next. He's not here though, so I give the floor to Mr.. Nardella.”
  EU approach to energy security (home-made vs import sources)
• “Thank you. President. Mr. Bhatia. You're talking about Mercosur. Mercosur went through the council because of the vote of Italy. But Mr. Lega is the Lega not a part of the coalition in government in Italy? And that meant that the Mercosur agreement got agreement got through the council. How do you come here to the Parliament and lament that decision when it's your government, your party, your deputy prime minister voted for this agreement and that meant that it got through. How can you now state that it damages farmers?”
  Trade relations with Mercosur
• “Oggi e per I rapporti con la Russia e di continuer a la di grande di eventi sportivi e culturali per I suoi grandi crimini. Bene, ma questo principio vale sempre o solo quando VI conviene perché quando la mettiamo la presenza di Israel Eurovision agli Olympiad, I responded, che lo sport e la cultura devono rimanere addirittura l'europa ancora non ha sospeso accordo di associazione con Israel e non ci sono alcune sanzioni delle due Luna o crediamo che non si possono normali rapporti con stati che bombardon o civili occupano territorio e violano constantemente IL diritto Internazionale oppure siamo dicendo che I crimini di alcuni vanno bene e quella di altri non sempre in questa planaria, abbiamo giustamente trovato lo spazio per parlare di una leggi Chinese contro IL mani nel frattempo per la nostra richiesta di parlare di Sulla pena di morte di Israel, su base razziali da novembre. Questi un doppio standard esaminando alla poca credibility rimasta al Europa di parlare di valore europei come se fossero universali se poi non li applicate a convenience posso.”
  Relations with Israel - Palestine
• “Thank you, Mr. Oliveira. I would argue that it's not true that this has just come true because after the tariffs and and the trade war that Donald Trump is imposing us, first of all, second, I think this is a scenario that is telling us that Europe needs to be more independent, more strategic, and needs to be able to have its own resources. That's what we're learning. And it don't get me wrong. In my speech, I said I don't want to create a dependency to create another dependency. I want to stop dependency, to create autonomy, to have our own resources, to be more efficient, to be more green, to be more sustainable. We need to use less to produce the same. We don't need to buy more or buy from Trump. So yes, I just want to.”
  EU-US trade relations
• “Thank you. Commissioner, we can't deny the fact that China is acquiring a dominant position in these critical raw materials. It's taking this decisive and aggressive action with low prices. It already has 10% of Europe's industrial capacity. But there is something we should be looking more closely at. China here has decided very clearly on its energy and industrial policy and what have we done? We have been moving backwards and forwards. We've shown uncertainty in the way that we've behaved. We need to have a strong and cohesive European industrial policy with a serious and targeted financing. We need to coordinate our actions as quickly as possible. We can't then replace one dependency with another dependency. We need to have a more effective circular economy to reduce the number of critical raw materials we need. We need to here encourage strategic production in Europe and make sure that we are focusing on clean technologies. This is.”
  Sourcing of critical raw materials
• “Imagine trying to find a solution, a solution to for an individual who needs a housing. An individual who has a scholarship and who's unable to find any sign of student housing whatsoever because the market has decided that the particular home that this particular individual could rent is has become Airbnb. The individual is rendered without is homeless, without a roof over their head. This is the problem of people under 25 years of age on a daily basis. Thousands of students are excluded from the housing market altogether. No, we have this particular housing plan right now, but we have to look at the priorities. House is a fundamental right. It is not a merchandisable good. It is something that is a right once again to individuals. And its living comes before everything else. Above profit, above speculation. No, we can't have simply building new houses. We have to regulate the market so that we don't have this particular system where speculation rules us. So what we have to do is invest, invest in public housing and make sure that the that it is provided, housing is provided for those who are the most vulnerable. And we have to have regulation of the short term rental market. Housing has to be put at the absolute center of our policies. Thank you very much.”
  EU regulation of short-term rentals
• “(15:28:24 – 15:31:27): Yes, thank you so much. Thank you Kjell. Thank you all to all the speakers, sir, for the very interesting contributions and the passion again that you put into this subject. Also thank you to all the rapporteur and the shadows for the work that we are all doing on this file which I truly agree is extremely important file for the future of Europe and we have a great responsibility of dealing with it in the best way. Just to go to the point on the questions, I have a few questions on the governance. I agree like at the moment we have quite broad policy windows and with very, very small earmarks and a lot of capability from the Commission after the approval of the fund to be deciding on where and how the projects will be funded and what would be funded and where the money are gonna go. So I have a more general question to all the speakers which is how do you foresee a more comprehensive governance system where we have also maybe a foreseen from the Parliament but also the inclusion of different stakeholders as you were also saying about the experts being included and the necessity of having this? How this can work and how we can project this in a situation where we also don't want to make it, don't want to make it overcomplicated but we want to make it fair and we want to have a good governance that is actually making it putting the money where they should go. I have a specific question on governance for Mister John's, sorry for the mispronunciation, I'm very bad with names, so what kind of award criteria would you foresee for the selection of projects and how do you evaluate the indicative budget allocation between policy windows considering the wide and concentrated sector of themes? I have another point and question on fossil and non-fossil investments. So I completely agree with the analysis done by Eidri on how many money are going now into the fossil import and how many damage we have to pay for climate related events and the climate investment gap we have. So we have a big responsibility that the ECF money are going into investments that are looking at the future, are looking at the climate transition, are looking at decarbonization and non-fossil investments. How will we do this? Finally, again to all the speakers, I really believe it's been said a few times the money are not that much but we need to make the best of it. So how we make sure that we have a multiplier effect of this money? How we make sure that the money that we are investing, we are not investing it in something that would be finding investments anyway but we are investing it in something that we need for the European competitiveness, for social and environmental justice and most of all for something that would not have seen an investment otherwise? Also how in this scheme we are making sure that we take everyone on board including workers and of course SMEs that need to play a big role because of the big role they play in our economy. Thank you so much.”
  Energy (green transition)
• “Miss Wexler. You talked about the fact that there are indeed abuses in our subcontracting chains. This leads to very serious abuses of workers. But then you've said we don't need a directive. We don't need rules, because that would have an impact on our businesses. How can we effectively avoid that abuse without a directive? It's not just about implementing existing rules, because there are no rules that currently respond to what this Parliament's report is saying. So how can we protect workers?”
  EU policy on labour exploitation in global supply chains
• “Iran, Venezuela. Afghanistan. What have they got in common? Well, they have oil and gas. They have fossil fuels. We can never build on peace if we attack countries that have fossil fuels. If we keep importing oil and gas, we will have global crisis after global crisis. So today, the price of energy electricity has gone up by 60% in Italy. So we get we're paying twice as much as before. And therefore the cost of living is going up. So we need more renewables. We need new energy efficiency, proper insulation and to allow citizens to share their energy through energy communities. Prices go down and the costs of the environment will remain within the community, and. This would also make it possible to prevent those to. Influence us, that is the Putin and the Trumps of today. So in Italy, by 2030 we should have five gigawatts of energy, um communities. But the figure is much lower today. So we're running out of time basically.”
  Energy (green transition)
• “Thank you, chairman, and thank you very much indeed, Commissioner, for your proposal on the clean industrial deal. It's very important to notice that competitiveness, sustainability and decarbonization do not have to be excluding each other. We believe they go hand in glove, really? And industrial processes that use fossil fuels for the production of cement, steel and plastic are not very efficient because a lot of energy is lost. And if you then look at the direct electrification, then that is really a very efficient The alternative is that he heat dispersion and energy can be used in a more targeted way, and there are very advanced technologies such as electric ovens for steel and others are being developed. And we need to invest in those, of course, but it would be useful to use renewables and to have flexibility when it comes to demand. But our question specifically is in relation to the first pillar for the clean industrial policy, which is to bring prices down. There's only a vague reference to the rules on subsidies and investment in decarbonisation technologies. There's no clear reference to direct electrification. So my question is why has the Commission been reluctant to see that as a priority, in particular, at a time when direct electrification is needed? And once we move on to achieving that, how can you make sure that the necessary investments can be made? Thank you.”
  Energy (green transition)
• “Hi. Thank you president. I will speak in Italian. Thank you very much. Thanks for the positive negotiations on this, Mr. Gori. We're facing an unprecedented crisis here, and it's extremely important. We need to have quality jobs. A lot of families depend on these jobs. Climate neutrality and just transition are necessary points to put in place. But we need to weave this in with industry as well. We have to allow innovation while reducing emissions. We need to achieve these objectives. But there are some concerns we have. For example. Technological neutrality seems to be problematic. If you look at limited commercial potential and not reducing emissions to an appropriate level, we don't want to be completely dependent on imported fossil fuels. Nuclear energy has been discussed at length. Um, we can talk about nuclear energy if you see, um, nuclear power stations cropping up. But I think it's quite clear the industrial energy needs can be covered to the lion's share by other forms of providing electricity, such as renewable energies and being more flexible. The technology for this transition already exists. At the same time, the efficient use of resources and the wise use of primary and secondary materials are absolutely essential for our strategic autonomy. Also, it's essential that we have sustainable resources to support transition, and our industries have to be linked to social conditions as well, to have quality jobs and to have a genuinely just transition. The energy prices are having a negative effect on our socio economic fabric in society. Imported fuels are dictating the cost of half of the electricity we consume. We have to be resolute on getting rid of fossil fuels in the mix, including natural gas, and the lack of a political guide on the phaseout is affecting our prices. And that's why they're so high. We cannot accept public subsidies, which are encouraging the consumption of fossil fuels. I conclude by saying that deindustrialisation is something that we are not doing well. We need to reinforce our competitiveness because this means there needs to be a transformative change respecting the planetary boundaries and the population.”
  Energy (green transition)
• “Unity and coherence. It's the only way that we can defend the European sovereignty and autonomy. Enough talking about submission to the US. We accepted tariffs. We accepted to buy US gas. Increasing military expenditure. Trump asks. We answer. And then we know that he is sparring with Putin and imperialism and the end of multilateralism if we are united. United Democratic boast on based on rules. We are in the way. Therefore they are pitting us against each other. But the attacks are also domestic, from the hard right Orban, Salvini that are protecting Putin and assist Trump and anyway, and they don't sanction Netanyahu and his genocide. And yet people still say that the USA is our greatest ally. We have to come up with a serious answer. We need our autonomy and energy and elsewhere speeding up the transition. We must defend international rights, defend that defense that is commune, but not a a rearming that is for 27 member states, federal Europe with leadership that assumes its responsibilities. Thank you.”
  EU competences on defence
• “This report is an insult to European citizens, has no ambition. It is a gift to speculators and developers instead of in. Instead of investing and changing the measures that led to the housing policy, it ignores the causal reasons such as financial speculation, a short term increase in tourism, and it legitimizes privatizing social housing without any strings attached and just having the law of the jungle and not recognizing the human right to housing. Instead of this, you're asking for money so that you can build houses for wealthy people, so the wealthy can become even wealthier. And what about those in need? Nothing for them. A full time worker and employee who can't even rent one house. She has to leave her city sacrificed on the altar of profit together with her family. This is the kind of person we want to help. We don't want to help those who want to line their pockets and become millionaires. That is why we're going to be voting against this, and we're going to continue making sure that we defend those who have a right to housing.”
  EU housing policy
• “We are spending millions on weapons and we're losing the battle against climate change. And we've got temperatures soaring to 50 degrees and we're seeing flooding and fires yet. Europe continues to count its dead. We have a number of elderly and disadvantaged people. We have got workers and children who are collapsing to the ground. We had 151 hectares who had burned to the ground in Italy, all a result of drought. Is this the kind of world we want to see? We have to face up to this emergency, put an end to it. It is a structural problem, and we have to be prepared for it and make sure that we invest in prevention as well as in structures. We need greener cities. We need to defend workers. We need renewable energy. We need to move away from fossil fuels. We have any shell eggs. Maloney, Trump, Musk and all their friends and the EPP voted against the climate emergency legislation, allying with the far right and basically undermining our ambitions. And they've already announced that is what they are set to do in future. But what will they do if there is no water? What are they going to do? Are they going to just defend the arms lobbies?”
  Climate efforts
• “Thank you. A single market. How many times do we use this buzzword in our speeches? We portray it as a great achievement of the EU. But if we don't have riots, if we don't have tax alignment, if we don't have single energy prices, if we don't have the same protection for male and female workers, what is the point? We cannot build a single market on social dumping. We have to build it on quality jobs, decent wages and clear rules for one and all. The single market and competitiveness have to be the means and not the end, the means to the end of social justice. Let us protect all those who work, no matter what member state they live in. Let us make sure there is no exploitation. Exploitation. Let us provide public support for care work. We have to fight for fair jobs for everyone, including women, migrants and young people. This has to be a means to an end, and the end is climate transition. We have to move ahead with renewable energy sources and reduce energy prices so that families can pay their utility bills. We need to become more autonomous. We need an industry that can produce steel, heat pumps and so much more. That's what we need for our green transition. We have to look at AI digital transition, and we need to be autonomous. The single market has to be at the service of Europe and our population, and not at the service of those who want to rake in profits. Thank you.”
  EU regulation of cross-border and posted workers
• “Yesterday, hundreds of workers came to Strasbourg to demand dignity in subcontracting chains. They look me in the eyes and ask for something very simple. Being able to go to work and come home again safely. We need to do some basic things. Limit the subcontracting chains. Have direct responsibility along all the chain. Direct employees for the main activities, but particularly European legislation that dictates how that line should function. It's a question of dignity, of social justice. It's necessary legislation that can have an impact on hundreds of thousands of people. And yet the right is trying to remove the request for a directive from the text. Why don't we want to support our workers? Why don't we want to improve their lives? Tomorrow we'll vote on this report, and we hope that we will have a request for a directive in it. The lives of many people could improve with this vote. Let's not accept the rhetoric of simplification, which means sabotaging rights. And no, it doesn't help businesses because it leads to unfair competition. As a parliament, we have the duty to protect workers from exploiters through fair legislation. We can't be held hostage by those who want the European Parliament not to legislate. We've heard about the risks of social dumping and deaths in the workplace, but competitiveness can't exist with low wages, with no safety and wages. That's not the Europe we believe in. Colleagues, tomorrow you can choose to turn your backs on those workers or vote for this report asking the commission to produce a directive as soon as possible.”
  EU policy on labour exploitation in global supply chains
• “Since 2024, over €7 billion of unused clean, clean energy in seven member states. This has been held up because of problems with connections to the grid in 16 countries. That's only the data available. It was probably more. We need a robust, high performance grid, otherwise we won't achieve the true energy transition. This is absolutely vital to the economy and to to our environment in the in the future too, we very often have obsolete plans that can't keep pace with the need for accelerated investment in renewables in order to achieve a true European grid. Extremely high costs of gas for companies and individuals. There's a need for modernisation and digitalization of grids so that we can develop smart, efficient demand management systems, which are decentralised. Only in that way can we have a just transition with everybody on board, so that individuals and local communities are on board. We also need to electrify industry in order to ensure that our companies can be more competitive and reducing people's energy bills.”
  EU energy infrastructure integration
• “Europa e poi per IL conflitto e lavorare per la pace. Ma questo non vuol dire che dobbiamo legitima o normalizar I rapporti con continua a compiere crimini di guerra e violazione del diritto Internazionale e questo vale anche nei confronti della Russia. Ma non puo valere solo nei confronti della Russia. Questo e quello che ho detto, quindi deve Farsi che si sia IL rispetto del diritto Internazionale di lavorare per la pace e deve far nei confronti di tutti gli stati e governi che lo violano.”
  EU foreign policy approach
• “Thank you so much. Thank you, chair, and thank you to the rapporteur for this draft opinion and for the solid basis it provides us. So from the perspective from our perspective, we see this as a key opportunity to strengthen the link between education, culture and employment policies. And we stand ready to work constructively together on this file. As Greens, we know that the impact of the youth guarantee remains uneven, with persistent gaps in access, outreach and outcomes, especially for young people with fewer opportunities. This shows that we need a stronger focus on education and training pathways, not only on short term employment outcomes, and it also shows that we need to make sure that these opportunities are made clear and available and accessible to all young people, wherever they live or whatever is their background. And they're especially focusing on the people that are systematically discriminated and excluded from the job market and our educational systems. We also want to emphasize that education and training are not only about skills, but also about personal development, autonomy and civic engagement, which are essential for sustainable integration into the labour market. We believe that young people need continuous accompaniment through career guidance, Mentoring and better cooperation between education and employment services, especially at key transition points and when the skills gap is the biggest. We also stress that the importance of non-formal learning, youth work and volunteering, which help build confidence and transversal skills and must be recognised and supported. We look forward to working closely with the rapporteur and colleagues to strengthen the education and youth dimension of this report to make it more just, more accessible and to deliver a more effective response for young people. Thank you so much.”
  Focus of EU policy on education (shaping workers vs citizens)
• “Thank you. Well, without a clear strategy, industry in Europe risks becoming a memory of the past. They're squeezed between expensive high energy costs and, uh, too slow actions from us. Now we need to link what we do to a fair transition. We need to ensure that we maintain high quality, quality jobs and prevent offshoring. We need really a clear strategy to move away from fossil fuels using clean technologies and using investments. Every euro invested in fossil fuels is a euro wasted for decarbonisation, which is a massive opportunity for Europe and also for our transition. We should stop going for false solutions, capturing carbon capture and storage and blue hydrogen will not save us. The best products are those that we have produced, so we need to better use our energy and also recycle. Energy markets are changing and we need to ensure that it making the right choice is easy. For businesses, we need long term supply contracts, guarantee stable prices for businesses, improve electricity infrastructure and lower consumption tariffs for high consumers. Cbam is crucial. It needs to be boosted and also the tax system needs to be focused on the future rather than the past. Industry can be a driver of the transition to the future, but we need political courage to push that.”
  Energy (green transition)