Bas EICKHOUT

Policy topics Bas EICKHOUT is active on

What Bas EICKHOUT has said (29)

• 2025-06-05 “E-002287/2025 Answer given by Ms Albuquerque on behalf of the European Commission While the Commission is not in a position to evaluate specific products referred to in the question, the Insurance Distribution Directive 1 provides a general obligation for insurance undertakings to ensure that their insurance products are aligned with the needs, objectives and characteristics of the target market. Products need to offer sufficient value for money with reasonable and proportionate costs and charges in relation to the benefits provided. The European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority has issued guidance on the assessment of value for money of unit-linked insurance products to help competent authorities in supervising compliance with these rules. It is up to the national competent authorities to ensure that investment products provide sufficient value for money to their target market and to use, if needed, in an effective manner their supervisory tools to enforce the application of the legislation. The Commission’s proposal for the retail investment strategy included measures to ensure that investment products offer value for money to retail investors, to improve the quality of advice and to ensure transparency of costs. The negotiations are currently on-going and their outcome is open. The Commission plans to issue a recommendation to Member States in the third quarter of 2025 on setting up retail savings and investments accounts (SIAs). The primary objective will be to facilitate retail savers access to capital markets. The Commission considers of utmost importance that investments through SIAs are in the best interest of customers. To that effect, the Commission is reflecting on what features would best accomplish this objective, including in terms of eligibility of assets and competition among providers. 1 Article 25 (Product oversight and governance requirements), Directive (EU) 2016/97 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 January 2016 on insurance distribution, OJ L 26, 2.2.2016, p. 19–59.”
  Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MiFID) · Financial regulation
• 2025-03-31 “P-001316/2025 Answer given by Mr Jørgensen on behalf of the European Commission Significant capital is required for investments in modernising and expanding our grid. This is essential to facilitate the deployment of renewables and electrification. Investing EUR 2 billion per year in cross-border networks provides EUR 5 billion in benefits for citizens yearly. In parallel, it is important to mitigate network costs impact on electricity bills. Spreading these investments over time and optimising the use of existing grids can help ensure that costs remain contained for consumers. In the Affordable Energy Action Plan 1 , the Commission has announced a series of actions to address the impact of network tariffs on consumer bills to be put forward by the second quarter of 2025. This includes a methodology for network charges that encourages flexibility and investments in electrification, guidance on using public budgets to reduce network charges in line with State aid rules, and guidance for anticipatory investments. The EU also provides substantial funding for grids, including through the Connecting Europe Facility to support key cross-border energy infrastructure projects. In addition, the Commission has proposed to facilitate funding of energy interconnectors and related transmission infrastructure as part of a modernised cohesion policy 2 . Infrastructure projects with cross-border impact face challenges with rising costs and fair distribution of costs and benefits. Regarding sharing costs across benefiting countries, the cross-border cost-allocation in the Trans-European Networks for Energy (TEN-E) framework has helped the allocation of costs across borders for Projects of Common Interest. In addition, the Commission will develop effective cost-sharing mechanism in the upcoming European Grids Package. 1 https://energy.ec.europa.eu/strategy/affordable-energy_en 2 COM(2025) 163 final.”
  EU approach to electricity market and prices · EU energy infrastructure integration
• “But on top of that, we need to have three principles in mind. First, we need to build European. We are overly dependent on US energy, defence, financial and digital services. Only strong and common European alternatives can provide us the operating room we need. We need joint investments in those sectors. We need joint EU borrowing measures. Secondly, we need to buy European. In the past months, the European consumer showed the way in showing how you do not buy further Teslas. We should learn from them and use local content requirements and resilience criteria and give preference to European products and services. And thirdly, we need to protect European our values, our industry. They will only survive if we act and protect, if we apply our digital rights to the letter. If we stop dumping on the EU market, we will work together with those that still value our rules based system, that let be our strategy. Build European, buy European. Protect European. Europe needs to stop thinking as a market and start acting as a power. A power to do good. Thank you.”
  "Buy European" provisions
• “What we are doing to chemicals, it is deregulation and not simplification. And if you want to compete with the US on deregulation, we will always lose from the US. It is the most stupid thing to do to compete with the US on deregulation. It is not an advantage of competitiveness. Secondly, the attention to clean tech is very important. And thank you also for raising that in your speech very clearly, because that is where we are still losing from China. And that is also where Draghi was putting most of the attention, which I think people have forgotten. Clean tech is essential for electrification, and I am happy that you are mentioning taxation that needs to shift from taxation on electricity to gas to electricity, from electricity to gas, because that is where the taxation needs to be. But if we're talking about new technologies and with the cars we are every time coming back to the old technologies like the combustion engine or in your letter mentioning biofuels. That is not clean tech. That is the old industry. And if we are not changing that, we will lose from China. Also on the car industry and as you have said, we want to make that in Europe, but then also be consistent in your policies on the cars, because in the end, the only way to be competitive in the future is to maintain our Green Deal and to keep our targets up also for 2040. Thank you very much.”
• “Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you Commissioner. Thank you Minister. Let's be very clear. The illegal tariffs that are imposed and announced by the Trump administration will not only hurt Europeans, it will also hurt US consumers and businesses. Trump is playing a stupid but dangerous game. And if the current negotiations do not work and the commissioner already said it, the EU has to show its strength and retaliate firmly. We have the instruments to do so. It comes down to political will and leadership. We should not back down to a bully. Important in our reaction is solidarity amongst EU member states because it is key. We will have to stay united and therefore the money raised by countermeasures should be invested to support the affected sectors in all countries in order to keep the unity. However, we have to be smarter than just bashing Trump on his favorite word. We need to develop a strategy that will make Europe stronger and more resilient in a new, chaotic world. We are living in a strategy that should build on the Green Deal that we have put in as a forward looking and future oriented strategy.”
  EU-US trade relations
• “Thank you, Madam Chair. So the themes were competitiveness, security and defence and EU in the world. Well, that's a good coincidence because those are the topics I'm addressing as well, but maybe in a bit more of a challenging way, because it seems that we're all very happy with how the council went. But to be very honest, I do not think there is a good reason to be so happy about what happened to the council because the council conclusions are quite empty and not really forward looking. Let's start with competitiveness. Then we should start with our green economy, our future economy. You mentioned that the climate targets will not be debated, but they were. Macron is joining the Visegrad at the moment fighting climate action while Marseille is burning. That's the real state of where we are. And that's really condemning to watch. And Madam President, you said we are going to end the fossil era in Europe for good. That's that's lovely to hear. No, you said in general.”
  Climate efforts
• “Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you, Commission president. And also the council for being here at your own discussion. Um, first of all, of course, there are many topics on the agenda that need to be addressed, and we're very happy with all that, especially, of course, the attention to housing has already been mentioned. Just saying that if I then read the council conclusions on housing, it's quite marginal, right? I mean, the council has discussed it and asked the commission to take it further. Thank you. But we expect a bit more if the if the council is going to discuss housing. But I think the biggest discussion and I'm also thinking, Madam President for the main topic is about competitiveness and the Green Deal and our climate targets. And let's be very clear, tomorrow we will see the biggest attack on the Green Deal by the heads of state. And that is very concerning because for Europe's future, we need a long term vision. We need stability. We need certainty. And that is what the Green Deal is providing. And questioning the Green Deal is just throwing away Europe's future. And if I then look at the simplification agenda that is being mentioned in the Council conclusions over and over, but also by you, Madam President, it is not helping because it is creating uncertainty. Which law is still there? Which law is going to be there in a couple of months time? But it is it's also deregulation. What we are doing to the due diligence law.”
  Overall simplification of regulation in the EU
• “Thank you, Madam Chair, and good evening. Good evening Commissioner. First of all, I really would like to thank the rapporteur for its good cooperation on this report, which which really is putting all the elements around the ECB at place. And I also really want to thank you, Madam President, also for the cooperation and the exchange we are having, not only orally but also quite often in the form of letters. I think what is also very important is that we realize that the inflation rate is going below the 2% now, and every time when I hear the Mr. Rapporteur, he's almost obsessed, it seems, with the inflation rates. And it's good to be careful. But at the same time we also should be very happy that we are now below the 2% and below the target, which also creates a bit of investment room that Europe drastically needs as well. Secondly, also on the digital Euro, very much support also from the Greens, in order to make sure that we are creating a public and sovereign alternative to third country private providers and very much welcoming also your work on that.”
  Digital euro
• “Thank you, Madam President. This motion should be about transparency, fighting corruption, etc.. Corruption by the far right. Most corruption cases are within your ranks, and I find it quite condemning that. Mr. Legare is talking about all kinds of scandals, without mentioning all the scandals under your leadership in Frontex. Or on transparency. You have been blocking any initiative that we took to get transparency in this House. And when there was a real issue of transparency, we as Greens are taking the European Commission to court on the contracts of the vaccines. Where were you when we were fighting in court? This just shows you one thing. This is one big political show of the far right to undermine democracy, to undermine our Europe, to undermine European democracy. That is what they are doing. And that does bring me to the EPP. Mr. Weber, you did not want lectures. But sorry, when you are talking about there are new majorities. Which majority are you talking about? There is no right wing majority without the far right. So if you talk about new majorities, you are talking about the majority with them. And I can just quote the president of the commission talking about extremists eroding democracy, that they are only doing conspiracy Theories. You are feeding that beast, and at a certain moment the beast will eat you.”
  Transparency requirements of EU institutions
• “Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you once again. Um, let's just go back one year. The political guidelines that you published in July last year, they were very balanced. But we have to say, over the last year we have been disappointed in what was implemented of those political guidelines because the focus was very much on defense, Ukraine and deregulation, and especially on the latter one, it was deregulation. What you do to the due diligence proposal is deregulation has nothing to do with simplification. Your tone now in the state of the Union is different again. You promise differences. But now we really want to see that you deliver on that. It boils down to real implementation, real proposals. And then you can find us because we are very well aware. We want to work on security, on competitiveness, but in a broader definition, and we will work with you. Thank you for making also very clear that you want to work with the pro Europeans. But I do think and you still have one minute, Manfred Weber, use that wisely with whom you want to work.”
  Von der Leyen
• “After the February 14th. And that needs to change. When is Europe finally going to learn? We need a strong, united, sovereign Europe. A Europe that fights for our freedom of speech and not a speech being determined by algorithms designed by US tech Autocrats truly implement the Digital Services Act. Our citizens deserve real free speech and not and need for protection from the US tech bros, but also economically. We need to be strong. It makes you think, dear eep, when the American ambassador is applauding what you are doing with the due diligence law, that is an American agenda, an American deregulation agenda that the EPP is providing to be proud of, that you are serving the Trumpist agenda. And also yesterday, also sorry to say, Madam President, what you did yesterday on the Car regulation proposal is the best Christmas gift you can give China. You are throwing the European car industry under the bus. You said the future is electric and you are right. But now you are casting doubt for our own car industry and that's the best gift for China. The future is electric, and the only choice is will we be part of it or will we just import future cars? That's the choice. So therefore, Madam President, rethink your omnibus agenda because it is a deregulation Trumpist agenda. Last point for the EPP. You promised during the elections to only work with those who are being pro-europe pro-ukraine pro-democracy. Well, you have heard the speeches of your new friends. Rethink under your Christmas tree. And not during Easter, but Christmas. Thank you.”
  EU digital & tech sovereignty
• “And this also means that we have to look on how Europe is functioning. Manfred Weber was asking, should we not also look at how Europe is functioning? Well, I think the answer is quite clear. We have to and probably we also need initiatives from there, from the Cypriot presidency. How can Europe react more forcefully, stronger and more urgent. But also we need to fight for our autonomy, our sovereignty on three fronts military, digital, economically, military. We talked a lot about digitally. We need to come up with Europe's alternatives. We need to fully implement the Digital Services Act to preserve free speech. We need to come up with digital service taxation to make sure that the digital dominance of the US is being handled by the EU, and on economics, it is a very simple issue. Europe needs to come up with the alternative to Trump. It's fossil autocracy versus renewable democracy, and Europe stands on renewable democracy. So therefore stop with this agenda of deregulation because that's a Trump agenda. We need to come up with our own agenda, and therefore also next week's Accelerator Act. And coming up with buy, European provisions are going to be essential if we really want to be autonomous as Europe, economically as well. Looking forward.”
  EU competences on taxation
• “Thank you very much. Um, I indeed have a bit of the issue. Which problem are we trying to fix here now? Because indeed, until now, the taxonomy is quite successful. We are trying to put the green standard out. And while we are doing that, you are changing rules which to be very honest, are creating a lot of questions and uncertainty. And the answers are not making it better. So on this materiality, it's like now we leave it to the companies and yes, they need to explain it, but that's all qualitative. So how does that really help? And just to make it very clear to the commissioner with the 10% threshold, and first of all, you already are making it a much higher because you are going to the CSR level. And then on top you do this 10% materiality threshold. So you are creating a disconnection with CSR again. So you are not aligning. So you are aligning and are not aligning. And for what reason exactly? With a vague threshold where you leave it to the companies. But for sure all the oil and gas companies will not be part of that. So they will fall out of this scope thanks to this materiality threshold. I don't think that is a smart idea, to be very honest, and the answers are really not helping in creating certainty to the market. And the same is for this partial alignment. I heard saying from DG Fisma, yes, this is a novelty and we need to put it into more clearer guidance later on. But that's no problem because it will come later. This is creating uncertainty and clarity, whereas the markets are already reacting on the taxonomy. And indeed the example of the EIB, which is very successful. Totally, totally alignment with taxonomy. And sorry Commissioner, if you say that we are not changing it, that's not true because you are changing do not significant harm criteria which is part of this full alignment. So it is changing the credibility, the predictability, the clarity.”
  Green Taxonomy
• “You did a lot of proposals for the security of US and Ukraine, and rightfully so, and we will support. But security is more than weapons alone. This is about moral leadership. And here we have to talk about Gaza. Will we only start acting on Gaza when there is no Gaza left, when all the buildings are razed to the ground and all peoples have fled or are being killed? We need action. We need sanctions. And we do welcome the proposals that you made. But we need more. We need to suspend the association. Association agreement immediately. We need an arms embargo. We need to stop imports from illegal settlements. Our credibility is at stake. You gave signs to very well understand that. So now we also have to turn to the council. When is the council finally going to understand that our credibility is at stake and is undermining our position in the world? Security also means acting on climate change. And you mentioned the forest fires and and you show the forest fires. And here really towards the EPP that you think you can slow down on. Climate action shows how disconnected you are from reality. We need a thriving economy that stays within our planetary boundaries, and that is what we need to work on.”
  Relations with Israel - Palestine
• “But then of course, we also need to talk about climate action and what the ECB needs to be doing on that. Because sometimes when I hear the EPP, they are saying you should not be ideological. But I always have the feeling that EPP is ideologically against climate action. And let me be very clear. If you are looking at price stability, climate change is one of the biggest threats for future price stability. And just one number from the network for central banks, for greening the financial system. By 2050, GDP losses because of climate change could be to the level of 15% 15% of our GDP. This requires that the central bank, because of its financial stability rules, needs to take climate action into consideration by doing that for also lowering interest rates for green investments, because they are very capital intensive. So they need that support, but also that we want to see more action from the ECB to explore all your possible instruments, to support our economic objectives and minimise the financial stability as a result of the climate crisis, as your mandate stipulates. Thank you very much.”
  ECB monetary policy
• “So here I would like to hear from the Commission how they are preparing that discussion, because it will be there and rightfully so, because countries that have contributed the least to climate change are paying for it massively and the most, and that they are looking at the rich world to do something about it. It's logical. I'm also on the side of Europe to say, hey, there is more than Europe that needs to pay, But that there is also a look at Europe is also very clear and very obvious. And if we want to fight to keep on our ambition, then also this side of the debate, we need to be better prepared. Otherwise Cop 31 will have another repetition of that. Then the other point is, and I was very happy to hear Gert van den Berg to say we ourselves need to stay the course. I love that. That's that's really I love when the commission is strong and firm on that. But then next week they will come up with an automotive package where the CO2 standards for cars are going to be weakened. And I heard the I heard from the industry, Mr. DiMera, talking about how electrification is ongoing and how it's unstoppable. But we also see that Europe is threatening not to be part of that. And then creating indeed regulatory uncertainty is the stupidest thing you can do.”
  Road transport environmental policy
• “Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Madam President. The two main topics that you also address in your speech at the council were, of course, Ukraine and climate and the Green Deal. First, on Ukraine. I'm happy that you are saying that negotiations are ongoing because yes, the conclusions were that Europe will stand by Ukraine. But then if we look at the concrete measures, the council is not delivering enough. And we all know how it got stuck with Belgium on the Russian frozen assets. I think the simple question is you said there are three options at the table. One was head space in the current budget. How much is left I would say. I don't. That doesn't sound like a lot of money. The second option I don't think is very serious either. So how are you going to break the Belgian blockage that we saw happening in October so that there will be a deal in December. Secondly, on the Green Deal, first of all, happy that we have a deal on 2040 in the council. Let's see in Parliament for today. The only price we are paying is a big price. And I want that colleagues realise that 5% international offsets means that by 2035, in achieving our decarbonisation, we will pay up to €100 billion outside Europe, money we could have spent inside Europe to create jobs inside Europe.”
  Russia-Ukraine conflict (10th term)
• “Thank you very much. Bolder. Simpler. Faster. That's. That's what's below the commission work programme. So I was enthusiastic and I start reading. Let's start with bolder. Probably the clean industrial deal must be the boldest proposal. That is a non-legislative proposal that will come in end of February. Let's see what will be in probably then the Commission of investments is going to be very bold. The invest the Savings and Investment Union a communication non-legislative maybe MFF that will come in the third quarter. The geopolitical union, then that's probably the boldness. I only see non-legislative proposals on these chapters. So probably the boldness we can only see in artificial intelligence maybe. But there the Digital Network Act is the only legislative proposal in the fourth quarter of this year, so bolder and faster. Let's see. So probably we only get simpler. That's probably what you are focusing on. And indeed almost all the legislation that is proposed is simplification. But where is the vision on a European future? Because we have a big risk that we only get stuck in beautiful strategies, communications, actions, plan and in the end only end up with deregulation, creating a Trump lite in Europe that will not save Europe, that will not save European industry. If we think that competitiveness will be saved by less reporting. That Is not simple, it's simplistic. And therefore we need a self-confident Europe. We need a Europe that knows that we are poor on resources, but we have one very strong resource as Europe, and that's the human resource. We need to invest in human resources, but also their social programs. Only four non-legislative proposals. We need to think of our values again, only four non-legislative proposals. We need to think of the circular economy to make sure that we are good in our resources. Maybe in the Clean Industrial Act. Where is investing in clean economy? That is the Green Deal is more than decarbonisation. Sorry Commission. This is not bolder, simpler, faster. This is too simplistic.”
  Overall simplification of regulation in the EU
• “These international offsets are just another bill that Europe is paying outside Europe. These offsets are not a smart solution. Secondly, the biggest lesson of Draghi was that Europe is lagging behind on the development of clean tech. I still have the feeling that a lot of our colleagues are living in the 20th century when they talk about their technologies, like also Mr. Procaccini, when we talk about cars, they can only talk about combustion engines. And in Italy it's even only with biofuels. That's the only thing they can mention. Those are old technologies. If you think you can keep the electric revolution outside Europe, you will pay the price later on because we will be importing then Chinese cars. We want to prevent an import of Chinese cars. We want to make sure that electric cars are being built in Europe for jobs in Europe. That's what needs to happen. And therefore, last call to the commission president. You've done a lot of roundtables on a lot of industry, but when is the roundtable on clean tech? Europe has to start looking to the future instead of every time looking at the industry of the 20th century. Thank you very much.”
  Chinese clean tech competition: trade barriers and investment caps vs. open market · Energy (green transition)
• “Thank you. Madam president, the US and Israeli illegal attacks on Iran have sparked a global energy crisis. And because of these attacks, the six largest oil companies, half of which are American, are raking in profits of nearly $3,000 per second while people can barely afford the fuel. Let me be clear this is not our war and we should not pay for it. Europe should stand up for peace, stability and justice in the Middle East. We need to shield at the same time, our societies from leaders like Trump. As long as we are dependent on fossil fuels, our well-being in Europe is in the hands of unreliable autocrats. Europe can only be a stable and credible global power. If our own European industry supplies us with our own energy, going fossil free is our path to freedom. This means we have to make clear political choices. And in the last weeks, communication by the commission, you did a first step. But what are we meanwhile doing? We applaud our best tool to price carbon emission trading. But at the same time, the Commission proposes to emit millions of extra allowances to pollute.”
  EU approach to energy security (home-made vs import sources)
• “Thank you, Mr. President. Let us be honest. The Cop 30 result is disappointing. I understand why the commissioner needs to be a bit more diplomatic, but we can say what it is. It was a disappointing result for the world and for Europe. Ten years of Paris, where we are at now, has brought us in the first five years, down from a four degrees, warming to around two and a half. But the last five years we have not made a lot of progress. The last five cops have been stagnating, whereas we need to go below 1.5 degrees. The promise of Paris is still not being delivered by the cops and we really need to change. I think there are also some lessons for Europe to be done. First of all, on money, on financing Europe seems to be surprised that tripling of adaptation was going to be a big demand. I can promise now already for Cop 31. Prepare for it, Mr. Commissioner. Money will be an issue again. For example, on the tripling of adaptation, we do not know what the baseline is. So be prepared that that question will come in. Cop 31. If then again the 27 countries are surprised about that demand, then we again have a big problem with Europe.”
  Climate efforts
• “Thank you very much. It is timely that the EU leaders come together tomorrow in the current unstable geopolitical environment. We need a strong Europe more than ever. And in that, let's not be naive. On Donald Trump on his agenda. He wants to destabilise Europe economically. He wants to divide us, and he wants to help the far right into power. So we need strong, united leadership from Europe and a powerful response. And that's where the surprises come. If I read the papers of Meloni or some of the books of Bartova thinking that deregulation is the answer, deregulation plays into Trump's cards. It's a Trumpist threat to European unity, deeply dividing Europe, one omnibus at a time. And deregulation is a race to the bottom where we will never, ever defeat the United States. What we need to talk about is the investment gap. That is the problem. And there are also deregulation is not helping. Be aware that the investment gap that Draghi said Europe has is 750 to €800 billion per year. The ECB last year increased our investment gap and saying it's €1,200 billion per year. You said it yourself. The ten omnibus is all together are bringing us a saving of up to €15 billion per year, €15 billion per year. This means only 1%. It is time we start talking about the 99% and stop being so focused on this 1%.”
  Foreign interference in Europe
• “Secondly, transitioning away from fossil fuels Europe in Belgium was standing behind it, but Europe in South Africa was questioning that maybe we should talk about the emissions of fossil fuels and not fossil fuels themselves. I really think the coordination within the commission is not good enough. It was not helpful that Ursula von der Leyen was making these statements in South Africa while you were fighting in Belgium for transitioning away from fossil fuels, but also here, the big question is what is Europe going to do itself on it? Next year there will be a roadmap for phasing out fossil fuel subsidies at European level. We expect an ambitious plan for Europe to show that we are credible on this issue. Last point diplomacy. Europe needs to increase its diplomacy towards the world because it was not enough. We were standing too much alone. And for that, we also need to look at a different way of organizing these climate conferences, because now they are too big, too legalistic, too technical, whereas they are highly political and should be shorter, sharper and more targeted on the ambition that Paris needs to deliver. But I am looking forward to doing that together with you, Commissioner, to work on that. Thank you very much.”
  Fossil fuels
• “We say we want to electrify, but at the same time, we weaken the best instrument to electrify our car park CO2 standards for cars. And we say we want home grown energy. But at the same time, we are concluding a deal with the US, a trade deal with the US which promises to import more American gas. This inconsistent behaviour weakens our transition and the citizens pay the price, not the fossil companies. These six companies are making around €94 billion of fossil fuel profits a year, money that could power millions of people with clean and affordable energy. But the commission refuses to tax the windfall profits of fossil giants. Let's be clear this energy transition is not a it's not a sacrifice. It's an upgrade. And none of this happens spontaneously, overnight. These solutions require investments. They require consistent, forward looking policies. Say what we had, we called it the Green Deal. Let's make sustainable choices. The obvious competitive choice over fossil fuels. The EU should take the lead. It is our political choices that decide whether this future belongs to all or only to a few. Thank you.”
  Energy (green transition)
• “Yes, I did take you by your word. And indeed then I'm going to ask, what are you going to do in the negotiations with the United States? Because are we now going to replace our fossil dependency from Russia with the United States. That is not ending a fossil era for good. This shows we are not really solving our problems for our future economy and in the MFF. I hope you will pick up that. We need strong industrial policies. It is not deregulation. We need clarity for the industry. Strong guidance, industrial policy, lead markets. Those issues need to be delivered on. Then on security and defence. The big elephant in the room is Orban. Not even mentioned. He is blocking negotiations with Ukraine. And you are not doing anything. Where is the article seven procedure? When are we going to take Orban to court? These are measures that we need to do. But meanwhile we are silent while he is banning. A pride in in in Budapest and finally Europe. In the world. Europe's inaction on Gaza is shameful. The council took note of a report that is making very clear human rights are being violated every day. When is Europe finally going to suspend the association Agreement with Israel? Thank you.”
  Relations with Israel - Palestine
• “If we go to economic independence, we have to talk about energy. You said we need to be energy independent, but at the same time, you sign a Trump deal that delivers and promises a 750 billion investment in American energy, American energy that is dirtier than we have seen before, and that to replace the Russian LNG gas that is only 10 billion per year for now. These numbers don't add up. This is really a crazy part of the deal with the United States. And it has to change. Because we should invest this money in European renewables, in European industry, because renewables are the worst enemy of fossil autocrats and are crucial for our competitiveness. And that brings me to competitiveness. Competitiveness is being framed too much as deregulation. And to the EPP, do you really want to fight America on their turf of deregulation. We will never win from the United States on deregulation. That's not the fight we should do. We should fight on our own investments. Investing in our workforce, our education, our infrastructure, our green innovation. That is what green investments have to mean. And for that, we also still need to change the Stability and Growth Pact to create that room for investments. You took your initiatives. You mentioned the initiatives on how the commission can work on demand or circular economy on clean tech. But I think it is very important to stress.”
  EU approach to energy security (home-made vs import sources)
• “Thank you very much. And over here, Commissioner. So you have to just look to this side. You said that we try to address unintended consequences, but what you're doing is much more than that. And you have to be honest about that. First of all, in already what Lara said banks are already reporting. And now suddenly you make it voluntary for two years. Why are you doing that? They are doing it already. They were happy with it. You are creating uncertainty and complexity. I mean, you can repeat saying simplicity, but that doesn't make it simple by just saying it. And that's the same with the materiality threshold. I am happy that my colleague already understands it, but Ernst and Young and PwC have different approaches to it now already. So you are adding complexity by this materiality threshold. That is not what we want. You are making things more complicated. And here I really want to have a clear answer for you. You know that in some of these approaches, this could mean that oil and gas companies like shell, Total can be excluded from reporting obligations. Is that indeed the consequence of the materiality threshold? Be very clear. It's a yes or no question. And you know the list and it's very important. And we want to know then also are you going to come up with binding guidelines. Are you coming up with a review. These are things that need to happen. But sorry what you're doing here is adding complexity and you're not simplifying at all. This is deregulation for oil and gas companies.”
  Sustainable corporate governance
• “Thank you, Madam President. And first of all, a warm welcome, Mr. President. Good to see you again. And also on behalf of the Greens, we are looking very much forward to working together with the Cypriot presidency because it's going to be an interesting half year. Let's put it this way. Um, first of all, I really want to thank you for your immediate actions also towards Mr. Zelensky and showing the support for Ukraine, also by receiving him in Cyprus at the beginning of the year. I think that was a very strong and important signal to be given, and I really want to thank you for that nevertheless, and I think we all know that probably the Cypriot presidency will be a bit overshadowed by a certain person on the other side of the Atlantic being Donald Trump. And I think your, uh, your priorities on security and autonomy are well chosen, but maybe even more urgent than you would have thought before. Or you were really visionary in coming up with those priorities. But let's be honest, Donald Trump is in a hurry because after the summer he will be occupied by midterms. So all his plans that he wants to do will be happening in the coming months under the Cypriot presidency. So it will be very important that Europe is acting decisively and also accurately.”
  EU-US relations
• “This means it's time for a cordon sanitaire. And a cordon sanitaire means not supporting their amendments, which EPP is still doing. It also means not pushing their agenda on fighting NGOs, on getting migration files with the help of the far right to kill the Green Deal files like the green claims. That is what you are doing together with the far right. That, of course, also brings me to the ECR. Lovely speech. The first signatory is from your group. Your co-president is one of the co-signers of this. Where does ECR stand? Mr. Webb, you said we are having one criteria that is pro Ukraine, pro-democracy, pro Europe. I think after the day it is clear ECR does not fit that criteria. Yeah. So, no, there is no left wing majority in this House. But there is also no right wing majority in this House. There is a majority of the centre parties and the pro-European democratic parties. Let us work on that. We have work to do together. It is now time to deliver on a green economy. It is time to deliver on social justice. It is time to deliver on peace. And we cannot do that with the far right. Thank you very much.”
  EU political integration