Kristian VIGENIN

Policy topics Kristian VIGENIN is active on

What Kristian VIGENIN has said (36)

• 2026-07-13 “(17:42:32 - 17:44:24): Thank you, chair. Thank you, minister. Thank you for your impressive presentation. I wish you successful presidency even more because your slogan, strength with unity resembles very much the Bulgarian 1 8 years ago, which was unity makes strength. So I hope you will achieve this strength and the unity of the European Union. Your presidency rightly presents health not only as a social responsibility, but also as a foundation of Europe's competitiveness, resilience, and security. But competitiveness in health must be measured not only by innovation, but also by whether patients can access it. Major inequalities remain between member states, especially in Central And Eastern Europe, and in rural and border regions. This is why health cannot be treated as an optional component of the next multi annual financial framework. Now the presidency will have an important responsibility to ensure that the negotiations on the European Competitiveness Fund and the next EU budget provide a clear, identifiable, and adequately financed health component. Since my colleague, Vitani Sandrokakis, asked the question on the health fund, I would, ask the my my 2nd question that I have prepared, would you, taking into account what I have said, rather focus on ensuring that biotech, the pharmaceutical package, and the European health data space reduce inequalities between member states rather than further concentrate investment clinical trial trials and innovation in the strongest markets. I know it's a difficult task, but, it very much depends how we address these challenges. So, of what I know, and what I've heard from you, maybe this is 1 of the elements where your presidency can make a difference. Thank you.”
  EU funding and budget allocation for health programmes
• 2026-07-13 “(15:55:05 - 15:56:51): Thank you, chair. Mister Byrne, I would like to wish you success with the presidency here on your left. I I hope that, you'll be able to unite the union, and I have a sympathy to your presidency because the Bulgarian presence of the council 8 years ago run on the similar slogan. It was unity makes strength, so I hope you'll be able to do that. So, minister, my questions that I've prepared are related to anticorruption because I think that anticorruption is very much linked to rule of law. I can imagine what will be your answer, but still I'll ask my question. It is related to the development of the European public prosecutor's office. We'll have a new chief prosecutor on November 1 taking office. Hungary has mentioned has decided to join EPPO. It was announced just few days ago, and we are waiting for the delayed, 5 year evaluation of EPPO regulations from the commission. And commission has also announced that this evaluation will be followed by a legislative proposal to revise the EPPO EPPO regulation. And now taking all this into account, would the presidency support reviewing whether its mandate powers and resources remain fit for purpose, including probably considering a possible extension of its competencies to clearly define forms of serious cross border crime? Thank you. I dare to ask this question because in Bulgaria, the creation of EPPO was met with a hope that this will strengthen also the rule of law and the anti corruption efforts.”
  EU law enforcement cooperation in criminal matters
• 2026-07-07 “European. Parliament. I. Na. The Moldovan national priority Demokratija. I. Europejski. Sveta. Celina. Svetlana. Moldovan. European. Integration. Reform. Of. Course. I'd. Encea. T e. A candidate for administrative reform. Of Moldova.”
  EU-Moldova relations
• 2026-06-24 “(10:05:58 – 10:08:24): Thank you so much. Thank you, chair, dear colleagues. Allow me to start by thanking the rapporteur, miss Kanko, for her approach to this file. While we have very different views on a number of issues, she has taken onboard several concerns raised by our group in her report, and this provides a constructive basis for the negotiations ahead. The S and D group supports a strong internal security fund that helps member states address evolving security threats while fully respecting the values on which our union is built. Our proposals are focused on several important aspects. 1st, we believe the fund must better reflect emerging threats. This includes the criminal misuse of artificial intelligence, which goes beyond the traditional understanding of cybercrime and is increasingly used by organized criminal networks for fraud, identity theft, disinformation, and other illicit activities. We also proposed the explicit inclusion of environmental crime, which has become a major cross border criminal activity with significant links to organized crime. 2nd, we see greater legal clarity regarding hybrid threats. A more precise definition will help ensure legal certainty and prevent resources from being diverted away from the fund's core objectives. 3rd, security policy must not forget those who suffer for most from crime. We therefore propose to include support, protection, and assistance for victims directly in the per operative provisions of the regulation. On fundamental rights and data protection, our position is clear. These are not separate from security. They are an integral part of effective and legitimate security policy. We will work to ensure that all actions financed under funds comply fully with the charter of fundamental rights and applicable data protection rules. Finally, we have concerns about the governance of the fund. The proposed architecture reduces parliament's role in overseeing how resources are allocated and implemented. I understand the desire to provide greater flexibility for member states, but this must go hand in hand with accountability, transparency, and democratic scrutiny. In conclusion, we look forward to working constructively with all political groups to ensure that this fund is effective, future proof, and fully aligned with the union's values. Thank you.”
  EU law enforcement cooperation in criminal matters
• 2026-06-24 “Thank you chair. Commissioner, we welcome, of course, the Commissioner Commission's technological sovereignty package. And obviously, we must reduce our dangerous dependence on foreign digital infrastructure, cloud services and platforms. At the same time, we have the chance to learn from the mistakes of our partners and competitors, because US is not such a shining example as some try to present it. This chaotic development of AI infrastructure in the United States creates contradictions, especially on local and state level in the EU. The expected expansion of AI infrastructure, semiconductor manufacturing and data centers will significantly increase demand for energy, water and grid capacity. At the same time, we are facing growing climate pressures and resource constraints. Constraints already. How will the Commission ensure that the drive for technological sovereignty does not create new dependencies or pressures on energy systems and water resources, and what concrete safeguards and incentives are being considered to guarantee that Europe's digital infrastructure is both sovereign but also sustainable? Thank you.”
  Climate policy · EU digital & tech sovereignty
• 2026-06-16 “Commissioner. Colleagues, Europe needs digital sovereignty. We cannot remain dependent on foreign owned platforms, cloud services and critical technologies while speaking about strategic autonomy. But sovereignty is not simply about building more data centers or chip factories. True sovereignty means democratic control over our digital infrastructure. It means protecting protecting citizens data, defending our public sphere from disinformation, and ensuring that public investment creates public value, jobs and resilience for Europe. At the same time, we must be honest about the costs. As Europe faces record heatwaves, droughts and water shortages, and citizens are asked to save water and farmers struggle to irrigate their fields. Europe's technological sovereignty cannot be built by weakening climate. Ambition cannot be built by increasing pressure on our energy grids or competing with citizens for water, which is already happening in some member states. It must be sustainable and fair, where digital infrastructure, clean energy, quality jobs and climate action reinforce each other. Thank you.”
  EU digital & tech sovereignty
• 2026-06-16 “Commissioner, colleagues, Europe needs digital sovereignty. We cannot remain dependent on foreign owned platforms, cloud services, and critical technologies while speaking about strategic autonomy. But sovereignty is not simply about building more data centers or chip factories. True sovereignty means democratic control over our digital infrastructure. It means protecting protecting citizens' data, defending our public sphere from disinformation, and ensuring that public investment creates public value, jobs, resilience for Europe. At the same time, we must be honest about the costs. As Europe faces record heat waves, droughts, and water shortages, and the citizens are asked to save water and farmers struggle to irrigate their fields, Europe's technological sovereignty cannot be built by weakening climate ambition, cannot be built by increasing pressure on our energy grids or competing with citizens for water, which is already happening in some member states. It must be sustainable and fair where digital infrastructure, clean energy, quality jobs, climate action reinforce each other. Thank you.”
  EU digital & tech sovereignty
• 2026-01-22 “E-000259/2026 Answer given by Ms Roswall on behalf of the European Commission The tethering requirement for caps of single-use plastic beverage containers under the SingleUse Plastic (SUP) Directive 1 was introduced because caps were found on EU beaches more than twice as often as the containers themselves 2 . In combination with the separate collection targets for SUP beverage bottles it aims to reduce littering and increase recycling of the caps. In line with the Better Regulation guidelines 3 , the Commission conducted an impact assessment before the adoption of the proposal for the SUP Directive, including stakeholder consultations 4 . Beverage containers holding liquid food for special medical purposes 5 are exempted from the tethering requirement. The harmonised standard for test methods to demonstrate that plastic caps and lids remain attached to beverage containers that was developed by the European Committee for Standardisation 6 takes into account the safety of the containers’ closures during their intended use. In view of the upcoming evaluation of the SUP Directive (due by 3 July 2027), the Commission has launched a call for evidence and an open public consultation 7 , inviting all interested stakeholders to share their experience with the different measures of the Directive, including the tethered caps design requirement. The evaluation will assess the effectiveness of the Directive and provide evidence on whether the expected environmental benefits have been achieved, as well as on any safety and usability issues that may have arisen. 1 Directive (EU) 2019/904 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 June 2019 on the reduction of the impact of certain plastic products on the environment (Text with EEA relevance), OJ L 155, 12.6.2019, p. 1–19. 2 Commission Staff Working Document Impact Assessment ‘Reducing Marine Litter: action on single use plastics and fishing gear Accompanying the document Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the reduction of the impact of certain plastic products on the environment’, Annex 3 (Current situation: Facts and Figures). 3 https://commission.europa.eu/law/law-making-process/better-regulation_en. 4 Commission Staff Working Document Impact Assessment ‘Reducing Marine Litter: action on single use plastics and fishing gear Accompanying the document Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the reduction of the impact of certain plastic products on the environment’, part 1-3. 5 As defined in point (g) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 609/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 June 2013 on food intended for infants and young children, food for special medical purposes, and total diet replacement for weight control and repealing Council Directive 92/52/EEC, Commission Directives 96/8/EC, 1999/21/EC, 2006/125/EC and 2006/141/EC, Directive 2009/39/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Commission Regulations (EC) No 41/2009 and (EC) No 953/2009. 6 Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2023/1060 of 30 May 2023 on a harmonised standard for test methods and requirements to demonstrate that plastic caps and lids remain attached to beverage containers drafted in support of Directive (EU) 2019/904 of the European Parliament and of the Council. 7 https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/14422-Rules-on-single-use-plasticsand-fishing-gear-evaluation-_en.”
  Sustainable packaging · EU policy towards plastics
• 2025-11-13 “– Г-жо Председател, днес гласувахме новия климатичен закон, ключов инструмент за бъдещето на Европа и на България. Това не е просто нормативен акт, това е решение дали ще живеем в по-чиста, по-сигурна среда и дали ще имаме по-конкурентна икономика. За България залогът е особено висок. Нашите домакинства и бизнеси вече усещат натиска на енергийната трансформация, затова трябва ясно да посочим и проблемите, свързани ИТС2, новата схема за търговия с емисии за транспорт и сгради. Тя може да доведе до по-високи цени на горивата и отоплението, а на този етап няма достатъчно защити за уязвимите граждани и малкия бизнес. Затова подкрепих отлагането на ИТС2 засега за 2028 г. Подкрепих актуализираната междинна цел за намаляване на емисиите до 2040 г., защото тя дава необходимата предвидимост за планиране на инвестициите в Европа и България, без която нито индустрията, нито енергийният сектор могат да вземат дългосрочни решения. Същевременно ние трябва да гарантираме, че зеленият преход е справедлив, че гражданите няма да бъдат оставени сами да плащат цената и че усилията за климатична неутралност ще вървят ръка за ръка с подкрепа, инвестиции и солидарност.”
• 2025-11-13 “– Madam President, dear colleagues, today we approved the updated regulation for EMSA, the European Maritime Safety Agency – a vital step forward for maritime safety, decarbonisation and sustainable governance. By supporting this regulation, I reaffirm my commitment to ensuring that our maritime sector adapts to the new geopolitical realities, strengthens environmental standards, and deploys modern training and governance frameworks. For our country, this regulation matters because our shipping, port infrastructure and maritime services must align with the highest European standards to remain competitive and resilient. The renewed EMSA mandate gives us stronger oversight and support so that tragedies at sea, environmental incidents and safety risks are better prevented, and our businesses operate on a level playing field. At the same time, I emphasise the need for EU policy to reflect fairness and proportionality, ensuring that smaller maritime nations and regional ports are not overburdened, that technical assistance and funding are accessible, and that training and capacity-building do reach all actors.”
• 2025-09-17 “E-003589/2025 Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the European Commission Regulation (EU) 2025/1197 1 imposes a measure under the International Procurement Instrument (IPI), restricting the access of Chinese bidders and Chinese medical devices to the EU public procurement market. This measure applies to all EU procurement procedures of medical devices under the Common Procurement Vocabulary (CPV) - codes 33100000-1 to 33199000-1 2 , including medical gloves, with an estimated value equal to or above 5 million EUR net of value added tax (VAT) 3 . The measure does not distinguish between singleproduct tenders and multi-product bundled tenders; its application is defined by the main CPV code of a tender. If the main CPV code is within the scope of the IPI measure, the measure shall apply to the entire procedure if the value of the tender is equal to or above EUR 5 million net of VAT. In designing the IPI measure, the Commission is bound by the requirements of Regulation (EU) 2022/1031 4 . Stockpiling of medical countermeasures is indeed one of the core areas of work within the Commission’s Health Emergency Preparedness and Response Authority's mandate. In this respect, the Commission ensures that the EU maintains preparedness for specific cross-border health threats by stockpiling essential medical goods including personal protective equipment to be deployed in crisis times under rescEU. These stockpiles are fully funded by the EU grants given to Member States, which procure the items in line with the terms of the grants and EU legislation. The Commission is currently preparing the revision of the public procurement framework 5 . The evaluation report has been published on 14 October 2025 6 . On this basis the Commission will develop a public procurement proposal that should also consider resilience and affordability aspects. 1 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/1197 of 19 June 2025 imposing an International Procurement Instrument measure restricting the access of economic operators and medical devices originating in the People’s Republic of China to the European Union public procurement market for medical devices pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2022/1031 of the European Parliament and of the Council, OJ L, 20 June 2025; https://eurlex.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2025/1197/oj/eng. 2 As defined in Regulation (EC) No 2195/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 November 2002 on the Common Procurement Vocabulary (CPV) (OJ L 340, 16 December 2002, p. 1.; https://eurlex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2002/2195/oj/eng. 3 Value-added tax. 4 Regulation (EU) 2022/1031 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 June 2022 on the access of third-country economic operators, goods and services to the union’s public procurement and concession markets and procedures supporting negotiations on access of union economic operators, goods and services to the public procurement and concession markets of third countries (international procurement instrument – IPI), OJ L173, 30 June 2022, p. 1; https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2022/1031/oj/eng. 5 EU public procurement rules – revision: https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-yoursay/initiatives/15492-EU-public-procurement-rules-revision_en. 6 https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/documents-register/detail?ref=SWD(2025)332&lang=en.”
  "Buy European" provisions · Trade relations with China
• 2025-05-20 “E-002026/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission Member States must transpose Directive (EU) 2024/1438 1 by 14 December 2025. To date, three Member States have notified their national provisions to the Commission, namely Bulgaria, Spain and Lithuania. New labelling requirements will apply from 14 June 2026. Products placed on the market or labelled before 14 June 2026 may continue to be marketed until the exhaustion of stocks. The reviewed Honey Directive empowers the Commission to adopt delegated acts laying down methods and criteria to determine the place where honey has been harvested and Unionwide traceability requirements for honey from the harvesting producer or importer to the consumer. The Honey Platform has been set up to improve knowledge and formulate recommendations on honey composition and traceability. Support for apiculture under Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) Strategic plans continues to be available for advisory services, technical assistance, training, information and exchange of best practices, actions to support laboratories for the analysis of apiculture products, cooperation with specialised bodies for the implementation of research programmes, promotion, communication and marketing. 1 http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1438/oj.”
  EU policy on country of origin food labelling
• 2025-05-20 “E-002025/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 1. The Commission recognises the importance of facilitating access to funding for small and medium-sized beekeepers, particularly in less-developed regions. While the implementation of the mandatory apiculture sectoral support under the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) Strategic Plans rests with Member States, the Commission is continuously engaged with the latter to ensure that the available support measures are effectively implemented and adapted to address the needs of their beekeepers effectively. Under the CAP simplification package 1 presented by the Commission on 14 May 2025, payments per beehive will be allowed for agri-environment-climate commitments and eco-schemes providing Member States more flexibility to support their beekeepers. 2. The Commission supports mechanisms for transparent and effective consultation with representatives of the apiculture sector. During the drawing up of the CAP Strategic Plans, Member States were required to collaborate with the representatives of organisations in the beekeeping field and they continue to be actively involved in the development and implementation of apiculture sectoral support. The Commission also facilitates dialogue and exchange of best practices among Member States to enhance stakeholder involvement. 3. The continued support to beekeeping, together with the various policy initiatives to safeguard pollinators and their environment, will remain a key focus in the future under the CAP. The Commission will continue to engage with stakeholders and Member States to develop effective strategies to enhance the sustainability and resilience of the bee-keeping sector, considering its vital role for sustainable agriculture and the environment. 1 https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/circabc-ewpp/d/d/workspace/SpacesStore/b595fc96-2988-44fb-86a54383cb070119/download.”
  Agricultural funding · EU policy on pesticides
• 2025-05-20 “E-002020/2025 Answer given by Mr Várhelyi on behalf of the European Commission 1. There are four EU Reference Laboratories for pesticide residues developing analytical methods and supporting EU national reference and official laboratories. The EU coordinated multiannual control programme 1 for residues includes, among others, residues of pesticides affecting bee health. Furthermore, the exposure of honeybees to pesticides was monitored in the EU preparatory action Insignia 2 . 2. Decisions on the approval of active substances used in plant protection products are based on a comprehensive scientific risk assessment considering effects on human health and the environment, including on bees, in accordance with criteria set in Regulation (EC) No 1107//2009 3 . The Commission already restricted the approval of active substances (e.g., most neonicotinoids 4 ) to ensure protection of pollinators and will continue to do so whenever warranted. Moreover, Regulation (EU) No 2023/334 5 bans the import of food and feed containing residues of two neonicotinoids to avoid that products imported into the EU contribute to global pollinator decline. The Commission is in the process of strengthening by 2026 6 the risk assessment for bees by working towards endorsing the updated European Food Safety Authority’s Bee Guidance Document 7 . 3. The EU Common Agricultural Policy provides for eco-schemes and agro-environmental commitments to support bee protection, biodiversity and organic farming. In 2023, support for organic farming granted covered nearly 6% of EU agricultural area and sustainable pesticide use practices covers almost 30% 8 . Horizon 2020 9 , Horizon Europe 10 , as well as research under the Agroecology 11 and Biodiversity 12 Partnerships, fund 13 research for reduced pesticide use and biodiversity-friendly farming. 1 The most recent control programme was adopted by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/989 of 2 April 2024 concerning a coordinated multiannual control programme of the Union for 2025, 2026 and 2027 to ensure compliance with maximum residue levels of pesticides and to assess the consumer exposure to pesticide residues in and on food of plant and animal origin and repealing Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/731, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2024/989/oj. 2 https://wikis.ec.europa.eu/spaces/EUPKH/pages/36702461/Pollution+monitoring+Insignia. 3 Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and the Council concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market, OJ L 309, 24.11.2009, p. 1. 4 https://food.ec.europa.eu/plants/pesticides/approval-active-substances-safeners-and-synergists/renewalapproval/neonicotinoids_en. 5 http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/334/oj. 6 https://food.ec.europa.eu/plants/pesticides/protection-bees_en. 7 https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/7989. 8 ‘The 28 CAP Strategic plans underway – summary of implementation in 2023-2024 – facts and figures’ (June 2025) (https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/cap-my-country/cap-strategic-plans_en#at-a-glance). 9 Examples not exhaustive: https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/773921; https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/817622; https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/101003476. 10 Examples not exhaustive: https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/773921; https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/817622; https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/101003476. 11 https://www.agroecologypartnership.eu/. 12 https://www.biodiversa.eu/2022/10/31/beehope/. 13 Exact amount varies depending on the inclusion of projects focused on honeybees, all pollinators, precision farming, organics, agroecology, biodiversity conservation, and other related areas.”
  EU policy on pesticides · Reduction targets for pesticides · Agricultural funding
• 2025-04-09 “E-001444/2025 Answer given by Mr Várhelyi on behalf of the European Commission The management of animal diseases is a priority for the Commission as it strenghtens the EU livestock competitiveness, and the internal market for animals and by-products - contributing to economic growth, jobs, and sustainable agriculture. The legislative framework regarding Peste des petits ruminants (PPR) laid down in Regulation (EU) 2016/429 1 and Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/687 2 is grounded in the latest scientific evidence as confirmed by the European Food Safety Authority and is aligned with World Organisation for Animal Health’s international standards. This legislation provides effective, proportionate, risk-based measures for the prevention and control of transmissible animal diseases, including zoonoses. They set rules on disease awareness, preparedness, and response. Control measures are based on epidemiological factors and risk assessment and include targeted culling in outbreak, contact or suspected establishments. The Commission reviews legislation in light of science and international standards. The EU has been funding animal health research and innovation (R&I) through its successive Framework Programmes for R&I (FP), investing respectively EUR 35 million in vaccine research under Horizon 2020 (previous FP) 3 and EUR 20 million so far under Horizon Europe (current FP) 4 . The Horizon Europe partnership on animal health and welfare 5 in particular supports work on surveillance and monitoring, treatments and vaccines. The Vision for Agriculture and Food 6 announces a work stream on livestock to develop policy pathways for a competitive, resilient and sustainable sector. This work stream will explore important dimensions of the long-term future of the livestock sector to which animal health belongs. 1 http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/429/oj. 2 http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2020/687/oj. 3 https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-opencalls/horizon-2020_en. 4 https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2023-05/factsheet-agriresearch-animal-health_en.pdf 5 https://www.eupahw.eu/. 6 COM/2025/75 final.”
  Animal diseases prevention and management in the EU
• 2024-10-28 “E-002283/2024 Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Kallas on behalf of the European Commission European External Action service (EEAS) recruitments and selections are based on merit whilst ensuring adequate geographical and gender balance 1 . While ‘No posts shall be reserved for nationals of any specific Member State 2 ’, current efforts continue to focus on achieving a more balanced representation among Member States, including of those who joined after 2004 (EU13). The share of staff holding EU-13 nationalities reached 23% in the EEAS in 2023, exceeding the EU-13’s 22.6% share in total EU population 3 . By the end of 2023, 25 Member States were represented in all EEAS staff categories. The only exceptions were Luxembourg (no Temporary Agent – TA) and Malta (no TA and no Contract Agent). Only two Member States (Germany and Poland) had less EEAS staff than their share in the total EU population. The share of EU-13 nationals among EU Ambassadors increased from 17% in 2022 to 19.2% in 2023. As of 1 September 2024, all but one Member States (Hungary) are represented at the level of EU Ambassador or Deputy Head of Delegation. This is the result of a proactive EEAS action, including through steady exchanges with Member States, dedicated outreach events and information sessions aimed at under-represented Member States. 1 As per the EEAS founding Decision: Council Decision 2010/427/EU of 26 July 2010 establishing the organisation and functioning of the European External Action Service. 2 See Regulation 31 (EEC), 11 (EAEC), laying down the Staff Regulations of Officials and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants of the European Economic Community and the European Atomic Energy Community, Article 27 (SR) and Article 12 (CEOS). 3 Eurostat estimates for 2023, source: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/tps00005/default/table?lang=en&category=t_demo.t_demo_ind”
  Recruitment policies in the EU
• “Commissioner colleagues. Today, we discuss the partnership between the two largest democratic unions in the world, as the European Union and the Indian Union. Our relationship has forged over the years yielding remarkable achievements in trade, investment, scientific collaboration and cultural exchange. Now, in a rapidly changing world, it is imperative that the European Union and India deepen their cooperation in critical areas that will shape the future. Our commitment to peace, respect for international law, multilateralism and a rules based international order must be unwavering. Together, we can champion diplomacy, foster stability, and uphold the principles that have long ensured global security and prosperity. Climate change remains an existential threat. Our partnership in clean energy, sustainable development and environmental protection is crucial for securing a livable planet for future generations. The artificial intelligence presents both tremendous opportunities and significant risks. By aligning our approaches to regulate the EU and India can ensure AI development is ethical, transparent and respects fundamental rights. As digital technologies underpin every aspect of our societies, we also must work together to build resilient digital infrastructures and establish common standards to protect privacy and security. Dhanyavad. Thank you.”
  EU-India relations
• “Madam Commissioner, colleagues. The current debate is about proposals for amendments that affect the very foundations of European digital legislation. Under the pretext of simplification, the steps proposed will reduce the protection of personal data, the confidentiality of communications and citizens rights that are protected directly by the treaties and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. This is not a technical correction. This is a weakening of standards that is built on people's trust and the stability on which businesses rely. If we make definitions too blurred and allow for a wider use of personal data without clear safeguards, we risk not just a lower level of protection, but risk legal fragmentation. More importantly, weakening protection Action, undermines all legislation, undermines the AI act, the Digital Services Act, the Digital Markets Act. All of those rely on rules and definitions enshrined in the General Data Protection Regulation. Our message must be clear data protection, confidentiality and not an obstacle. There are conditions for innovation, trust and competitiveness. Thank you.”
  GDPR
• “Thank you. Chair. Director Szego , welcome to the committee. The establishment of anti-money laundering authority is a decisive step in strengthening the union's capacity to fight money laundering and terrorist financing. Criminal networks exploit loopholes, inconsistencies and fragmented supervision across member states, which is putting at risk our financial system, but also our citizens and the rule of law. A strong and operational Amla is therefore indispensable as Amla enters the crucial phase of becoming fully operational. Allow me to highlight three priorities from our perspective. First, a smooth and timely operational setup, logistics, recruitment, IT system and the first supervisory tools must become functional without delay. The mandate given to the authorities. Ambitious. It will soon oversee a significant number of high risk entities and will have to deliver a very substantial package of technical standards and guidelines. Any delay here may undermine the credibility of the entire new anti-money laundering framework. Second, we need consistent and risk based supervision across the EU. Mla Kia added value is to put an end to the current uneven and fragmented system of national practices. The authority must ensure that the same rules are applied in the same way everywhere. Strengthened cooperation and close the gaps that criminals have deliberately exploited by shifting activities from one jurisdiction to another. And thirdly, we need effective coordination of financial intelligence units across the EU. These national authorities still differ widely in size, expertise and resources, and some face clear capacity gaps. Emla must drive better information exchange, promote common analytical tools, and support those units that struggle with complex of cross-border cases. My question is, uh, first National Financial Intelligence Unit is very widely in capacity and resources. How will Amla support these authorities that currently cannot process or analyse complex cases at the same speed as larger member states? And secondly, given the regional environment in Southeastern Europe and the proximity of a number of member states to the Western Balkans, how will Emla strengthen cooperation with neighboring jurisdictions where money laundering risks and governance issues may have a direct impact on the EU financial system? Thank you, thank you.”
  Anti-money laundering regulation
• “President, the situation in the Middle East is yet another example of an erosion in the international order. We are noticing a serious escalation that risks to grow into a full scale war. No doubt the regime of Iran has a destabilizing role in the region. It is a threat to the international security, and it is responsible for serious repressions against its people. Hardly anyone believes that military action will lead to democracy and stability in Iran. We've got a sufficient number of examples Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. responding to a breach in the international order by. War only deepens the instability, because the message of this war to the authoritarian regimes is that it is not diplomacy and compromise, but armament. That is the only guarantee and security under the new geopolitical realities. Europe has to have a voice of its own. It should have a voice in protection of international law and diplomacy. We should not get involved in this US conflict. Madame von der Leyen, you need to be more courageous.”
  EU-Iran relations
• “Thank you chair. Thank you, colleagues, for your remarks. I fully agree with Mrs. Vivaldi for her final statement at this discussion. I would like, however, just in case, to draw your attention, that we together change very different directive. So MiFID has its own definition which is unique about what Midcaps is. It's not exactly the same with the other directive where Libya is leading. I would only like to say that, um, uh, we need to be at least my approach would be to be a bit more conservative, uh, with the changes we make not to jump to, uh, too high threshold. I reiterate it again, maybe because I come from a traditional legislative tradition where national parliament was very quick to adopt changes, then we were then forced to change them again. I hope it's not happening in the European Parliament. And I would say that, uh, we need to study what would be the impact of the changes that are proposed now before we go to further, deeper changes in the legislation itself. So let's stick to the initial idea of the commission, only to extend the scope of the special measures to from. Smes to Mid-caps. And in this sense, I think the possibility to revise the definition of smcs gives the necessary flexibility for further fine tuning of our European legislation. And in this sense, I would be rather ready to give credit to the estimation of the thresholds made by the Commission. Thank you.”
  Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MiFID)
• “Today we mark World Mental Health Day, a day when we remember that there's no health without mental health. We are increasingly aware that mental well-being depends not only on our personal strength or attitude but also on the conditions in which we live. Socioeconomic factors, poverty, unemployment, low income, social isolation and inequality have a profound impact on the human psyche. When a person lives in constant stress without a stable income or a secure environment, anxiety and depression become not just a personal problem but a public one. That is why the fight for mental health must also be a fight for social justice. More investment is needed in education, accessible health care and support programs for vulnerable groups. We need to talk openly about mental health without shame or stigma and create a society where help is available to everyone regardless of their social status. The European Mental Health Strategy adopted in two thousand twenty three, which focuses on prevention, access to care and combating stigma, is a good start but concrete measures are also needed today. Let us make a step forward toward a world where mental health is a right, not a privilege, a world where care, understanding and solidarity are at the heart of human dignity.”
  EU policy on mental health
• “Thank you. Chair. Colleagues. Dear Mr. Hogarth, I'm here on your left. Welcome to our committee. I wish you. I wish you a successful presidency. And I count on constructive cooperation in the months to come. Allow me to dig a bit more into the ETS issue, since your comment was very general. The extension of the emission trading system to the buildings and road transport sectors, envisaged to take effect in 2027, is one of the most socially sensitive elements of the EU's climate agenda in Eastern Europe, where many citizens already struggle with high energy costs, inadequate housing infrastructure, limited access to clean mobility options, the additional costs imposed by ETS two risks exacerbating energy poverty and widening existing social and regional inequalities. While the Danish presidency has rightly prioritized a cost effective and competitive green transition. It is equally essential that this transition be fair and inclusive given the responsibility. How does the Danish Presidency intend to ensure that its implementation does not disproportionately burden lower income households, particularly in member states with lower average incomes and weaker social safety nets? And more specifically, what measures will the presidency support to reinforce the social dimension of the Green Deal, including the effective deployment of the Social Climate Fund and broader cohesion tools? Thank you.”
  Extension of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme
• “Thank you, Chair. Mrs. Talus, I would like to thank you for your presentation for the report that you have presented to us. I have one question regarding the regulation laying down additional procedural rules relating to the enforcement of GDPR. In your report, you mentioned about the cooperation between the respective agencies within the European Union, within the within the board. Um, you do not mention, however, the ongoing trilogue on this regulation. In your opinion, in which direction does it go? Is it positive as you how would you evaluate evaluate it and would it help Um. Your work. One statement. Congratulations on the task force that you have created on ChatGPT and on your extensive work on AI models. Obviously, protecting data is becoming more and more complex issue, and we have to be prepared since AI models grow and multiply exponentially. And one recommendation I think you need to focus a bit more on public information campaigns, because I believe that people simply do not know their rights with regard to the data protection, and the more they know, the better they will be able to address you on these matters. Thank you.”
  GDPR
• “Thank you chair. Dear colleagues, first of all I'd like to thank colleague Vivaldi and her team including the Secretariat for the good cooperation on this exercise, which is not easy to work together on two very different directives. As part of the omnibus for package, the proposal amends to to amend two existing directives with a clear goal to extend certain facilitating measures for SMEs to small mid-cap enterprises, and to introduce further simplification for the Labour Committee. Our focus is on the amendment to the Critical Entities Resilience Directive. Member States would have to include in their national strategies a description of facilitating measures not only for SMEs but also for SMEs. This, in essence, the proposal for a change. In practice, this broadens the number of companies operating in critical infrastructure, for example in energy transport, digital services, water management or healthcare that can benefit from simplified compliance requirements. Guidance and support. At first glance, this may appear to be a straightforward simplification exercise aimed at reducing the administrative burden on companies. However, the proposal raises an important horizontal issue the need to formulate a clear and future proof definition of what constitutes a small mid cap enterprise. If simplification is the guiding principle of the omnibus package, and indeed one of the key priorities of this mandate, then we must ensure that introducing a new category of enterprises will not add fragmentation, but rather apply consistently across existing and future EU legislation. Otherwise, instead of simplifying, we risk creating new inconsistency in this legislation.”
  Overall simplification of regulation in the EU
• “The commission original proposal already introduced flexibility for small operators by exempting companies with turnover below €150 million from certain due diligence obligations and by maintaining annual reporting to ensure regular oversight. The draft report, however, significantly expands this approach. It raises the turnover threshold from 150 million to €450 million, thereby extending the exemption to a far broader category of companies. While this reflects the diversity and size of Europe's mid-caps, it also carries a risk it may remove due diligence obligations from companies that do have substantial market impact, and whose supply chains raise meaningful substantiality or human rights concerns. In the name of simplification, we risk creating blind spots in precisely the sectors where transparency is needed most. The draft report also proposes replacing annual reporting with a five year reporting cycle and allowing companies to consolidate their obligations into a single EU wide due diligence report. This undoubtedly reduces duplication, but it also reduces the frequency of scrutiny in an area. Battery supply chains, where risks evolve rapidly and where early early monitoring has been a key tool for ensuring responsible sourcing. So simplification has its place, but a five year cycle may stretch accountability too far. We work with the rapporteurs to find balanced solutions. Thank you.”
  Due diligence in supply chains (environmental and human rights)
• “Dear Commissioner. I reiterate our deep concern regarding the Commission's continued authorisation of genetically modified organisms in direct defiance of this Parliament's repeated objections. The European Parliament has rejected nearly 50 GMO authorisations, raising concerns about biodiversity, food safety and environmental sustainability. Yet despite this consistent opposition, the Commission continues with approvals often without a qualified majority and against the will of both Parliament and a divided council. The risk posed by GMOs are not hypothetical. They are rooted in legitimate scientific uncertainty and long term concerns about the loss of biodiversity through monocultures. Potential harm to pollinators. Dependency on herbicides and resistant crops. These authorisations mainly serve the commercial interests of large, primarily US based companies rather than European farmers and consumers. We believe in a sustainable agricultural future rooted in science, responsibility and democratic legitimacy. Therefore, our opposition to GMO will remain. Thank you.”
  GMOs
• “Thank you chair. Dear colleagues, I would like to congratulate the Afco leadership for this exchange. It's an excellent idea to bring together national parliamentarians and members of European Parliament because although the act was adopted here in the European Parliament, it is our common responsibility because implementation then is rather in the hands of the National Member States. I appreciate the draft report of my colleague Kefalogiannis. It focuses on a different aspect of this AI revolution. If I can summarize on the democratic oversight of of that and how can we guarantee that? And since we don't have much time, I would like to focus on one aspect here. The EC vice president mentioned the AI office and the fact that the employees there are 140 at this stage, and I can assure you that it's already not enough at the office, is not able to produce the necessary guidelines in time. And the more I am dealing with the AI and the AI regulation or AI oversight, I am more and more convinced. Also, as a rapporteur of the socialists on the on the digital omnibus and the AI act regulation, that we need a more comprehensive oversight, infrastructure or structure. I believe that we at this stage already need an AI agency that would be more independent at the same time, would make it easier for European Parliament to oversight, to scrutinise the activity of such an agency. And we also need a more centralized approach. Also in the member states. I give you only one example. For example, on the issue of the fundamental rights, there are seven Bulgarian institutions that have been tasked to follow this. I think this is not the way to deal with such a difficult topic. So let's think about that. I'm sure we'll come to this issue sooner or later. At this stage, I support personally the idea of such AI observatory in the European Parliament. Thank you.”
  Artificial Intelligence
• “Colleagues, the EU's Pakistan Enhanced Partnership and Cooperation Agreement is an important step in strengthening the EU's long term engagement in Central Asia in times of global uncertainty. Stronger cooperation between the EU and the countries of Central Asia is clearly in the strategic interest of both sides. Uzbekistan is becoming an increasingly valuable partner for connectivity, energy diversification, critical raw materials and regional stability. At the same time, challenges remain regarding political pluralism, media freedom, and the protection of fundamental rights. And this is precisely why continued dialogue matters. Constructive engagement gives the EU the tools to support positive change over the long term. Uzbekistan has already demonstrated both the willingness and the capacity to reform. The agreement will create new opportunities for economic growth, social progress and poverty reduction in the country. The S&D Group supports Epca as a solid foundation for a balanced and forward looking partnership between the EU and Uzbekistan. And allow me to wish them success in their own language. Zyga Tilman. Thank you.”
  EU policy on Central Asia
• “However, if our actions have contributed to this decision of the Mejlis, we should also be willing to learn from the situation and review our approach. I know the answer I may receive to this year. We are politicians. We are not diplomats. Yet the European Parliament is a multinational parliament with a strong international role, and more diplomacy in our actions can only help us achieve our goals. At the same time, we must remain clear and principled throughout this parliamentary mandate. The S&D Group has consistently raised concerns regarding the rule of law and the human rights situation in Azerbaijan, including the treatment of journalists, opposition figures and human rights defenders. These concerns are legitimate and reflect the European Parliament's commitment to fundamental rights and democratic standards. Our criticism should never be interpreted as hostility towards the Azerbaijani people. On the contrary, our objective is a stable, peaceful, democratic and prosperous South Caucasus, where dialogue prevails over confrontation. The European Parliament should remain ready to re-engage with our Azerbaijani colleagues at all levels through dialogue, accountability and mutual respect as soon as they are ready to. Thank you.”
  EU-Azerbaijan relations
• “Thank you, chair colleagues. The decision of the Azerbaijani Parliament to suspend cooperation with the European Parliament is deeply regrettable and sends a worrying political signal at a crucial moment for the South Caucasus. It comes precisely when there are important opportunities for progress in the Armenia, Azerbaijan peace process and for greater regional stability. Developments that the European Parliament has consistently supported. Parliamentary dialogue is not a reward reserved only for moments of agreement. It is most necessary precisely when disagreements are serious. The European Parliament has always believed that the cooperation between parliamentary institutions provides a platform for addressing differences, defending common interests and promoting democratic values. Suspending this dialogue risks deepening mistrust and weakening channels for constructive engagement at a time when diplomacy and communication are urgently needed. During my years as a European and national parliamentarian, I have had the opportunity to cooperate closely with Azerbaijani counterparts on many occasions. As founder and first SIP co-president of the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly. Later, as vice president of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly and its Special representative for the South Caucasus, I have experienced difficult moments with them. It is often not easy to strike the right balance between constructive criticism and cooperation.”
  EU-Azerbaijan relations
• “Thank you, Madam President. Commissioner. Ladies and gentlemen. Cardiovascular diseases are leading cause of mortality and affect millions of citizens. I therefore welcome the development of the cardiovascular health based on objectives and measures. The plan must focus on prevention. This means investing in early diagnostics, systematic preventive checkups and initiatives to reduce risk factors, smoking and healthy diets, inactivity and air pollution. Prevention is better than cure and it is more sustainable. It is important that these initiatives reach out to vulnerable groups and regions in Bulgaria. Mortality remains alarmingly high. We need screening programs, health education and support for primary care, including in smaller settlements. Expectations for this plan must be realistic. It will not replace national policies, but it can create framework for coordination and funding. Thank you.”
  EU measures on lifestyle-related behaviours (smoking, drinking, eating, etc.)
• “Thank you chair. We all recognize the need to help European companies, especially smaller ones, to comply with data protection rules in a proportionate and practical way. Away. But the draft report before us goes beyond simplification. It opens structural questions about the GDPR that this omnibus file was never meant to address, and in doing so, risks weakening the safeguards that underpin trust in European digital economy. The proposal to double the exemption threshold from 750 to 1500 employees would place almost all European companies outside basic record keeping obligations. This is not a technical fix. It is a redesign of GDPR accountability. Company size simply does not reflect the risk of data processing, and many small firms handle very sensitive data. The report also turns accountability into an undocumented self-assessment, making it impossible for authorities to verify whether processing has been correctly classified as low risk. Even more worrying, it suggests that employment related sensitive data may not require record at all, contradicting the core logic of the GDPR and risking a. Normalization of undocumented processing and workplaces. Finally, the draft introduces provisions inviting future reinterpretations of legitimate interest risk categories and pseudonymization topics far too fundamental to be addressed through a technical omnibus exercise. S&d Group supports genuine simplification, but not at the expense of fundamental rights or legal certainty. We will table amendments to bring the report back within its proper scope, and stand ready to work with all groups to achieve a balanced outcome. Thank you.”
  GDPR
• “(17:58:01 – 18:00:14): Thank you, chair. Thank you, commissioner, for being with us. Honestly, I don't understand the empty room today, but, okay. At least we are here, and we'll discuss the important things. Thank you for your presentation. And, you touched upon some of the topics that I was planning to raise, but still, I'd like to make some comments regarding the fact that Europe is no longer facing isolated climate disasters. You mentioned that you talk about floods, wildfires, storms are becoming a structural reality. And the recent years have shown that extreme weather events increasingly overwhelm national response capacities and create major economic, environmental, and public health consequences. So in your preparedness union strategy, rightly, it was recognized that preparedness must become a core component of EU policymaking moving from a reactive to a preventive approach. One current issue, we see scientific forecasts that indicate the possible return of a strong El Nino cycle this year, which could further intensify global temperature records and increase the likelihood of extreme weather patterns affecting Europe. Against this backdrop, preparedness cannot remain a secondary expenditure item. The next multi-annual financial framework should ensure that climate adaptation, disaster resilience, and civil protection are treated as strategic investments in Europe's security and competitiveness. So taking into account that the preparedness union strategy speaks about the preparedness by design approach across EU policies, how do you intend to ensure that the next MFF systematically integrates flood resilience and disaster preparedness across cohesion, agriculture, infrastructure, and regional development funding? I know it's a very general question, but still we discuss these issues right now in different committees. And my second question, will the commission propose measurable preparedness benchmarks for member states linked to EU funding to ensure that investments translate into real resilience on the ground? Thank you.”
  EU policy on infrastructure for preventing climate-related disasters (floods, droughts, extreme weather etc.)
• “Thank you. Chair. Commissioner Hoekstra A recent studies and analysis have highlighted the risk that the introduction of the second EU emissions trading system here, which will extend carbon pricing to two new sectors buildings and road transport, could lead to a sharper than expected increase in carbon prices, particularly due to the previously limited ambition of national and EU level climate policies. This has raised legitimate concerns among member states about the potential social repercussions, particularly for vulnerable households. I can repeat if necessary. Chair, should we start over or you have heard? More or less. Yeah, it's about the ETS. Two the question and the broader risk to public acceptance of the EU's climate agenda. Could you elaborate on the evidence and projections the Commission relies on to maintain its assessment that the price impact will remain modest of the introduction of the ETS two? And furthermore, how does the Commission plan to adapt its approach, both in terms of additional legislative safeguards and the mobilisation of financial resources, to ensure that the Social Climate Fund is adequately equipped to cushion the social impact and foster fairness and solidarity across the union. Thank you.”
  Extension of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme
• “Dear colleagues. Mr.. Commissioner, today a public health is a matter of autonomous sovereignty, and the crisis has shown today that there are certain vulnerabilities in Europe shortages of critical medicines, dependence on non-EU suppliers. No single member state can solve those unless we coordinate very well. Here it is important to note the role of the future European Competitiveness funds. Only two weeks ago, the Committee on Public Health has adopted an opinion which focuses strongly on Europe's strategic autonomy in medicine, supporting innovation and ensuring affordable medicines for all European citizens. As a reporter for the S&D Group, I pushed for more guaranteed funds for health care, including medicines. But in addition to medicines, measures to provide health care systems with medical staff and to overcome the phenomenon of health deserts are unacceptable in modern Europe. Thank you.”
  Pharmaceuticals regulation in EU — innovation/access axis