Kathleen FUNCHION

Policy topics Kathleen FUNCHION is active on

What Kathleen FUNCHION has said (52)

• 2026-03-24 “Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Kallas on behalf of the European Commission 3.6.2026 Written question The EU has repeatedly expressed its deep concern regarding Israel’s offensive in Lebanon and the devastating humanitarian consequences thereof [1] . The EU stresses that attacks on civilians, civilian infrastructure, healthcare personnel and facilities, as well as on the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (Unifil) personnel are unjustified, unacceptable and in breach of International Humanitarian Law. The EU calls on all parties to respect the recently agreed temporary ceasefire, fully supports the continuation of bilateral dialogue between Israel and Lebanon and encourages negotiations as a path to lasting stability and de-escalation in line with UN Security Council Resolution 1701 [2] . We have continuously called upon Israel to respect Lebanon’s sovereignty and territorial integrity and on Hezbollah to stop its attacks on Israel. The EU will continue to stand by Lebanon, its authorities and its people and has provided EUR 100 million in humanitarian assistance to answer the basic needs of the most affected populations supports the government-led emergency response under the EUR 1 billion package for 2024-2027. The EU supports the government’s efforts in reforms to strengthen the state institutions and services and in implementing its decision to disarm all non-state armed groups, notably via substantial support to the Lebanese Armed Forces, through the European Peace Facility and to the Lebanon’s security sector through the Neighbourhood Development and International Cooperation Instrument. [1] https://www.eeas.europa.eu/delegations/moldova/foreign-affairs-council-press-conference-high-representative-kaja-kallas_en. [2] https://unscr.com/en/resolutions/1701/.”
  EU-Lebanon relations · Relations with Israel - Palestine
• 2026-03-06 “E-000945/2026 Answer given by Mr Serafin on behalf of the European Commission The Strategic Technologies for Europe Platform (STEP) Seal is meant to create incentives for private investors or for Member States to support the project financially. It is meant to flag the project proposal as being of interest for the European single market and of excellent quality. The STEP Seal has no connection with planning permissions or related judicial reviews unless this is specifically stated in the call for proposals. Consequently, the Commission does not track whether a project proposal is awarded the Seal prior or only after a planning permission has been granted. Should a planning permission be listed as a requirement in a STEP-relevant EU call for proposals, and the applicant project has not achieved it at the time of application, the applicant will simply not be awarded a STEP Seal.”
  Transparency requirements of EU institutions · EU Supervision of the Rule of Law
• 2026-02-10 “E-000546/2026 Answer given by Mr Várhelyi on behalf of the European Commission On 19 May 2025, the UK and the Commission reached a common understanding and agreed to work towards establishing a Common Sanitary and Phytosanitary Area by way of an EUUK sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) agreement. On 13 November 2025, the European Council adopted the guidelines 1 for the negotiation by the Commission of an SPS agreement between the EU and the UK that should cover sanitary, phytosanitary, food safety and general consumer protection rules applicable to the production, processing and distribution of agrifood products, the regulation of live animals and pesticides, the rules on organics as well as marketing standards applicable to certain sectors or products. The agreement would require that the UK dynamically aligns to the relevant EU rules and, as a result, movements of animals, including zoo animals, could be undertaken without sanitary checks at the borders and with the same certificates as the ones required for movements between Member States. The guidelines as approved by the Council do not cover CITES 2 requirements and therefore the future SPS agreement will not include them in its scope. As a consequence, permits will still be required to move CITES species to and from Great Britain. 1 Council Decision (EU) 2025/2468 of 13 November 2025 authorising the opening of negotiations between the European Union and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland on a common sanitary and phytosanitary area between the European Union and the United Kingdom in respect of Great Britain and to link the United Kingdom’s and the Union’s greenhouse gas emissions trading systems (OJ L 149). 2 Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.”
  EU-UK data transfer
• 2026-01-21 “– A Uachtaráin, vótáil mé in aghaidh na tuairisce seo, de bharr na béime a chuir sé ar chúrsaí míleata. Níl mé i bhfabhar airgead a thógáil amach as cistí sóisialta ar nós CAP, LEADER agus an ESF chun é a chaitheamh ar an earnáil mhíleata. Tá daoine ag streachailt chun a gcuid billí a íoc agus níl muid ag déanamh dóthain chun cabhrú leo. Chomh maith leis sin, ní dóigh liom go léiríonn an tuairisc seo mórán measa ar neodracht na hÉireann. Ba chóir níos mó measa a léiriú do Bhallstáit ar nós na hÉireann agus cistí tábhachtacha a chosaint. Tá muid i bParlaimint na hEorpa. Níl muid i gcruinniú NATO.”
• 2026-01-08 “E-000042/2026 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission The definitions of the terms mentioned by the Honourable Member and their interpretation in concrete cases is a matter for the national authorities. The Commission has assessed the Irish national measures and has initiated an infringement procedure 1 concerning Ireland’s failure to correctly transpose the Drinking Water Directive 2 . This infringement procedure does not relate to the provision on the frequency of sampling. 1 https://ec.europa.eu/implementing-eu-law/search-infringementdecisions/?langCode=EN&version=v1&typeOfSearch=byDecision&refId=INFR(2025)2106&page=1&size=10 &order=desc&sortColumns=decisionDate. 2 Directive (EU) 2020/2184 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2020 on the quality of water intended for human consumption (recast), OJ L 435, 23.12.2020, p. 1–62.”
  Drinking regulation
• 2026-01-05 “E-000005/2026 Answer given by Mr McGrath on behalf of the European Commission The Commission is aware of cases relating to the implementation of Directive (EU) 2019/1937 on the protection of persons who report breaches of EU law 1 being brought to the attention of the Committee on Petitions of the European Parliament. The Commission opened infringement proceedings against Ireland 2 on 27 January 2022 for failure to notify transposition measures for the Directive. Following these proceedings, Ireland notified the relevant measures to the Commission. After assessing these measures and confirming they ensure the complete transposition of the Directive’s requirements, the Commission decided on 16 November 2023 to close the infringement proceedings against Ireland. The Commission is monitoring the correct implementation of the Directive in all Member States, including Ireland. The Commission monitors the situation in the Member States and aims to follow up on systemic issues involving the application of EU law. It is for the national authorities, including national courts, to analyse individual cases in light of the national legal framework providing for whistleblower protection, and to ensure that citizens' rights under EU law are protected. 1 Directive (EU) 2019/1937 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2019 on the protection of persons who report breaches of Union law, 26.11.2019, OJ L 305, p. 17–56 2 INFR(2022)0098, see specific webpage on infringements https://ec.europa.eu/implementing-eu-law/searchinfringementdecisions/?lang_code=en&langCode=EN&version=v1&typeOfSearch=byDecision&refId=INFR(2022)0098&dg =JUST&policyArea=JUST-123&memberState=IE&page=1&size=10&order=desc&sortColumns=decisionDate.”
  Transparency requirements of EU institutions · EU engagement with citizens
• 2025-11-10 “E-004434/2025 Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Kallas on behalf of the European Commission The EU urges all parties to implement the ceasefire agreement of 27 November 2024 between Israel and Lebanon and calls for the full implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 1701. The EU recalls that the safety and security of UN personnel and premises must be ensured in accordance with international law and UN Security Council Resolution 1701. Focus by all parties must be on preserving the ceasefire and the progress achieved so far. The EU commends the Lebanese government’s decision to assert full state control over all arms and restore the presence of the Lebanese Armed Forces on the whole territory. The planned withdrawal of the UN Interim Force in Lebanon 1 starting end of 2026 makes it all the more urgent to strengthen national institutions and the Lebanese armed forces deployment. In its relations with Israel, the EU considers that political engagement and frank and open dialogue are the most effective ways to convey EU concerns. The Association Agreement with Israel 2 is the legal basis of the EU’s ongoing dialogue with the Israeli authorities and it provides mechanisms to discuss issues and advance EU’s point of view. Following the review of Israel’s obligations under Article 2 of the EU-Israel Association Agreement, the EU engaged in dialogue with Israel with the objective to improve the humanitarian situation on the ground. Considering the continued catastrophic situation in Gaza, in September 2025, the President of the Commission proposed a package of measures during the State of the Union address 3 . The EU will continue to reaffirm its commitment to the applicability of international human rights and humanitarian law in the occupied Palestinian territory. 1 https://unifil.unmissions.org/en. 2 https://eeas.europa.eu/archives/delegations/israel/documents/eu_israel/asso_agree_en.pdf. 3 https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/state-union/state-union-2025_en.”
  EU-Lebanon relations · Relations with Israel - Palestine
• 2025-10-22 “– A Uachtaráin, ní raibh mé in ann tacú leis an tuairisc de bharr na béime a chuir sí ar chúrsaí míleata. É sin ráite, cuirim fáilte roimh an díospóireacht maidir le méadú an Aontais Eorpaigh. Tá díospóireacht ag tarlú in Éirinn faoi athaontú ár n-oileáin agus creidim go gcaithfidh an tAontas Eorpach ról níos mó a ghlacadh sa díospóireacht seo. Tá sé soiléir domsa go mbeidh reifreann againn sa todhchaí ar Éire Aontaithe, agus beidh an Éire Aontaithe seo taobh istigh den Aontas Eorpach. Dá bharr sin, tá sé tábhachtach go ndeireann an AE cén tacaíocht a bheidh ar fáil dár n-oileán agus muid dul ó oileán le teorainn chuig Éire Aontaithe.”
• 2025-10-07 “E-003929/2025 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The Commission shares the deep concern about the state of key North-East Atlantic pelagic stocks, particularly mackerel, and the serious threats this poses not only to the sustainability of these fisheries but also to the livelihoods of thousands of fishers and coastal communities across the EU. Unilateral quota increases by certain coastal States continue to push mackerel catches above scientifically advised levels in a situation where the EU maintains a responsible and stable fishing level in compliance with its international obligations. The arrangement signed on 15 December 2025 by the United Kingdom, Norway, Iceland, and the Faroe Islands risks exacerbating the state of the stock, considering that it sets a total allowable catch which is 72% higher than the headline advice issued by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) for 2026. The Commission remains committed to work towards the objective of agreeing on the total allowable catch for 2026, a comprehensive sharing arrangement and other long term management measures while assessing the compatibility of recent developments with international law. The Commission will continue to address this matter with the other Parties, while working closely with Member States and the sector to identify constructive and sustainable approaches protecting the stocks and supporting their long-term rebuilding. The Commission is committed to direct engagement with all stakeholders, and the recent visit of the Commissioner for Fisheries and Oceans to Irish coastal communities is but one example of that commitment.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries · Funding for fisheries and aquaculture
• 2025-09-30 “E-003789/2025 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission Compliance with relevant legal obligations, including those under the Habitats Directive 1 and the Water Framework Directive 2 , has always been a requirement in the implementation of the Nitrates Directive 3 and in the granting of derogations under that Directive. Compliance with the obligations of the Habitats Directive is therefore not a new requirement and was included in the current derogation granted to Ireland 4 . Derogations are granted through implementing decisions. As they are exceptions to legislation adopted by the co-legislators, they do not require impact assessments. However, the environmental and economic implications of the derogation feature prominently in discussions with the Irish authorities and underpin the request for derogation. 1 Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7-50. 2 Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy, OJ L 327, 22.12.2000, p. 11-73. 3 Council Directive 91/676/EEC of 12 December 1991 concerning the protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources, OJ L 375, 31.12.1991, p. 1–8. 4 Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2022/696 of 29 April 2022 granting a derogation requested by Ireland pursuant to Council Directive 91/676/EEC concerning the protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources, OJ L 129, 3.5.2022, pp. 37–45.”
  Water pollution · Use of fertilisers
• 2025-09-25 “E-003732/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Fitto on behalf of the European Commission The Commission will launch a consultation to prepare an EU-wide strategy covering islands and coastal communities by early 2026. The strategy, foreseen in the 2026 Commission Work Programme, will set out a framework to better address the needs of EU islands, taking into account their specific characteristics. The exact scope will be clarified following the consultation.”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• 2025-09-10 “– A Uachtaráin, vótáil mé i bhfabhar na tuairisce seo. In Éirinn, tá géarchéim thithíochta inár nGaeltachtaí. Tá méadú sa mhéid lóistín atá ar fáil ar Airbnb agus ardú i dtithe saoire atá mar dara teach agus tá fadhbanna a bhaineann le cead pleanála a fháil freisin. De bharr na bhfadhbanna seo uilig, tá sé deacair do mhuintir na Gaeltachta fanacht sa Ghaeltacht. Níl sé seo sách maith i 2025 agus caithfimid níos mó a dhéanamh chun todhchaí gheal a chinntiú don Ghaeltacht agus dár dteanga.”
• 2025-07-04 “E-002746/2025 Answer given by Ms Lahbib on behalf of the European Commission The Commission is aware of recent developments affecting diversity and inclusion policies, but remains committed to diversity as a driver of innovation and competitiveness and will continue to monitor developments. The Commission’s corporate call documents 1 provide that projects must comply with EU values, promote gender equality and non-discrimination, reduce discrimination against various groups and improve equality outcomes for individuals 2 . The corporate model grant agreement states that beneficiaries must commit to and ensure the respect of EU values 3 . Moreover, under Horizon Europe having a Gender Equality Plan 4 is an eligibility criterion that applies to certain organisations, including private research organisations and private higher education establishments. If this requirement is not met, Horizon Europe funding may not be received 5 . The Commission can also suspend or terminate a grant or reduce the funding if EU values are breached 6 . Equality and non-discrimination are EU core values enshrined in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. They are also reflected in the proposal for the future long-term EU budget, which includes an enhanced performance framework supporting the delivery of EU policy priorities, increasing transparency and ensuring consistent application of horizontal priorities. They are also key for businesses’ performance to boost competitiveness and unlock the full potential of the EU economy. The Commission remains steadfast in supporting efforts to strengthen diversity, equality and inclusion. This includes the annual EU Diversity Month 7 , the European Capitals of Inclusion and Diversity awards 8 and the EU Platform of Diversity Charters 9 . 1 Information on calls for proposals, tenders and EU funded projects and their results can be found on a dedicated EU Funding & Tenders Portal website: https://ec.europa.eu/info/fundingtenders/opportunities/portal/screen/home. 2 Based on Article 2 of the Treaty on the European Union and Article 21 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. 3 Such as respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and human rights, including the rights of minorities. 4 https://eige.europa.eu/gender-mainstreaming/toolkits/gear/what-gender-equality-plan-gep. 5 See page 14-15: https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/docs/2021-2027/horizon/wpcall/2025/wp-14-general-annexes_horizon-2025_en.pdf. 6 Incorrect implementation, fraud, irregularities, substantial errors or serious breach of contractual obligations, including the violation of EU values. 7 https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/policies/justice-and-fundamental-rights/combattingdiscrimination/tackling-discrimination/diversity-and-inclusion-initiatives/european-diversity-month_en. 8 https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/policies/justice-and-fundamental-rights/combattingdiscrimination/tackling-discrimination/diversity-and-inclusion-initiatives/european-capitals-inclusion-anddiversity-award_en. 9 https://eu-diversity-inclusion.campaign.europa.eu/eu-platform-diversity-charters_en.”
  Gender roles, equality and inclusion · Sustainable corporate governance
• 2025-06-17 “– A Uachtaráin, cé go gcuirim fáilte roimh go leor a bhí sa tuairisc seo, ní raibh mé in ann tacú léi. Mar Fheisire, nuair atá mé ag dul timpeall Éireann Theas, feicim go bhfuil gá le polasaithe tuaithe agus maoiniú dár bpobail thuaithe. Sin an fáth go gceapaim go bhfuil sé scannalach go bhfuil alt 39 sa tuairisc seo ag rá gur chóir dúinn cursaí míleata a thabhairt isteach go dtí ár bpolasaithe tuaithe. A chairde, tá dóthain airgid agus béime ag dul i dtreo cúrsaí míleata. Ba chóir do gach duine sa teach seo seasamh suas agus cinntiú go bhfuil muid ag cosaint maoiniú dár bpobail thuaithe. Go raibh maith agaibh.”
• 2025-06-16 “E-002414/2025 Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Kallas on behalf of the European Commission The EU and its Member States are strongly committed to international criminal justice and the fight against impunity. The EU supports the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the principles set out in the Rome Statute. The EU respects the ICC’s independence and impartiality. The EU recalls that the ICC is an important and independent international institution. All states that have ratified the Rome Statute, which includes all Member States, are under an obligation to execute arrest warrants issued by the ICC.”
  Relations with Israel - Palestine · Support for International Criminal Court
• 2025-06-13 “E-002394/2025 Answer given by Mr Várhelyi on behalf of the European Commission The fungus causing ash dieback, Hymenoscyphus fraxineus, is not a regulated quarantine pest at EU level. Based on the biology of this pest and its distribution on the Union territory, the Commission and the Member States concluded that it was not feasible to eradicate it or prevent its further spread and therefore, it did not fulfil the criteria for Union quarantine pest status according to the Plant Health Regulation 1 . EU co-financing opportunities available in the plant health area 2 are normally foreseen for regulated quarantine pests 3 or pests that qualify as quarantine pests for the Union territory. Under Horizon 2020, the Commission has funded the research project POnTE 4 targeted pests threatening EU agriculture and forestry. The project focused on the development of early detection and surveillance tools for Hymenoscyphus fraxineus 5 , as well as knowledge and practical solutions against the spread of ash dieback and other emerging plant pests. Additionally, EU-funded projects like HOMED 6 and B4EST 7 supported sustainable forest management and resilience against threats like ash dieback. Under Horizon Europe Research and Innovation Programme, a European co-funded partnership on Forests and Forestry for a Sustainable Future 8 is proposed, where Member States are encouraged to join. 1 Article 3 of Regulation (EU) 2016/2031 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:02016R2031-20250105. 2 Single Market Programme https://commission.europa.eu/funding-tenders/find-funding/eu-fundingprogrammes/single-market-programme_en. 3 Plant pests listed in Annexes II and III of Regulation (EU) No 2019/2072 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:02019R2072-20250227. 4 POnTE (Pest Organisms Threatening Europe) https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/635646. 5 POnTE: https://www.ponteproject.eu/factsheets-hf/ponte-project-findings-and-achievements-forestrypathogens/. 6 https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/771271. 7 https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/773383. 8 https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/portal/screen/opportunities/topic-details/HORIZONCL6-2025-01-CIRCBIO-15.”
  Nature protection and restoration in the EU · Management of EU forests
• 2025-06-13 “E-002393/2025 Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the European Commission The EU has the exclusive competence for the adoption of common commercial policy measures according to Article 3(1)(e) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and Article 207 TFEU. In an area of exclusive competence Member States may legislate in accordance with Article 2(1) TFEU only if so empowered by the EU or for the implementation of EU acts. Pursuant to Article 346(1)(b) TFEU the Member States may take measures to protect their essential security interests connected with the production of or trade in arms, munitions and war material. Such measures shall not adversely affect the conditions of competition in the internal market regarding products which are not intended for specifically military purposes. Pursuant to Article 347 TFEU, Member States shall consult each other with a view to taking together the steps needed to prevent the functioning of the internal market being affected by measures which a Member State may may be called upon to take in the event of serious internal disturbances affecting the maintenance of law and order, in the event of war, serious international tension constituting a threat of war, or in order to carry out obligations they have accepted for the purpose of maintaining peace and international security. Moreover, Article 24(2) of the Import-Regulation 1 , Article 11 of the Export Regulation 2 and Article 33 of the Textile Products Regulation 3 set out other circumstances and conditions where Member States may adopt trade measures. 1 Regulation (EU) 2015/478 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 11 March 2015 on common rules for imports, OJ of the European Union, L 83 of 27.3.2015, p.16, ELI: https://eurlex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2015/478/oj/eng. 2 Regulation (EU) 2015/479 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 11 March 2015, on common rules for exports (codification), OJ of the European Union, L 83 of 27.3.2015, p.34, ELI: https://eurlex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2015/479/oj/eng. 3 Regulation (EU) 2015/936 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 9 June 2015 on common rules for imports of textile products from certain third countries not covered by bilateral agreements, protocols or other arrangements, or by other specific Union import rules, OJ of the European Union L 160 of 25;2015, p. 1, ELI: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2015/936/oj/eng.”
  EU policy on custom fee on non-EU imports
• 2025-06-11 “E-002363/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Mînzatu on behalf of the European Commission The Commission operates under the EU Strategy for the Rights of Persons with Disabilities 2021-2030 1 (the Strategy), fulfilling EU obligations under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) 2 to which both the EU and Member States are parties to the extent of respective competencies. The Strategy promotes inclusive and accessible education 3 and refers to Article 24 of the UNCRPD, which states that persons with disabilities have the right to inclusive, quality and free primary and secondary education on an equal basis with others, along with the necessary support within the general education system 4 . The rules governing the EU cohesion policy funds contain specific provisions for persons with disabilities. They refer to the UNCRPD in their enabling conditions and require accessibility to be considered throughout the preparation and implementation of programmes. The European Social Fund Plus programme in Ireland supports ‘Path II – 1916 Bursaries’ 5 , aimed at increasing participation in higher education among underrepresented groups, including students with disabilities. While Ireland’s 2021-2026 recovery and resilience plan includes reforms and investments to enhance digital inclusiveness in schools, it lacks targeted funding for disability-related treatment. Students with physical, intellectual, sensory, or other disabilities are explicitly prioritised under Erasmus+ programme’s inclusion measures. They can get extra funding to help cover real costs related to their needs, which comes on top of the usual mobility grant. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52021DC0101. 2 https://www.un.org/development/desa/disabilities/convention-on-the-rights-of-persons-with-disabilities.html. 3 See section 5.3 of the Strategy. 4 Report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, 18.12.2013 https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Issues/Disability/StudyEducation/A_HRC_25_29_ENG.pdf . 5 https://hea.ie/funding-governance-performance/funding/student-finance/1916-bursary/.”
  EU policy on disability inclusion & accessibility
• 2025-06-06 “E-002305/2025 Answer given by Mr Tzitzikostas on behalf of the European Commission Regulation (EU) 2024/1679 1 on Union guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network (TEN-T) establishes three priority layers within the network, each with specific requirements and target completion dates: the core network by 2030, the extended core by 2040, and the comprehensive network by 2050. Both the road and railway connections between Dublin and Rosslare are part of the comprehensive network. This means that, under the EU Regulation, they are subject to mandatory requirements to be met by 2050. Nonetheless, there is nothing preventing Member States from advancing improvements before the 2050 deadline, especially where earlier action is considered appropriate. Finally, as these axes are part of the comprehensive network, they are not eligible to be included in a European Transport Corridor. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1679/oj/eng.”
  EU support of rail transport · EU transport infrastructure integration · EU funding for transportation
• 2025-06-06 “E-002306/2025 Answer given by Ms Albuquerque on behalf of the European Commission As the Commission stated in its opinion 1 of 8 November 2019, ‘Article 215 TFEU is the only appropriate legal basis to ensure the implementation of sanctions regimes adopted under the Common Foreign and Security Policy within the competences covered by the TFEU with regard to economic and financial measures, and notably the internal market, in order to avoid potential distortions. This is done through the adoption of Council Regulations, which are immediately applicable in the Member States, and ensure a harmonised implementation of the regimes in an area without internal borders’. Therefore, Article 215 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) serves as a bridge between the objectives of the Common Foreign and Security Policy and the actions of the EU involving restrictive measures falling within the scope of the TFEU. In this regard, the Commission notes that the EU has the exclusive competence in certain areas, i.e. for the adoption of common commercial policy measures according to Article 3(1)(e) TFEU and Article 207 TFEU. In accordance with Article 2(1) TFEU, in an area of exclusive competence Member States may legislate only if so empowered by the Union or for the implementation of Union acts. 1 Commission opinion C(2019) 8007 final: https://finance.ec.europa.eu/document/download/ef856827-f61942ad-9543-0df6451040b2_en.”
  EU competences on foreign affairs
• 2025-06-06 “E-002304/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The voluntary Agri-Climate Rural Environment Scheme (ACRES) promotes commitments to deliver on climate and environmental objectives. When Ireland’s common agricultural policy Strategic Plan (CSP) was approved, ACRES was noted for its ambitious scope, with a substantial budget of EUR 1.5 billion, and its innovative dual approach combining prescriptive and results-based (or scored) actions. ACRES stood out as the only scheme in the EU to incorporate results-based measures on such a scale. The Commission was informed that the initial rollout of ACRES faced some implementation challenges, as the uptake exceeded expectations, which indicates farmers’ willingness to contribute to the climate and environmental objectives. The Irish authorities conveyed that payment delays are due to challenges involving the rollout of significant training programmes for advisors and farmers, extensive scoring activities under ACRES, and major adaptations in processes, IT systems, controls and reporting. Ireland has recently informed the Commission that the 3% of ACRES payments still outstanding for claim year 2023 mainly relate to ownership issues. Such delays are not expected for subsequent years. Many Member States signalled difficulties linked to the initial CSP implementation and requested a derogation from the application of a late payment reduction 1 . The Commission recognised that the extent of some system changes could not have been fully foreseen or corrected under normal administrative conditions and therefore granted a derogation exceptionally and exclusively for the first year of CSP implementation. 1 See Article 5 (4) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2022/127.”
  Agricultural funding
• 2025-06-02 “P-002204/2025 Answer given by Ms Zaharieva on behalf of the European Commission 1. The EU Startup and Scaleup Strategy 1 does not contain language permitting companies to break any rules at EU or at national level. 2. The EU Startup and Scaleup Strategy announced the launch of a study to assess the extent to which corporate restructuring organisation and regulation at EU and Member State levels create obstacles for business adaptation and innovation in different sectors of the economy, based on firm-level data. This study will support the implementation of the Quality Jobs Roadmap 2 and the Fair Labour Mobility package 3 . 3. The Commission does not consider that the EU Startup and Scaleup Strategy would discourage responsible business practices. 1 https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/strategy/strategy-research-and-innovation/jobs-and-economy/eustartup-and-scaleup-strategy_en. 2 https://employment-social-affairs.ec.europa.eu/news/executive-vice-president-minzatu-kicks-exchanges-socialpartners-quality-jobs-roadmap-2025-04-16_en. 3 https://transport.ec.europa.eu/transport-modes/road/mobility-package-i_en.”
  EU policy on permanent and fixed-term employment · EU regulation on worker representation in company decisions
• 2025-05-28 “E-002156/2025 Answer given by Mr Várhelyi on behalf of the European Commission One of the priorities under the mandate of the new Commission is to improve cardiovascular health in the EU. Commissioner for Health and Animal Welfare will develop an EU Cardiovascular Health Plan in line with the President of the Commission’s political guidelines 1 . The plan is to be developed in close collaboration with citizens, Member States and stakeholders. The preparatory work for the plan will follow the better regulation guidelines that outline the steps in developing a new initiative, including targeted stakeholder consultations. The timeline for the plan will depend on these steps. As a first step, a webinar to gather feedback from stakeholders 2 took place on 16 May 2025. The Commission will work together with the Member States under the Expert Group on Public Health 3 . The plan is expected to be built on ongoing work under the ‘Healthier Together’ initiative 4 and on collaborative work between Member States funded by the EU4Health programme 5 . The latter includes as the Joint Action on Cardiovascular Diseases and Diabetes (JACARDI) 6 , supported with EUR 53 million, and the Joint Action PreventNCD 7 on health determinants, supported with EUR 76 million. 1 Page 9: https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/e6cd4328-673c-4e7a-8683f63ffb2cf648_en?filename=Political%20Guidelines%202024-2029_EN.pdf. 2 https://health.ec.europa.eu/events/webinar-prevention-ncds-2025-05-16_en. 3 https://health.ec.europa.eu/non-communicable-diseases/expert-group-public-health_en. 4 https://health.ec.europa.eu/non-communicable-diseases/healthier-together-eu-non-communicable-diseasesinitiative_en. 5 https://commission.europa.eu/funding-tenders/find-funding/eu-funding-programmes/eu4health_en. 6 https://jacardi.eu/. 7 https://www.preventncd.eu/.”
  EU competences on health
• 2025-05-28 “P-2157/2025 Answer given by President von der Leyen on behalf of the European Commission The General Court has ordered the Commission to pay the legal costs of this court case. Since these costs have not yet been liquidated, it is not possible to quantify the legal costs at this stage. Concerning other costs related to the legal representation of the Commission, no fees or other disbursements for external lawyers have been incurred. As in similar judicial cases concerning administrative decisions taken by the Commission and challenged before EU Courts, no external lawyers were hired. The agents representing the Commission in this case are staff members of its Legal Service. Since it is part of the official duties of the staff members of the Commission’s Legal Service to represent the institution in those judicial proceedings, no separate invoice of work hours or costs can be determined for this particular case.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget · Disclosure vs. confidentiality of pharma companies processes
• 2025-04-02 “– A Uachtaráin, ní raibh mé in ann tacú leis an tuarascáil seo. Chuir an tuarascáil béim mhór ar chúrsaí míleata don Aontas Eorpach agus níl mise i bhfabhar sin. Mar Fheisire Éireannach, táimid bródúil as ár bpolasaí stairiúil maidir le neodracht. Níl sé ceart go mbeadh an tAontas Eorpach ag cur brú orainn in Éirinn dul i dtreo Arm Eorpach. Tá muid chun é seo a throid. Sin an fáth nach raibh muid in ann tacú leis seo. Go raibh maith agat.”
• 2025-03-05 “E-000945/2025 Answer given by Mr Várhelyi on behalf of the European Commission According to Article 168(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union 1 , a high level of human health protection shall be ensured in the definition and implementation of all Union policies and activities. Article 168(7) provides that Union action shall respect responsibilities of the Member States for the organisation and delivery of health services and medical care. The EU supplements and supports these efforts, especially by encouraging cooperation and exchange of best practices among countries. This means that the Commission has no mandate to call for a reopening of the Emergency Department as referred. The challenges in accessing healthcare have been reported in the Country Health Profile 2023 for Ireland under the ‘State of Health in the EU’ 2 . In the context of the 2020 European Semester, a Country-Specific Recommendation was addressed to Ireland to improve accessibility of its health system and strengthen its resilience 3 . A number of EU funding programmes, such as the EU4Health Programme 4 , the Recovery and Resilience Facility, and the Cohesion Policy Funds, offer significant funding opportunities, which Ireland can use to strengthen its healthcare system in response to this recommendation. For example, the Irish Recovery and Resilience Plan 5 has earmarked EUR 75 million for reforms and investments to progress on the implementation of the Sláintecare reform programme. The EU Health Policy Platform, which has replaced the EU health forum, is used to facilitate stakeholder engagement in EU health policies. It is a restricted Platform accessible through membership and is not designed to be used for national health system issues. 1 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:12012E/TXT&from=en. 2 https://health.ec.europa.eu/document/download/20f96f89-7286-4e4f-8a2cbea12cf97576_en?filename=2023_chp_ie_english.pdf. 3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A52020DC0507. 4 https://health.ec.europa.eu/funding/eu4health-programme-2021-2027-vision-healthier-european-union_en. 5 https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/d4939-national-recovery-and-resilience-plan-2021/.”
  Public and private sectors role in healthcare services · EU competences on health
• 2025-02-20 “E-000789/2025 Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the European Commission The inclusion of the Paris Agreement 1 as an essential element of the EU-Mercosur Partnership Agreement (the EMPA) 2 is a key improvement over the text tentatively agreed in 2019. The EU takes its obligations under the Paris Agreement very seriously and is committed to reach climate neutrality by 2050 as enshrined in the 2021 European Climate Law. Under the EMPA, each Party is obliged to ‘remain a party, in good faith, of the […] Paris Agreement’. That obligation constitutes an ‘essential element’ (Article XX Climate change EMPA). The obligation would be violated if a Party were to leave the Paris Agreement, or to stop being a Party ‘in good faith’. Further, where a Party considers that the other Party has failed to comply with this essential element, that first Party is entitled to ‘take appropriate measures’, which ‘may include the suspension, in part or in full’ of the EU-Mercosur Partnership Agreement. A suspension ‘in relation to a Mercosur State withdrawal from the Paris Agreement would not entail a suspension in relation to the other Mercosur States’ (Article XY.7 EMPA). The Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) provides a clear legal basis and procedure for suspending an international agreement (Article 218(9) TFEU) 3 . The precise measure undertaken as a response to a violation of the Paris Agreement will take the form of a proposal from the Commission to the Council. 1 https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/english_paris_agreement.pdf 2 https://policy.trade.ec.europa.eu/eu-trade-relationships-country-and-region/countries-and-regions/mercosur/eumercosur-agreement/text-agreement_en 3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:12012E/TXT”
  Climate efforts · Trade relations with Mercosur
• 2025-02-05 “E-000526/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Virkkunen On behalf of the European Commission The Digital Services Act (DSA) 1 lays out the rules for online intermediaries to tackle illegal content, while safeguarding freedom of expression and information. The DSA does not determine what content is illegal. Rather, it imposes ‘due diligence’ obligations on providers of very large online platforms to conduct risk assessments and adopt appropriate proportionate and effective mitigation measures to mitigate the risks identified. This includes risks related to recommender systems. On 7 January 2025, Meta informed the Commission that it had introduced Community Notes as a replacement of the Third-Party Fact-Checking in the United States. This policy does not currently apply in the EU. In addition, Meta informed the Commission of changes to its content policy and political content control. These changes apply globally, including in the EU. The Commission has received ad hoc risk assessment reports in relation to these changes and is reviewing them. In 2024, the Commission initiated formal proceedings against Meta under the DSA including in relation to the suspicion that Meta demotes political content in the recommender system of Facebook and Instagram and does not provide adequate data access to researchers. 2 The Commission is monitoring the functioning of Facebook and Instagram in the EU to ensure Meta’s compliance with the DSA and has sent Meta several requests for information, including on the topic of recommender systems. 3 The Commission can open additional proceedings, should this be necessary. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32022R2065 2 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_24_2373 3 https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/list-designated-vlops-and-vloses”
  Disinformation & online freedoms · Recommender systems
• 2025-01-17 “P-000194/2025 Answer given by Ms Albuquerque on behalf of the European Commission The case-law of the Court of Justice confirms the principle of freedom to set rates in the nonlife insurance sector. 1 In accordance with this case-law, this does not preclude national measures liable to have effects on the rates. It is the responsibility of the national competent authorities to supervise insurance undertakings, including ensuring that these undertakings comply with their obligations under the applicable national laws, taking into account all relevant factual and legal circumstances of each case. The Commission may intervene only in cases where a breach of EU law has been identified. At this stage, the Commission is not aware of any such instance. 1 See, to that effect, the judgment of the Court of Justice of 7 March 2013, C-577/11, paragraphs 21 and 22.”
  Regulation of vehicles insurance
• 2025-01-14 “E-000117/2025 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission The Commission does not have updated information on the situation in Gweedore (Gaoth Dobhair). The Commission’s claim regarding the failure by Ireland to ensure that Gweedore is provided with appropriate waste water collecting systems and treatment in compliance with Articles 3 and 4 of the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive 1 was dropped during the pleading stage before the Court of Justice of the European Union in case C-427/17. This was because Ireland argued that the settlement of Gweedore was too dispersed to qualify as an agglomeration under the Directive and that the population equivalent (p.e) of Gweedore fell below the 2 000 p.e. threshold of the Directive. Ireland further explained that regardless of its assessment that these EU obligations did not apply, separate works were planned in Gweedore to upgrade waste water infrastructure for a part of the area known as Bunbeg/Derrybeg. The Commission has not further enquired about the situation in Gweedore as there is no legal basis in the Directive to do so. Whilst the revised Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive 2 adopted in November 2024 will extend the waste water collecting and treatment obligations to smaller agglomerations above 1 000 p.e., this obligation only comes into force as of 1 August 2027. 1 Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 concerning urban waste-water treatment, OJ L 135, 30.5.1991, p. 40–52. 2 Directive (EU) 2024/3019 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2024 concerning urban wastewater treatment (recast), OJ L, 2024/3019, 12.12.2024.”
  EU policy on water management · Water pollution
• 2024-12-18 “E-003028/2024 Answer given by Ms Šuica on behalf of the European Commission The assessments of Legal Service of the Commission are part of the internal decision-making procedures of the Commission and they are not published. On the issue of demolitions, the EU's position for the EU-Israel Association Council's 13th meeting that took place in Brussels on 24 February 2025 stated that 1 ‘The EU calls on Israel to halt continued settlement expansion and related activities, including state land declarations as well as evictions, demolitions, confiscation and forced transfers of Palestinians, which have reached record levels in the past year. Furthermore, the EU strongly condemns the demolitions of the structures funded by the EU or its Member States and expects that Israel make good the damage in accordance with international law. Since 7 October 2023, increased access restrictions by Israel in the West Bank have gravely impacted socioeconomic conditions for Palestinians. The EU calls on Israel to allow for a tangible improvement of freedom of movement and access for the Palestinians, to enable accelerated Palestinian construction, as well as social and economic development in Area C, and reverse the worsening of living conditions for Palestinians in Area C’. 1 https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-6511-2025-INIT/en/pdf.”
  Relations with Israel - Palestine · EU Development & Humanitarian Aid
• 2024-11-05 “E-002418/2024 Answer given by Mr Várhelyi on behalf of the European Commission Regulation (EU) 2021/2117 of the European Parliament and of the Council 1 adopted in December 2021 and amending among others Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council 2 and Regulation (EU) No 251/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council 3 , lays down new labelling requirements concerning the ingredient list and nutrition declaration for grapevine products and aromatised wine products, applicable from 8 December 2023, except for wine produced before that date. The amending Regulation allows this information to be presented either on a label attached to the package or by electronic means identified on the package or the physical label - with the exception of the energy value and the allergens which have to be always provided on the package or on a label attached thereto. The beers and spirit drinks sectors signed in 2019 two Memoranda of Understanding concerning the labelling of the list of ingredients and the nutrition declaration, which are currently being implemented. The spirit drinks sector provides the energy value on label and the list of ingredients via a digital label, while the beer sector provides such information on label. Approaches to support addressing harmful alcohol consumption would be most effective when communicated consistently from reliable resources, including healthcare professionals. 1 Regulation (EU) 2021/2117 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 2 December 2021 amending Regulations (EU) No 1308/2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products, (EU) No 1151/2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs, (EU) No 251/2014 on the definition, description, presentation, labelling and the protection of geographical indications of aromatised wine products and (EU) No 228/2013 laying down specific measures for agriculture in the outermost regions of the Union https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/2117/oj 2 http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2013/1308/oj 3 Regulation - 251/2014 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2014/251/oj”
  Drinking regulation · Food labelling harmonisation at EU level · EU measures on lifestyle-related behaviours (smoking, drinking, eating, etc.)
• 2024-10-24 “E-002246/2024 Answer given by Mr Kadis on behalf of the European Commission The Commission engages in consultations with Norway and other coastal States on behalf of the EU based on positions agreed in the Council and in close coordination with Member States, with a view to ensuring the sustainability of shared fish stocks and safeguarding the livelihood of fishing communities that depend on them. The UK is the only third country today enjoying access to EU waters to fish for mackerel. As regards access for Norwegian vessels, this is decided annually on the basis of bilateral consultations on (reciprocal) fishing opportunities that the Commission conducts on behalf of the EU and in exchange of access to Norwegian waters and quotas of relevant stocks of interest to the EU. The EU is actively engaged in consultations on a quota-sharing arrangement for mackerel with other coastal States and advocates for a comprehensive deal that will bring the sum of all quotas to sustainable levels as advised by the International Council for the Exploration of the Seas. The Commission shares the serious concern regarding the biological status of this valuable stock that is in declining trend since 2020. The EU has expressed strong concerns about the unilateral actions taken by certain coastal States, including Norway, which continue to put the mackerel stock at risk, and continues to engage to promote the long-term sustainability of this stock.”
  Environmental regulation of fisheries
• 2024-10-18 “E-002164/2024 Answer given by Mr Várhelyi on behalf of the European Commission Following the Commission’s announcement in Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan related to the mandatory labelling of ingredients and nutrient content on alcoholic beverages, work has been undertaken, including scientific studies, public consultations, and targeted surveys 1 . In December 2021, Regulation (EU) 2021/2117 of the European Parliament and of the Council 2 amending Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council 3 was adopted. It lays down new labelling requirements concerning the ingredient list and nutrition declaration for grapevine products and aromatised wine products, applicable from 8 December 2023, except for wine produced before that date. The amending Regulation allows this information to be presented either on a label attached to the package or by electronic means identified on the package or the physical label - with the exception of the energy value which has to be always provided on the package or on a label attached thereto. The beers and spirits sectors signed in 2019 two Memoranda of Understanding concerning the list of ingredients and nutrition declaration, which are currently being implemented. The spirits sector provides the energy value on label and the list of ingredients via a digital label 4 , while the beer sector provides such information on label 5 . Continued work on food labelling will pay particular attention to minimising any related burdens and finding balanced, pragmatic solutions which facilitate the functioning of the internal market. 1 https://food.ec.europa.eu/food-safety/labelling-and-nutrition/food-information-consumers-legislation/proposalrevision-regulation-fic_en 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/2117/oj 3 http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2013/1308/oj 4 CP.MI-098-2019: https://spirits.eu/upload/files/publications/CP.MI-098-2019-MoU-Final Version on website without signature- 4 June 2019.pdf 5 Labelling - The Brewers of Europe: https://brewersofeurope.eu/our-priorities/labelling/”
  GMOs
• 2024-10-18 “E-002166/2024 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission 1. The Commission has not been informed regarding the Irish Environmental Protection Agency reports on drinking water plants. Member States are not required to report on operational performance aspects of drinking water plants under the former 1 and recast 2 Drinking Water Directive (DWD). Non-compliance areas under the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive 3 (UWWTD) are followed by the Commission in two infringement cases: on 14 November 2024 4 , the Commission sent a letter of formal notice under Article 260 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to Ireland 5 for failing to comply with the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 28 March 2019 6 in relation to over 20 agglomerations 7 . In another case 8 , on 7 February 2024 9 , the Commission issued a letter of formal notice to Ireland for failing to fully comply with the UWWTD in eight agglomerations 10 . A further three agglomerations 11 with a population of more than 10,000 were considered to be discharging wastewater in sensitive areas without the more stringent treatment required by the UWWTD. 2. Based on data reported by Ireland, the Commission has no indication of general problems with drinking water quality associated with large water supplies. In specific water supply zones, however, the Court of Justice ruled in January 2024 in favour of the Commission in the case 12 opened against Ireland regarding exceedances of trihalomethanes (THM). The Commission cannot comment on the compliance of the agglomerations listed in the above mentioned UWWTD infringement cases. 3. The Commission will continue to follow-up the Irish data reported under the recast DWD 13 1 Council Directive 98/83/EC of 3 November 1998 on the quality of water intended for human consumption, OJ L 330, 5.12.1998, p. 32–54. 2 Directive (EU) 2020/2184 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2020 on the quality of water intended for human consumption (recast), OJ L 435, 23.12.2020, p. 1–62. 3 Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 concerning urban waste-water treatment, OJ L 135, 30.5.1991, p. 40–52. 4 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/inf_24_5223 5 https://ec.europa.eu/atwork/applying-eu-law/infringementsproceedings/infringement_decisions/?langCode=EN&version=v1&typeOfSearch=byCase&refId=INFR(2013)20 56&activeCase=true&page=1&size=10&order=desc&sortColumns=refId 6 C-427/17, https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/753775e2-8608-11e9-9f0501aa75ed71a1/language-en 7 Arklow, Athlone, Cork City, Enniscorthy, Ballybofey/Stranorlar, Cobh, Enfield, Fermoy, Killybegs, Mallow, Midleton, Passage/Monkstown, Rathcormac, Ringaskiddy, Ringsend, Roscommon Town, Shannon Town, Tubbercurry, Youghal, Dundalk and Castlebridge. 8 https://ec.europa.eu/atwork/applying-eu-law/infringementsproceedings/infringement_decisions/?langCode=EN&version=v1&typeOfSearch=byCase&activeCase=true&pa ge=1&size=10&order=desc&sortColumns=refId&refId=INFR(2023)2178 9 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/inf_24_301 10 Kilmore Quay, Kilrush, Kilkee, Whitegate-Aghada, Moville, Mitchelstown, Clareabbey and Lahinch. 11 Ringaskiddy, Malahide and Cobh. In relation to Ringaskiddy and Cobh the letter of formal notice of 7 February 2024 covers new issues compared to those already covered by the judgment in case C - 427/17, Commission v. Ireland. 12 C481/22, https://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=282070&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode= req&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=5160941”
  Energy (green transition)
• 2024-10-18 “E-002165/2024 Answer given by Ms Kyriakides on behalf of the European Commission Following the Commission’s announcement in the Farm to Fork Strategy related to food labelling, work has been undertaken, including scientific studies, public consultations and targeted surveys 1 . This work confirmed the complexity of food labelling and highlighted the challenges in reaching common solutions. Continued work on food labelling will pay particular attention to minimising any related burdens and finding balanced, pragmatic solutions which facilitate the functioning of the internal market. The Farm to Fork Strategy, as a component of the Green Deal, announced different initiatives, with food information being one component of a comprehensive approach. 1 https://food.ec.europa.eu/food-safety/labelling-and-nutrition/food-information-consumers-legislation/proposalrevision-regulation-fic_en”
  GMOs
• 2024-10-18 “E-002167/2024 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Mînzatu on behalf of the European Commission The European Social Fund Plus (ESF+) is implemented under shared management 1 . This means that the payments to beneficiaries of ESF+ support are made by the Member State’s authorities. In accordance with Article 74(1) of the Common Provisions Regulation (CPR) 2 , the managing authorities must carry out management verifications to verify that the co-financed products and services have been delivered. Moreover, Article 73(2)(c) CPR requires the managing authorities to ensure that the operations selected present the best relationship between the amount of support, the activities undertaken and the achievement of objectives. When implementing the ESF+, the Member States may choose using simplified cost options (SCO). Currently, an increasing share of the ESF+ support is implemented through SCO. Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/1676 of 7 July 2023 3 ensures that if the managing authority or intermediate body in charge of implementing a programme applies the unit costs to establish the Union contribution to the programme for one operation that falls under this Regulation, these amounts constitute the amount that the Commission reimburses for any formal education operation under the same programme for the same type of beneficiary. 1 Article 63 Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 September 2024 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union (recast) - https://eurlex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/2509/oj 2 Regulation (EU) 2021/1060 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2021 laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund Plus, the Cohesion Fund, the Just Transition Fund and the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund and financial rules for those and for the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund, the Internal Security Fund and the Instrument for Financial Support for Border Management and Visa Policy - https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32021R1060 . 3 Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/1676 of 7 July 2023 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2021/1060 of the European Parliament and of the Council regarding the definition of unit costs, lump sums and flat rates and financing not linked to costs for reimbursement of expenditure by the Commission to Member States https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32023R1676 .”
  EU policy on social criteria in public funding · EU competences on social policies
• 2024-10-09 “P-001999/2024 Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Borrell i Fontelles on behalf of the European Commission On 13 October 2024, the High Representative/Vice-President issued a statement 1 on behalf of the EU condemning all attacks against any United Nations (UN) missions and expressing particularly grave concern regarding the attacks by the Israeli Defence Forces against the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), which left several peacekeepers wounded. Such attacks against UN peacekeepers constitute a grave violation of international law, are totally unacceptable and must stop immediately. UNIFIL plays a fundamental role in the stability of South Lebanon and completes its mission under UN Security Council mandate (Resolution 1701 of 11 August 2006 2 ). Currently 16 Member States contribute with personnel to UNIFIL. The EU urgently calls for explanations and a thorough investigation from the Israeli authorities about the attacks against UNIFIL and urges all parties to fully uphold their obligations to guarantee the safety and security of UNIFIL personnel at all times, and to allow UNIFIL to continue to implement its mandate. The EU has been consistently clear that political engagement and frank and open dialogue are the most effective way to convey EU concerns to third countries, including to Israeli partners. The Association Agreement with Israel 3 is the legal basis of EU’s ongoing dialogue with the Israeli authorities and provides important mechanisms to discuss issues and advance EU’s point of view. 1 https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2024/10/13/statement-by-the-high-representative-onbehalf-of-the-european-union-on-recent-attacks-against-unifil/ 2 https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/n06/465/03/pdf/n0646503.pdf 3 https://eeas.europa.eu/archives/delegations/israel/documents/eu_israel/asso_agree_en.pdf”
  EU-Lebanon relations · Relations with Israel - Palestine
• 2024-10-09 “E-001998/2024 Answer given by Mr Várhelyi on behalf of the European Commission The European Centre of Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) collects surveillance data from Member States on neuroborreliosis, a severe form of Lyme disease. Moreover, it publishes tick surveillance efforts maps as well as maps showing the current known distribution of tick species across the EU 1 . The EU4Health programme supports a coordinated surveillance in animals and the environment for cross-border pathogens (with implementation in the 2024-2026 period) 2 . In the context of this action, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has prepared a list of priority diseases based on a scientific risk assessment, which includes Lyme borreliosis 3 . For this action, dedicated EU funds have been allocated to Member States to carry out surveillance under a One Health approach. Furthermore, agents responsible for borreliosis are listed in Directive 2003/99/EC 4 as agents for which Member States must collect relevant and comparable data according to their epidemiological situation. In March 2024, EU reference laboratories (EURLs) 5 for public health were designated by the Commission, as per Article 15 of Regulation (EU) 2022/2371 6 . One of these EURLs focuses on high risk, emerging and zoonotic bacterial pathogens, which includes Lyme borreliosis. This EURL’s work is financially supported from the EU4Health Programme. In line with Article 168(7) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU, the organisation and delivery of health services and medical care is a national competence. Treatment of the infection varies across Member States. 1 https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/disease-vectors/surveillance-and-disease-data/tick-maps#surveillance-for-ticks. 2 CP-g-22-04.01 Direct grants to Member States’ authorities: setting up a coordinated surveillance system under the One Health approach for cross-border pathogens that threaten the Union. 2022 Work programme: https://ec.europa.eu/assets/sante/health/funding/wp2022_en.pdf 3 Prioritisation of zoonotic diseases for coordinated surveillance systems under the One Health approach for cross‐border pathogens that threaten the Union. Published: 3 March 2023. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2023.7853 4 http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2003/99/2013-07-01 5 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2024/892/oj 6 http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2022/2371/oj”
  Vaccination
• 2024-09-04 “E-001623/2024 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Šefčovič on behalf of the European Commission There are currently two infringement cases in relation to Ireland on compliance with the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive 1 (UWWTD). On 7 February 2024 the Commission issued a letter of formal notice to Ireland for failing to fully comply with the Directive in agglomerations Kilmore Quay, Kilrush, Kilkee, WhitegateAghada, Moville, Mitchelstown, Clareabbey and Lahinch as urban waste waters are not properly treated before being discharged. A further three agglomerations with a population of more than 10,000 – Ringaskiddy, Malahide and Cobh 2 – were considered to be discharging wastewater in sensitive areas without the more stringent treatment as required by the Directive 3 . In another case 4 , on 28 March 2019 the Court of Justice of the EU gave its judgment in case C-427/17 5 and found that Ireland breached various obligations of the UWWTD in relation to the following agglomerations: Arklow, Athlone, Cork City, Enniscorthy, Ballybofey/Stranorlar, Cobh, Enfield, Fermoy, Killybegs, Mallow, Midleton, Passage/Monkstown, Rathcormac, Ringaskiddy, Ringsend, Roscommon Town, Shannon Town, Tubbercurry, Youghal, Dundalk and Castlebridge. As the cases are still ongoing, at this stage, the Commission is not in a position to confirm the compliance of any of the above listed agglomerations with the requirements of the Directive. However, the most recent report on the implementation of the Directive in Ireland is public 6 . 1 Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 concerning urban waste-water treatment, OJ L 135, 30.5.1991, p. 40–52. 2 In relation to Ringaskiddy and Cobh the letter of formal notice of 7 February 2024 covers new issues compared to those already covered by the judgment in case C - 427/17, Commission v. Ireland. 3 https://ec.europa.eu/atwork/applying-eu-law/infringementsproceedings/infringement_decisions/?langCode=EN&version=v1&typeOfSearch=byCase&activeCase=true&pa ge=1&size=10&order=desc&sortColumns=refId&refId=INFR(2023)2178 4 https://ec.europa.eu/atwork/applying-eu-law/infringementsproceedings/infringement_decisions/?langCode=EN&version=v1&typeOfSearch=byCase&refId=INFR(2013)20 56&activeCase=true&page=1&size=10&order=desc&sortColumns=refId 5 https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/753775e2-8608-11e9-9f05-01aa75ed71a1/language-en 6 https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/water/urban-wastewater/implementation-reports_en”
  Energy (green transition)
• “(15:42:26 – 15:45:02): Garmaga chair. I also want to thank our rapporteur for all of its work on this to date, and I welcome this debate. So we have, not quite measured by 100 amendments. We've measured around 27 amendments covering a wide range of issues that affect young people, not just obviously in our own home country of Ireland, but right throughout the EU as well. So there's many issues as we know, housing, the child guarantee, decent paying conditions, and we've also tabled some amendments in relation to language rights as well. As I have said on a number of occasions in this committee and in other committees, the youth guarantee and well designed youth policies, they're not budget costs. And I don't think we should look at them in that way. We should look at them as what they are, which is an investment, an investment in the next generation in our young people. And that's why we will be also calling for a fully funded and a standalone ESF Plus in the next multiyear budget. We must place a focus on jobs and recognize and begin to address the phenomenon that younger workers are often overqualified for roles. They are often as well mismatched in terms of the end up in part time employment after qualifying, due to this, you know, not having the experience and they're kind of caught in a cash 22 situation. And I think that needs to be recognized and then the knock on and the long term effect that has for workers, particularly in terms of pension and things that none of us think about when they're younger. And then as you get older, obviously, people start thinking about that. And we know as well that that can affect women a lot more as well. And we have put some amendments, obviously, in relation to addressing that issue as we see it. We need to call out the spread also of precarious work and low paid forms of employment in the labor market, which particularly impacts our younger people. Amendment 1 3 5 that we have put in is in relation to that issue. And, I want to touch on this, and it was mentioned as well by MEP O'Reardon, the issue of trainees and interns. We have to recognize workers and trainees and interns and their entitlement to fair wages and fair terms and conditions. That really is an important part of this because far too often, we have staff and trainees taken advantage of underpaid and overworked. So it's my hope we can produce a forward thinking and progressive documents. And given the work of all the shadows and the rapidity to date, I think that we can achieve that. And, yeah, I will leave it at that for now, chair. Thank you, Karmagos.”
  Youth employment & training
• “Girma. Thank you president. We need to work to end all types of bullying. Therefore, I welcome this debate on the action plan against cyberbullying. The world has changed a lot in recent years. We have a greater obligation to prevent bullying. We all know someone who has suffered from online bullying. And now with AI, things are getting even worse. As usual, children, young people and women are the most likely targets when it comes to online bullying. In this house, we talk a lot about protecting children, but when it comes to action, we fail them. So I hope that this Parliament will take this issue seriously and that we will put an end to cyberbullying. Thank you.”
  Safety features & content control for child protection online
• “So then to focus on a few other points as well. I come from a country which will contribute on a per capita basis the second most of any member state. Yet it would seem that we will lose a huge amount. Firstly, just as I was speaking about in relation to the militarisation situation, but also secondly because as an island, Ireland just doesn't get as much attention as other parts of the continent. And I think we need to see that this is rectified. And I'm proposing that we have a set amount of at least 5% that would be reserved for island member states. Otherwise, they stand to lose out due to their peripheral nature. To the west of Ireland is just as much a part of Europe as a corridor running down the centre of the continent, and deserves to be connected. The island member states also need special consideration. The CEF focus on rail and cross-border projects does not necessarily suit them, and flexibility must be given so that ports, sometimes more urban projects and airports on these islands can benefit from the facility. Just to give an example, 5% of the budget in 2023 went towards ports, compared to 81% for rail. So as an island member, state, ports and airports play a different and far more crucial role in facilitating cross-border travel and the transport of goods.”
  EU funding for transportation
• “Thank you very much, chair. And firstly, like other colleagues, I want to thank the rapporteur for this opinion and say that I think it adds a huge amount, particularly as well from our point of view. And I welcome, um, a lot of that. So just to put that on the record, um, just some other points to make as well though. Um, in relation to particularly the military aspects, I do not accept that 17 billion of the connecting Europe facility needs to be spent on military projects. As a committee, we should be defending civic projects, very important transport projects that could be funded with this money. And my own political group queried the location of these 500 military hotspots that are to be funded, and we were told that that information cannot be shared. So how can we have a situation. And how can this committee and an elected parliament sign off on billions of funding to essentially secret projects? So we have a lot of talk of transparency and accountability, and rightly so in this committee and throughout the parliament. However, I would say this goes out the window when it comes to these military hotspots because we don't know the locations. So I'd like to know how that decision was being made and how on earth any of us in this Parliament could accept such an arrangement as that.”
  EU funding for transportation
• “Thank you very much, chair. Thanks to all of our speakers as well. First of all, I just I'm not sure if you're still here, but I just want to agree briefly with my colleague, um, MEP O'Riordan. Just the points you made there about children in particular and homeless services. So I think we have a situation in Ireland where there is serious rural decline. So we have on the one hand, the prices for housing in the urban areas is becoming unaffordable for the vast, vast majority of people. And then on the other hand, we have a situation in rural Ireland of serious decline, you know, a lack of services. We see our GAA teams and our sports teams being unable to field a full team because of rural decline. Um, and I would say a lot of this is down to lack of investment by our own government in terms of like our water infrastructure and failure to tackle vacancy and dereliction, in particular in rural Ireland. Um, and they've also, I think, you know, this could pose other problems in the future in terms of, you know, just community living and our care system, for example, in terms of, you know, how do you provide all of the services for a decline in rural population? So what I would argue is that we need to see more investment into our rural towns and our rural communities.”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• “On the housing crisis is the biggest challenge facing a generation of Irish people today. Of course, it is not an accidental crisis when we're talking about it for ten years or more. It is a crisis caused by successive government policy who have prioritised vulture funds over ordinary workers and families. But the solutions to the housing crisis do exist, and I think it's really important that we focus on that in a debate such as this, and that the EU has a role to play in relation to this. Repeal the non-performing loans Directive, which is nothing more than a directive for vulture funds. Relax EU fiscal rules so that countries like Ireland can use their own money to invest in housing and return decision making powers to local councils. Decisions should be made as near as possible to the people and communities that they affect. It is time that we build the failed policies that clearly do not work, and which only help to maximize the profits of developers. It is time to work towards a genuine and radical housing policy that does deliver for all of our communities. Kolmogorov.”
  EU housing policy
• “Regional airports in particular. I'll give two examples. In my own constituency of Ireland South in Waterford and also in Kerry. These need to be prioritised alongside ports. Again. We have a port in Waterford and also Rosslare in Wexford that are Ireland's closest point to the EU. The difference in importance of such infrastructure on islands should be recognised and addressed in order to support better integration with the EU at large. So we must look at the focus on inland waterways and mode of transport. That is irrelevant in terms of Ireland, where roads are a more practical alternative. The SEF takes talks a good game about taking geographic, you know, specifications into account but must follow through on them. And as things stand, as a member of the Regional Development Committee, it would be harder to design an instrument less likely to help develop islands and peripheral coastal regions. It has to change. Just I wanted to touch on those points, as they'll be the areas that I'll be focusing on in my amendments. But again, I want to thank the rapporteur for the work to date and look forward to continuing the work. Thank you chair.”
  EU transport infrastructure integration
• “On child sexual abuse material online is at an all time high, and we must do a lot more to tackle it. Children and the issues that affect them are too often treated as an afterthought in this Parliament, which I have to say I have found very frustrating since being elected here. The fact that we still do not have a dedicated committee focused on children's issues shows that very clearly, the online world is becoming more complex and more dangerous for young people. Children can easily be exposed to violent pornography, access games that seem harmless at first, and start using social media at a very young age. Many fall victim to cyber bullying or harassment, often without the knowledge or support that they need to deal with it. The spread of child sexual abuse material is extremely alarming, and the Internet Watch Foundation, which deals with detection of the content, has traced the majority of this content to countries within the European Union, we must take a lot stronger action. Hold these large platforms accountable for the content they host. Ensure those responsible for these horrific crimes are brought to justice. And we do need to put proper safeguards in place to protect children online. I would like to end by paying tribute to Jackie Fox, who addressed this Parliament yesterday. She's an inspirational, courageous woman and we need to support her and her call that Coco's law is extended to all of our member states.”
  Safety features & content control for child protection online
• “For greater militarisation of the budget at the expense of programmes and initiatives which really do deliver for communities not only throughout my own country of Ireland, but also throughout all of our member states. It's my view that the Commission and Parliament needs to get back to focusing on the everyday issues, like cost of living, which all of our citizens are suffering from protecting the livelihoods of our farmers, our coastal and our fishing communities, which are really under pressure and just ordinary workers and families, while also addressing many regional imbalances. We need to remember that at its core as well. And unfortunately, I feel a lot of people are forgetting this, that the EU is, at its core, a peace project and we should not be moving away from that. We should not be allowing any funds or vital programmes, such as the European Social and Cohesion Funds, to be used for any military purposes whatsoever. So I have three questions for you today, Commissioner. Can you provide greater clarity for us on the concrete figures allocated in this next MFF to tackling the real social issues that affect our citizens across all of our Member States? Can you give us some more detail on the process around the national plans? And then finally, how confident are you that the Commission's proposals will actually help workers and families who are struggling, particularly around cost of living issues. They've been struggling for a very long time now. And unfortunately, I have to say, when I see the direction we're going in, I don't have much confidence. But if there is anything else that you can shed on this in relation to, um, real, actual, tangible, concrete measures that can help our communities and our workers and families. Thank you, Commissioner, and thank you, chair.”
  Defence spending
• “Occurred across Europe. We all know women do not feel safe. Many are afraid to walk alone at night, and too many do not feel safe even in their own homes. Now, women and children are being targeted in a new way through unregulated AI, which is being used to create fake sexual and abusive images of women and children. The platforms know that this is happening, yet they continue to turn a blind eye. If this abuse is visible on platforms like X, we can only imagine how much worse it is on hidden networks on the dark web. And the irony of this situation is that those who profit most from this exploitation are often the very same people who spread misinformation and fear, all in the name of protecting women and children. We need to see strong, up to date laws and real enforcement. Ai tools that harm our communities must be stopped, and we have a responsibility to ensure this happens. We all deserve safety and dignity and to live lives free from exploitation, both online and offline.”
  Transparency and oversight of AI-generated content
• “As the council meets its agenda is clear. Militarization. Above all else, the lines between NATO and the EU are going from blurred to non-existent. The EU is openly talking about coordinating coordinating the armies of Europe. Yet an Taoiseach, Micheal Martin, among others, says we cannot question this trajectory. Asking questions apparently makes us anti-European. I am not anti-European, but I am 100% pro Irish neutrality. Pro Irish interests in the world and our interests do not lie in a militarised Europe, where our social and agricultural funds are stolen to spend on tanks and drones. Irish neutrality will not go quietly into the night, even if the Irish government may want this. Irish people do not want this and will resist it. The Council also must not, having been dragged kicking and screaming to the point of proposing the most minor sanctions on Israel, let Israel off the hook. The murder and savagery of the Netanyahu regime continues and must be punished.”
  Relations with Israel - Palestine · EU competences on defence
• “And thank you very much, chair. Thanks to all of the colleagues for their work in relation to this and also obviously to yourself. Chair for your work on this important opinion. We are at a very critical time in the EU budget cycle, and for those of us concerned about investing in our regions and people, it is an extremely worrying time because on the one hand, we see Brussels seems set on forcing farmers, our fisheries community, all of our regions to battle it out for a smaller set of funds. And then, on the other hand, these funds will be raided to support the military security and defense budget. So the message is going out, certainly from an Irish perspective, that if you want funding from the EU, it's best to stick a military label on everything. And it's extremely sad state of affairs. I think that we're in, and one that I certainly will always stand very much opposed to. Every time somebody in Brussels proposes funding military or dual use infrastructure, they should have to say exactly where they believe that money should come from. Should it come from our farming community, should it come from our fishery community? Should it come from all the regions that we regularly talk about in this committee? Should it come from social funds? We in this committee should stand up for our regions.”
  Defence spending