NewzIntel.com

Category: Europe

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Impact of the Commission’s plan to consolidate development offices in EU delegations in 18 hubs and close 80 offices – E-001005/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    Maintaining a network of EU Delegations around the world is an obligation[1] and a political necessity. The network (the largest among EU diplomatic services with 145 EU Delegations) is vital for articulating and executing the EU’s priorities, both for external and internal policies.

    More EU is needed in the world, as a normative, geopolitical and economic power. The Delegations project the EU’s values and policies on the ground, pursue strategic partnerships to reinforce the EU competitiveness and the economic security of third countries through the implementation of Global Gateway and the external dimension of key EU priorities[2]. They also enable the EU to deliver on key political commitments, undertaken in multilateral fora, such as the implementation of Agenda 2030 and its sustainable development goals.

    Therefore, it is critical that EU Delegations are fit for the future and are equipped with the right mix of staff profiles and tools to respond to the rapidly shifting geopolitical situation, evolving policy priorities, and budget constraints.

    As of today, there is no specific ‘plan’ nor decision for changing the EU Delegations’ structure or closing down any of them. T he Commission and the European External Action Service are looking into options for their modernisation on the basis of a set of budgetary, legal and staff parameters to increase their effectiveness. This is a collective endeavour and ambition to have an EU network fit for the future to protect EU interests in the world.

    • [1] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A12016E221.
    • [2] Among others enlargement, trade and investments, energy, climate, environment, digital, migration, disinformation.
    Last updated: 15 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Progress in implementing the EU biodiversity strategy for 2030 and in protecting primary and old-growth forests – E-000682/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    1. The Joint Research Centre monitors the progress of Member States in implementing the EU Biodiversity Strategy[1] for 2030 and its targets[2]. The European Environment Agency (EEA) has published dashboards on the reported progress towards achieving 30% of protected areas coverage on land[3] and at sea[4] by 2030. For the period between 2011 and 2022, these dashboards show a doubling of marine areas designated as protected[5], but only limited progress on land[6], and hence a need for Member States to step up efforts if the targets are to be achieved by 2030.

    Given that only seven Member States have submitted pledges that outline their national coverage of strictly protected areas, a reliable EU-level assessment of progress towards achieving 10% of strictly protected areas by 2030 will only be possible once the EEA has revised its reporting tool of nationally protected areas in 2026.

    Regarding primary and old-growth forests, the Commission is currently analysing their mapping and protection by Member States. Members States should map their primary and old growth forests by 2025 and strictly protect them by 2029[7].

    2. The Commission does not have specific information[8] on the condition of primary and old-growth forests in the EU, nor does it currently intend to undertake such an analysis, except where such forests fall under provisions of the Habitats Directive[9] or the Nature Restoration Regulation[10]. A common definition of old-growth forest was provided in the 2023 Commission guidelines[11].

    3. While the Commission does not have official data on the coverage of primary and old-growth forests, of those areas mapped, 87% are within strictly protected areas[12]. However, this figure needs to be read with caution given the significant mapping deficit in certain Member States[13].

    • [1] https://environment.ec.europa.eu/strategy/biodiversity-strategy-2030_en.
    • [2] E.g. A coherent network of protected areas: https://dopa.jrc.ec.europa.eu/kcbd/EUBDS2030-dashboard/?version=1#Target%201 .
    • [3] https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/analysis/indicators/terrestrial-protected-areas-in-europe.
    • [4] https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/analysis/indicators/marine-protected-areas-in-europes-seas.
    • [5] From 5.9% in 2012 to 12.3% in 2022.
    • [6] From 24.3% in 2011 to 26.1% in 2022.
    • [7] https://environment.ec.europa.eu/publications/guidelines-defining-mapping-monitoring-and-strictly-protecting-eu-primary-and-old-growth-forests_en.
    • [8] Beyond the information that is published in the scientific literature: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-021-00988-7 , https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14404.
    • [9] Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7-50.
    • [10] Regulation (EU) 2024/1991 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2024 on nature restoration and amending Regulation (EU) 2022/869, OJ L, 2024/1991, 29.7.2024.
    • [11] https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/cef2f588-7c54-11ee-99ba-01aa75ed71a1.
    • [12] https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC124671.
    • [13] Estimated at ~4.4 million hectares.
    Last updated: 15 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Humanitarian aid for Gaza – E-000799/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    In 2024, the Commission allocated EUR 237 million in humanitarian aid to address the needs of vulnerable Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank[1]. EU humanitarian aid is delivered according to the humanitarian principles of humanity, independence, impartiality and neutrality[2]. These funds were allocated by the Commission to certified non-governmental partners and international organisations, including United Nations organisations[3].

    Humanitarian non-governmental partners are thoroughly assessed by the Commission on their capacity to observe basic principles and obligations, including respect of the relevant EU, international and national law, as well as compliance with transparency, accountability and internal controls, including risk management mechanisms[4].

    Furthermore, humanitarian partners have taken measures to secure aid delivery, such as securing warehouses, ensuring presence during distributions, and coordinating routes used for movement with Israeli security forces through the Humanitarian Notification System. The Commission is in regular contact with its partners on the ground. Despite the dramatic situation, they are doing their utmost to ensure due diligence, monitoring the situation and their activities.

    Reconstruction goes beyond humanitarian aid and requires a long-term ceasefire as well as other conditions, such as governance and security arrangements, to fall in place. With the ongoing hostilities between Israel and Hamas during 2024, the EU was not able to finance any reconstruction activities in Gaza in 2024.

    • [1] https://civil-protection-humanitarian-aid.ec.europa.eu/where/middle-east-and-northern-africa/palestine_en#how-are-we-helping .
    • [2] https://civil-protection-humanitarian-aid.ec.europa.eu/who/humanitarian-principles_en.
    • [3] Funded partners operating in Palestine in 2024 were the United Nations Children’s Fund (United States), the World Food Programme (Italy), United Nations Relief and Works Agency in the Near East (Palestine), Norwegian Refugee Council (Norway), International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (Switzerland), International Committee of the Red Cross (Switzerland), World Health Organisation, War Child (Netherlands), International Rescue Committee (Denmark), Relief International (France), Humanity and Inclusion (France), Action Against Hunger (Spain), Care International (Austria), Médecins du Monde (France), World Vision (Denmark), United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (Switzerland), and International NGO Safety Organisation (Netherlands).
    • [4] https://www.dgecho-partners-helpdesk.eu/ngo/humanitarian-partnership-2021-2027/eu-humanitarian-partnership-certificate-2021-2027 .
    Last updated: 15 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Is the Commission aware of the serious trade difficulties faced by French wines and spirits? – E-001192/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    The Commission regrets the decision of the United States (US) to impose tariffs on EU exports of steel and aluminium on 12 March 2025. The Commission sees no justification for these tariffs. The Commission has emphasised to the US its wish to work together to address global overcapacities in these sectors and that the EU is not the problem — but is part of the solution. The Commission’s policy for the promotion of agricultural products allows specific promotion arrangements in case the markets would be disturbed. The recently published Commission legislative proposal to support the wine sector[1], includes an amendment to increase the duration of support for promotion operations under wine sectorial interventions, to allow for better market consolidation.

    The Commission has also removed all the alcoholic products which were part of the package of countermeasures to the US steel and aluminium tariffs and of the published list for consultation. This includes bourbon, wine, and other spirits . The current exclusion keeps space for de-escalation and preserves room for negotiation. However, the Commission remains fully committed to defending its interests.

    Finally, in light of the decision by the US to delay by 90 days its country-specific universal tariffs on EU exports at a level of 20%, the EU has decided to put its countermeasures on EUR 21 billion of US exports on hold for the same length of time.

    The Commission’s priority remains to achieve a mutually beneficial negotiated solution.

    • [1] COM(2025) 137 final, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52025PC0137
    Last updated: 15 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Effect of imposing duties on European agri-food imports – E-000991/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    On 12 March 2025 the United States (US) imposed a 25% tariff on all US imports of steel and aluminium and derivative products[1][2][3]. This affects EUR 26 billion in EU exports. The EU adopted countermeasures for entry into force on 15 April 2025[4][5].

    Since 2 April 2025 the US also imposes a 25% tariff on cars, to be extended to car parts as of 3 May[6][7]. Also on 2 April, the US announced broad horizontal tariffs of 20% on imports from the EU as of 9 April. These additional tariffs also include all EU exports to the US of agri-food products[8].

    Subsequently, for various reasons, including contacts with trade partners, the US suspended its horizontal tariffs on many trade partners including the 20% tariff on the EU for a period of 90 days, while still maintaining a 10% base-tariff.

    The EU has adopted countermeasures against the US tariffs on steel and aluminium but has also suspended those for 90 days. This was done to allow time and space for negotiations towards a mutually satisfactory solution and should these negotiations not be successful, the adopted countermeasures can enter into force again. In addition, the EU continues preparatory work for possible further proportionate countermeasures in response to the other US import tariffs.

    The EU has at its disposal several instruments that allow addressing unjustified measures, including tariffs and other countermeasures, as well as internal measures to address impacts on EU agricultural producers from situations of market disturbance.

    More broadly, and also in view of recent developments in EU-US trade, the Commission will continue to work on diversifying trade with other partners and will intensify efforts to remove internal barriers in the EU and to develop the EU Single Market.

    • [1] https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/02/adjusting-imports-of-steel-into-the-united-states/.
    • [2] https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/02/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-restores-section-232-tariffs/.
    • [3] https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2025-02-18/pdf/2025-02832.pdf and https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2025-02-18/pdf/2025-02833.pdf.
    • [4] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/api/files/document/print/en/ip_25_740/IP_25_740_EN.pdf.
    • [5] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2023/2882/oj/eng.
    • [6] https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/03/adjusting-imports-of-automobiles-and-autombile-parts-into-the-united-states/ .
    • [7] https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/03/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-adjusts-imports-of-automobiles-and-automobile-parts-into-the-united-states/ .
    • [8] https://www.whitehouse.gov/articles/2025/02/reciprocal-trade-and-tariffs/ .
    Last updated: 15 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Revision of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 – E-001232/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    Regulation (EC) No 883/2004[1] on the coordination of national social security systems, together with its implementing Regulation (EC) 987/2009, are key pieces of EU legislation that ensure the protection of social security rights for individuals moving within the EU, as well as in Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, and Switzerland. They establish common rules for determining which country’s social security system applies to individuals in cross-border situations, while respecting the competence of Member States to define the specifics of their social security systems, such as beneficiaries, levels of allowances, and eligibility criteria.

    In December 2016, the Commission proposed to modernise the current rules to ensure that they are fair, clear and easier to enforce. The negotiations between the co-legislators are ongoing.

    Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 also applies to frontier workers or other cross-border workers, including those in the Moselle department of France who worked in Germany and receive unemployment benefits in France. According to the current rules, for these groups of workers, the unemployment benefits are generally paid by the Member State of residence.

    • [1] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2004/883/oj/eng .
    Last updated: 15 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Inclusion of Israel and human rights criteria in the FP10 – E-000488/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    1. Since 1996, Israel’s association to the EU framework programmes for research and innovation (R&I) has been a success story with clear mutual benefits across various priority areas including information and communication technologies, health, advanced manufacturing, climate change and energy, as well as biotechnology. At this stage, it is premature to discuss which countries would be allowed to participate in or offered association to the successor of the current framework programme for R&I and under which terms as it is still to be scrutinised and adopted by the co- legislators, based on a proposal that is yet to be adopted by the Commission.

    2. In accordance with Article 2 Treaty on European Union, the EU is founded on the values of inter alia respect for human rights. In consequence and in application of relevant EU, national and international law[1], the EU will continue to reaffirm its commitment to the protection and promotion of human rights including in R&I related activities, applicable to all participants in the R&I framework programmes regardless of their nationality.

    3. Currently, any R&I activities carried out under Horizon Europe[2] must have an exclusive focus on civil applications, as set forth in applicable rules and in particular in the Horizon Europe Regulation[3]. During the implementation of Horizon Europe projects, all beneficiaries must ensure that the activities under the action comply with these rules.

    • [1] Including the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and its Supplementary Protocols.
    • [2] https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-open-calls/horizon-europe_en.
    • [3]  https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32021R0695 , OJ L 170, 12.5.2021, p. 1-68.
    Last updated: 15 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Bovine tuberculosis: is a vaccine in sight? – E-000857/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    1. Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/361[1] prohibits Member States from allowing the use of vaccines against tuberculosis in bovine animals. This EU rule is based on decades of experience with eradication, on robust scientific advice, and on expert opinions. Currently available vaccines for bovine tuberculosis do not confer full protection and compromise tuberculin skin tests or other immunological tests, for the distinction between vaccinated and infected animals, jeopardising current control and eradication of bovine tuberculosis and the ongoing approved eradication programmes of the Member States.

    2. The Commission has not communicated with the British authorities in this regard and has not received information from them on this topic.

    3. The Commission is constantly ensuring that the EU rules are based on the latest scientific knowledge and has consulted the European Food Safety Authority several times on the issue of bovine tuberculosis .

    • [1] Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/361 of 28 November 2022 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2016/429 of the European Parliament and the Council as regards rules for the use of certain veterinary medicinal products for the purpose of prevention and control of certain listed diseases.
    Last updated: 15 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Briefing – Spain’s National Recovery and Resilience Plan: Latest state of play – 15-05-2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Spain’s national recovery and resilience plan (NRRP) is the second largest (in absolute figures) financed by the Next Generation EU (NGEU) recovery instrument and its main spending tool, the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF). Following the October 2023 amendment of the Spanish NRRP, adding a REPowerEU chapter, the plan’s value reached €163 billion (or 13.1 % of national gross domestic product (GDP) in 2019), an increase of roughly 135 % compared with the original plan of 2021 (€69.5 billion in grants only). The amended plan comes with an increased grant allocation of €79.8 billion and a freshly requested loan allocation of €83.2 billion. The grant part includes the June 2022 upward revision of Spain’s grant allocation of €7.7 billion and the country’s REPowerEU grant allocation of €2.6 billion. In addition, Spain has requested a transfer of its share from the Brexit Adjustment Reserve of €58 million to its NRRP. So far, €48.3 billion of RRF resources (29.6 % of the amended NRRP) have been received. These have been disbursed by the European Commission in form of pre-financing and four grant instalments. The amended plan focuses on the green transition, devoting almost 40 % of the resources to it, and fosters the digital transformation by committing 25.9 % of the funds (excluding REPowerEU) to digital projects. In the context of the European Semester, the Commission assessed the plan’s implementation as ‘under way’, yet warned about emerging delays hindering effective and swift implementation. The European Parliament participates in interinstitutional forums for cooperation and discussion on its implementation and scrutinises the European Commission’s work. This briefing is one in a series covering all EU Member States. Sixth edition. The ‘NGEU delivery’ briefings are updated at key stages throughout the lifecycle of the plans.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Financial connections between the European External Action Service and NGOs in the USAID network – E-001847/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-001847/2025
    to the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy
    Rule 144
    Petr Bystron (ESN)

    According to the ‘About Us’ section of its website, the European External Action Service (EEAS) works to support resilient democracies, promote human rights and contribute to a rules-based global order in Europe and around the world. However, the EEAS – the EU’s official diplomatic service, which receives approximately EUR 732 million annually from the EU budget – appears to cooperate with and fund NGOs that were previously part of the network of the US Agency for International Development (USAID), such as Development Alternatives Incorporated (DAI), Save the Children, Catholic Relief Services, Mercy Corps and others.

    In light of recent actions by US President Donald Trump, which led to the termination of most USAID foreign activities, we would like to raise the following questions:

    • 1.Which other USAID-funded NGOs has the EEAS supported or worked with? How much funding was granted to these organisations in 2024 by the EEAS, and how much funding did the EEAS itself receive?
    • 2.What steps has the Commission taken to ensure that this funding does not support foreign interests?
    • 3.What level of oversight does the EEAS have over the activities of its NGO partners, which are based in non-EU countries, and how are cases of ideological or political bias addressed?

    Submitted: 7.5.2025

    Last updated: 15 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Cooperation between the coastguards of Cyprus and Syria – P-001889/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Priority question for written answer  P-001889/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Özlem Demirel (The Left)

    Cyprus is engaged in a new form of cooperation with Syria that involves boat refugees being returned directly to the Syrian port of Tartus before they reach Cypriot territorial waters. Such action, which prevents asylum applications from being made and examined, is banned under international law because it constitutes refoulement at sea.

    • 1.What does the Commission know about Cyprus’ new refoulement practice, and to what extent was it informed in advance or even involved in bringing the practice about?
    • 2.Does the Commission consider that the relevant agreement between Cyprus and Syria is covered by EU law?
    • 3.What efforts is the Commission making to build up and equip the Syrian coastguard, and what structures are already known about in this connection?

    Submitted: 12.5.2025

    Last updated: 15 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Recent judgment of the European Court of Human Rights regarding the systematic practice of pushbacks in Greece – E-000386/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    1. The Commission is not competent to supervise or enforce compliance with European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) judgments. The monitoring of the execution of ECtHR judgments falls under the competence of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. The Commission considers the implementation of leading judgments of the ECtHR an important indicator for the functioning of the rule of law in a country and reports on it in the context of its Rule of Law Report. The Commission will continue monitoring the situation in Greece, including as regards the follow-up to ECtHR judgments, to address any challenges. 

    2. Full respect of fundamental rights in the management of external borders is a key requirement under EU law, in particular under the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. Member States must investigate and address reports of fundamental rights violations. Constant dialogue with Member States is necessary to foster a common understanding and ensure effective implementation of EU law. Infringement procedures are one of the tools to ensure such implementation. If the Commission concludes that any Member State has failed to fulfil its obligations under the EU acquis, including in terms of adopting legislation that would be incompatible with the acquis or in terms of non-compliance with the EU legislation in their administrative practice, it may decide to initiate infringement procedures.

    3. According to the Treaties, the Commission has a discretionary power to launch infringement procedures. The Commission will continue monitoring the situation in Member States, including Greece, to ensure that oversight mechanisms are in place to enable efficient follow-up and effective investigations into alleged fundamental rights violations.

    Last updated: 15 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Briefing – United States Congress: Facts and Figures – 15-05-2025

    Source: European Parliament

    The Congress is the legislative branch of the United States (US) system of government. It is divided into two chambers: the House of Representatives (the lower chamber) and the Senate (the upper chamber). The formal powers of Congress are set out in Article I of the US Constitution, and include making laws, collecting revenue, borrowing and spending money, declaring war, making treaties with foreign nations, and overseeing the executive branch. Elections to the US Congress occur every second November, with the Congress convening the following January. Additionally, every four years, these elections coincide with the presidential election. The current, 119th Congress was elected in November 2024, and convened in January 2025. The US has a long-standing two-party system, which means that nearly all members of Congress belong to either the Republican or Democratic parties. Independent members, if any, generally align or caucus with one of the two main parties. In the most recent US Presidential and Congressional elections, held in November 2024, the Republican party won the White House. They also retained control of the House with a five-seat margin – the smallest in modern history – and won back the Senate with a six-seat majority, taking account of two independents who caucus with the Democrats. This gave the Republicans a governing trifecta, with control of the presidency and both chambers of Congress. This EPRS briefing provides key facts and figures about the US Congress as an institution, including relevant comparisons with the European Parliament (EP).

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Slovenia to get expressway upgrade with €120 million EIB loan to motorway operator DARS

    Source: European Investment Bank

    • EIB lends Slovenian motorway company DARS €120 million to finance a bypass project near southeastern city of Novo Mesto.
    • Planned Novo Mesto eastern bypass is to improve traffic flow, road safety and air quality in area close to Croatian border.
    • Project includes more than six kilometres of cycling paths as well as bike and pedestrian bridge across river Krka.

    The European Investment Bank (EIB) is lending €120 million to the Slovenian national motorway company DARS to build a bypass near the southeastern city of Novo Mesto. The planned Novo Mesto eastern bypass is a 9.8-kilometre expressway that will improve traffic flow, road safety and air quality in the region, which is near the border with Croatia.

    The project is expected to boost economic growth in the area by connecting to the A2 motorway, which traverses Slovenia from north to south.

    In line with the EIB’s Climate Bank Roadmap commitments, it continues to invest in road projects such as the one in Novo Mesto, which includes the creation of more than six kilometres of dedicated cycling paths as well as a bike and pedestrian bridge across the river Krka, bolstering actions to promote clean forms of transport and fight climate change.

    “This project reflects our support for sustainable infrastructure development in Slovenia,” said EIB Vice-President Kyriacos Kakouris. “It is part of our broader effort to help improve mobility and quality of life for residents in Novo Mesto and the wider region.”

    The Novo Mesto Eastern Bypass is  part of Slovenia’s plan for sustainable urban mobility and aligns with the European Union’s priorities for infrastructure development and environmental sustainability.

    “We welcome the EIB’s decision to grant DARS the credit facilities to implement this key infrastructure project. We are convinced that it will significantly contribute to the development of the municipality and the wider region, while at the same time improving road safety and traffic flow for all users,” said the President of the Board of DARS, mag. Andrej Ribi.

    The EIB’s advisory services, including technical assistance from JASPERS, helped in the project preparation by being involved in feasibility studies and environmental-impact assessments. 

    Background information

    The European Investment Bank (ElB) is the long-term lending institution of the European Union, owned by its Member States. Built around eight core priorities, the EIB finances investments that contribute to EU policy objectives by bolstering climate action and the environment, digitalisation and technological innovation, security and defence, cohesion, agriculture and the bioeconomy, social infrastructure, the capital markets union and a stronger Europe in a more peaceful and prosperous world. 

    The EIB Group, which also includes the European Investment Fund (EIF), signed nearly €89 billion in new financing for over 900 high-impact projects in 2024, boosting Europe’s competitiveness and security.   

    All projects financed by the EIB Group are in line with the Paris Climate Agreement, as pledged in the organisation’s Climate Bank Roadmap. Almost 60% of the EIB Group’s annual financing supports projects directly contributing to climate-change mitigation, adaptation and a healthier environment. Fostering market integration and mobilising investment, the Group supported a record of over €100 billion in new investment for Europe’s energy security in 2024 and mobilised €110 billion in growth capital for startups, scale-ups and European pioneers. Approximately half of the EIB’s financing within the EU is directed towards cohesion regions, where per-capita income is lower than the EU average. 

    High-quality, up-to-date photos of the EIB Group’s headquarters for media use are available here.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Labelling and transparency requirements for hybrid meat products – E-001859/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-001859/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Jessika Van Leeuwen (PPE)

    Hybrid meat products consist of a combination of animal-based and plant-based proteins. For meat substitutes, strict rules apply regarding labelling and marketing: such products cannot be marketed under names like ‘chicken’ or ‘minced meat’. However, for hybrid meat products, these rules currently do not apply.

    • 1.Is the Commission aware of the difference in nutritional value between hybrid meat products and traditional meat products consisting entirely of animal proteins?
    • 2.Does the Commission agree that consumers may be misled if it is not clearly indicated on the label that a product partly consists of plant-based proteins and, if so, does the Commission share my opinion that specific labelling rules should be introduced for hybrid meat products to ensure transparency and consumer protection?
    • 3.Moreover, does the Commission acknowledge that clear labelling is also crucial for people with legume intolerances, who need to be fully informed about the presence of plant-based ingredients in such products in order to manage potential health risks?

    Submitted: 8.5.2025

    Last updated: 15 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – EU ETS for maritime transport – P-001895/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Priority question for written answer  P-001895/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Asger Christensen (Renew)

    • 1.The current regulatory regime for the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) for maritime transport only covers ships above 5000 gross tonnage. Does the Commission agree that exempting all ships below 5000 gross tonnage significantly distorts competition in the internal market, and is it prepared to rectify what is unfair competition by including all ships between 400 and 5000 gross tonnage within the EU ETS for maritime transport from 1 January 2027?
    • 2.The current regulatory regime for the EU ETS for maritime transport only covers ships above 5000 gross tonnage. Does the Commission take the view that exempting ships below 5000 gross tonnage incentivises owners of smaller ships to replace their fleets with modern, highly energy-efficient vessels with low greenhouse gas (GHG) emission ratings? If not, is the Commission prepared to rectify what is unfair competition by including all ships between 400 and 5000 gross tonnage within the EU ETS for maritime transport from 1 January 2027?
    • 3.Does the Commission agree that the Innovation Fund, which allocates funding from the EU ETS, could usefully be extended to subsidise the retrofitting of low energy efficiency vessels that have high GHG emission ratings?

    Submitted: 13.5.2025

    Last updated: 15 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Transparency of the Commission’s actions in promoting its CSDP initiatives in Member States – E-001826/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-001826/2025/rev.1
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Michał Dworczyk (ECR)

    The Commission is obliged to ensure transparency in the development and implementation of EU legislation and policies. However, in recent years, there have been numerous reports of a lack of transparency. One need only mention the Commission President’s secret SMS negotiations on the purchase of COVID-19 vaccines, or the Commission’s lobbying of MEPs on the Green Deal[1], which violated the principles of sincere cooperation between EU institutions.

    Another example is the Commission’s lobbying activities in Member States to promote its policies in the area of security and defence, including the arms industry. The EU’s competences in these areas are limited, yet more and more proposals put forward by the Commission indicate a systematic drive to secure greater decision-making powers at EU level. In particular, since the outbreak of the full-scale war in Ukraine, the Commission’s initiatives relating to the defence industry, while not formally changing the competences laid down in the Treaties, have de facto extended the EU’s influence in these areas through financial and regulatory instruments. Therefore, the Commission’s actions aimed at shaping public opinion and influencing the public debate in Member States on security and defence issues raise serious legal and ethical concerns.

    In light of the foregoing:

    How many contracts has the Commission concluded, for what amounts and in which countries for lobbying activities for its initiatives in the area of Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) and the arms industry in the Member States?

    Submitted: 6.5.2025

    • [1] According to the media, the Commission used European taxpayers’ money to commission lobbying activities aimed at influencing the views of MEPs. https://www.lepoint.fr/monde/la-commission-europeenne-a-paye-des-ong-pour-faire-son-lobbying-sur-le-pacte-vert-23-01-2025-2580637_24.php#11
    Last updated: 15 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: President Calviño: EIB Group to provide €70 billion for tech firms and innovators

    Source: European Investment Bank

    EIB Group President Nadia Calviño explains how Europe can benefit from the Trump chaos, with the tech sector set to receive a massive financial boost.

    Interview by Carsten Volkery (published by Handelsblatt)

    The European Investment Bank (EIB) Group is launching a new initiative to close Europe’s investment gap with the United States, aiming to provide €70 billion in startup funding by 2027. This will encourage private investors to get on board with projects, unlocking as much as €250 billion in investment for the European tech sector.

    “This is the largest ever programme to exclusively support European innovation and technological leadership,” EIB Group President Nadia Calviño told Handelsblatt. The goal, she explained, is to finance research projects and companies “from idea to IPO.”

    This also includes supporting the exit of company founders and venture capital investors – who often sell their stakes to US investors, who can afford to buy them. In the future, the EIB could help EU firms to acquire promising startups to prevent technologies from being sold out of Europe.

    TechEU platform to launch this year

    Set to launch later this year, the EIB’s TechEU platform is designed to provide researchers and companies with a one-stop shop for all their financing needs. Calviño says that EU support will become “larger, faster and simpler.” The EIB will work closely with the European Commission, and national promotional banks such as Germany’s KfW may also participate.

    The plan still needs to be approved by the Bank’s Board of Governors, which is made up of the finance ministers of the 27 EU Member States. The EIB Group President gave her perspective to a meeting of the finance ministers in Brussels on Tuesday, and hopes for a positive decision in June.

    She also sees an opportunity in US President Donald Trump’s erratic economic policy and the uncertainty it has caused. “The current situation in the United States creates an opportunity for Europe to attract talent, to attract investment, to attract capital,” she said. “We see strong interest in Europe from international investors.”

    Brain drain warning from US researchers

    In recent weeks and months, the US administration has massively cut research funding for institutions such as the elite Harvard and Columbia universities. US researchers are already warning of brain drain as leading scientists leave the country.

    Former President of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Leo Rafael Reif wrote in Foreign Affairs magazine that the Trump administration seems intent on destroying one of the United States’ greatest strengths. The recent cuts to university funding, he writes, risk “draining a crucial source of new ideas for industry and the military.”

    Calviño emphasised that Europe is a “beacon of stability, clarity and confidence” in the current geopolitical environment. This is what investors are looking for. The EIB is also the only multilateral development bank whose shareholders are the EU Member States. “We are not confronted with the same sort of uncertainties that other multilateral development banks are going through,” she says. This enhances the international role of the EIB.

    The EIB’s goal is to back EU policy objectives. It catalyses private investment by offering only partial financing for projects, thereby mobilising public and private sector co-investors. It lent €89 billion last year, and plans to provide €95 billion this year.

    Europe’s largest venture capital financier

    Beyond guarantees and loans, the EIB also takes equity stakes in companies. It is Europe’s largest venture capital financier and its biggest venture debt provider. The various EU funding programmes for researchers and startups will be linked together on the new TechEU platform, meaning that each project will only need to be appraised once.

    The EIB’s prominent role in venture capital financing shows just how underdeveloped Europe’s private capital markets really are. Calviño says that this new initiative aims to nurture the private venture capital ecosystem in Europe. The hope is that, in time, European startups will no longer be obliged to go to the United States to meet their growth phase capital needs.

    However, critics accuse the EIB of being too conservative in its investment approach. In his report on EU competitiveness published last year, EU Special Advisor Mario Draghi called on the Bank to take on more risk to foster breakthrough innovation.

    EIB to take on more risk

    Calviño says that the EIB has already become more willing to take risks. It intends to continue on that track with the TechEU programme, supporting an extra 1 000 EU champions and innovators every year. At the same time, the EIB must ensure it preserves its AAA credit rating, which enables it to raise funds cheaply on the capital markets. It can then pass these funds on to companies.

    Calviño also promises to cut red tape, aiming to return decisions on venture capital financing applications within six months. “This would be a gamechanger.”

    The tech sector often complains that response times are too long. In the past, the EIB has always framed its thorough appraisal process as a hallmark of quality, as it keeps loan default rates very low. But it now seems to have been understood that speed is also a critical factor.

    Another innovation driver could be the defence sector. The EIB has recently made defence one of its core strategic priorities and now also finances purely military projects. “Security and defence investments can certainly help the technology agenda,” said Calviño.

    The Bank already has a pipeline of 22 projects in this sector, supporting drone manufacturers and space companies, for example, as well as several defence-focused venture capital funds.

    According to Calviño, Europe already has almost everything it needs to close the technology gap with the United States. “Europe has a very large market, 450 million citizens, excellent universities, excellent research centres and companies, and brilliant startup ecosystems. With deeper and larger capital markets, we can ensure that technologies and startups born in the European Union can be financed and scale up in Europe.”

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Bridgestone’s restructuring plan for its plants in the Basque Country and Cantabria – E-001853/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-001853/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Idoia Mendia (S&D), Estelle Ceulemans (S&D), Gabriele Bischoff (S&D), Jonás Fernández (S&D), Elena Sancho Murillo (S&D), Alicia Homs Ginel (S&D)

    Bridgestone Spain Manufacturing, one of Spain’s leading tyre producers, has announced a restructuring plan that will lead to 546 workers being laid off at its plants in the Basque Country and Cantabria.

    The company justifies this measure by changes on the European market, citing inflation, rising costs, regulatory pressure and international competition as the reasons behind the move. Unions are demanding that a stop be brought to these redundancies, and are calling for real negotiations and a credible industrial plan to ensure the future of these plants.

    The Commission has presented the Clean Industry Deal and is preparing a specific plan for the automotive sector with the aim of strengthening European industry.

    In view of the above:

    • 1.Is the Commission aware of the situation announced by Bridgestone in Spain and does it intend to respond in any way to these mass redundancies, which are seriously affecting industrial employment in regions which are already feeling the strain?
    • 2.At a key moment for the reindustrialisation of the European Union, which is essential for strengthening the Union’s strategic autonomy, what mechanisms does the Commission intend to activate to protect industrial employment and prevent such situations – to which other Member States are no stangers either – from recurring time and time again, with devastating consequences for thousands of workers and their families?

    Submitted: 7.5.2025

    Last updated: 15 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Press release – MEPs back new tariffs on Russian and Belarusian agricultural goods

    Source: European Parliament

    The International Trade Committee has approved a 50% increase in tariffs on certain Russian and Belarusian agricultural goods to further reduce EU dependency.

    MEPs in the International Trade Committee have backed a Commission proposal to increase EU tariffs by 50% on those agricultural products from Russia and Belarus that are still excluded from other customs duties. The aim is to reduce EU dependency on the two countries still further. Products to be hit by the new tariffs include sugars, vinegar, flour and animal feed.

    The approved text also provides period. The latter duties would rise to €430 per tonne by 2028. Income from Russian and Belarusian fertilisers is seen as contributing directly to the war against Ukraine.

    The proposed measures will significantly reduce imports into the EU of the goods concerned originating in or exported directly or indirectly from Russia and Belarus. This should result in further diversification of EU fertiliser production, a sector that is currently suffering from the low prices of imported goods.

    The legislation also tasks the Commission with monitoring and acting to mitigate price increases that could damage the internal market and the EU agriculture sector.

    The draft regulation was adopted by 29 votes in favour, 6 against and 2 abstentions.

    Quote

    The standing rapporteur for Russia Inese Vaidere (EPP, LV) said: “This regulation to gradually increase customs duties for products from Russia and Belarus will help to prevent Russia from using the EU market to finance its war machine. It is not acceptable that three years after Russia launched its full-scale war, the EU is still buying critical products in large volumes; in fact, these imports have significantly increased.

    The proposal will also boost EU fertiliser production, which has taken a hit from cheap Russian imports, while giving farmers time to adjust.”

    Next steps

    The proposal will now be put to a vote in Parliament’s next plenary session, which will take place in Brussels, on Thursday 22 May.

    Background

    Imports into the EU of urea and nitrogen-based fertilisers from Russia, already high in 2023, increased significantly in 2024. According to the Commission, imports of the fertilisers covered by this regulation reflect a situation of economic dependence on Russia. If left unchecked, the situation could harm EU food security and, especially in the case of fertilisers, make the EU vulnerable to possible coercive measures by Russia.

    To tackle these issues, on 28 January 2025, the Commission presented its proposal to impose tariffs on fertilisers and certain agricultural products originating in Russia and Belarus.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Social situation at ArcelorMittal France and the future of steelmaking in Europe – P-001882/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Priority question for written answer  P-001882/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Anthony Smith (The Left), Manon Aubry (The Left), Marina Mesure (The Left), Damien Carême (The Left), Emma Fourreau (The Left), Leila Chaibi (The Left), Arash Saeidi (The Left)

    On 23 April 2025, the ArcelorMittal France group announced the closure of 636 jobs at seven sites in France, a few months after having already cut 135 jobs at Denain and Reims. This decision comes after the suspension of its European decarbonisation projects, including the flagship hydrogen furnace project in Dunkirk, despite EUR 850 million being promised in grants and the allocation of EUR 622 million by the state since 2013. In addition, the company chose to invest almost a billion dollars in a new plant in the United States, rather than in Europe.

    Given the strategic importance of the steel sector for European industry and sovereignty, as well as the company’s evident willingness to offshore its activities and leave Europe, does the Commission intend to:

    • 1.Support the decarbonisation of the European steel industry by granting public aid under strict environmental and social criteria, as proposed in the Clean Industrial Deal, in particular as regards a ban on redundancies when a company that received support is making a profit?
    • 2.Require European companies to use European-made steel?
    • 3.Encourage state intervention, through nationalisation, in companies in strategic sectors, such as the steel industry?

    Submitted: 12.5.2025

    Last updated: 15 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Far-left attacks threatening European infrastructure – E-001821/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-001821/2025/rev.1
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Julien Leonardelli (PfE), Marie Dauchy (PfE), Pierre Pimpie (PfE), Gilles Pennelle (PfE), André Rougé (PfE), Mathilde Androuët (PfE), Fabrice Leggeri (PfE)

    Far-left groups have carried out a series of attacks on transport and energy infrastructure throughout Europe. Since 2024[1], these acts have become so frequent that I will not include armed attacks by anti-fascist activists on a mayor[2] or right-wing activists[3], even though they too are alarming.

    During the 2024 Olympic Games, acts of sabotage targeted TGV rail lines[4] and fibre optic networks[5] throughout France. At the same time, an arson attack was carried out on a relay antenna in Haute-Garonne, depriving 5 000 residents of internet access. During works to construct the A69 motorway[6], 200 fires were reported affecting construction facilities and equipment[7].

    In February 2024, the far left claimed responsibility for sabotaging the Toulouse-Narbonne rail line[8], as well as for setting fire to an underground boring machine in Toulouse[9] in May.

    In December 2024[10], a telecommunications antenna near Mâcon was set on fire, depriving 800 000 people of internet access[11]. The Antifa movement is operating with complete impunity. None of the perpetrators of the acts I have listed have been identified.

    What measures does the Commission intend to put in place to help put an end to these terrorist attacks against our infrastructure committed by the far left?

    Supporter[12]

    Submitted: 6.5.2025

    • [1] It was impossible for me to list all the attacks carried out by the far-left before and after 2024 in this question, as they occur so frequently. However, it is worth noting the destruction of a bridge near Grenoble in 2022, as well as the arson attacks on a McDonald’s and a Tesla dealership near Toulouse in 2025.
    • [2] A mayor in Brittany targeted by an attempted assassination, links to Antifa suspected, Frontières, https://www.frontieresmedia.fr/societe/maire-tentative-assassinat-antifa
    • [3] Paris 8: an activist from the conservative student union La Cocarde threatened by an armed man, Le Journal du Dimanche, https://www.lejdd.fr/Societe/paris-8-un-militant-de-la-cocarde-menace-par-un-homme-arme-156488
    • [4] Live from the Olympic Games 2024: massive attack on the SNCF, major disruption on the Paris ring road, a day of chaos for transport ahead of the opening ceremony, Le Figaro, https://www.lefigaro.fr/conjoncture/en-direct-jo-2024-attaque-massive-a-la-sncf-peripherique-tres-perturbe-journee-noire-dans-les-transports-avant-la-ceremonie-d-ouverture-20240726
    • [5] After the SNCF, fibre optic networks sabotaged during the Olympics: ‘This is terrorism’, RTL, https://www.rtl.be/sport/tous-les-sports/jo-2024/apres-la-sncf-des-sabotages-de-reseaux-de-fibres-optiques-en-plein-jo-cest-du/2024-07-29/article/695285
    • [6] A69: Sabotage operations on the ground and questions in Parliament, Le Monde, https://www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/2024/05/07/a69-actions-de-sabotage-sur-le-terrain-et-questionnements-a-l-assemblee_6232090_3244.html
    • [7] Moreover, a night security guard was assaulted with an iron bar by hooded Antifa activists.
    • [8] Sabotage of the Toulouse-Narbonne railway: a look back at the blockade operation, Rebellyon, https://rebellyon.info/Sabotage-du-chemin-de-fer-Toulouse-25705
    • [9] Toulouse. In the middle of the night, a machine burns on the metro construction site: arson? Actu.fr, https://actu.fr/occitanie/toulouse_31555/toulouse-en-pleine-nuit-un-engin-crame-sur-le-chantier-du-metro-un-feu-criminel_61088721.html
    • [10] In the same month, an anti-Zionist group claimed responsibility for setting fire to a vehicle belonging to the city of Toulouse.
    • [11] Telecommunications tower set on fire: 800 000 subscribers left without television or telephone service, criminal investigation ongoing, France 3 Régions, https://france3-regions.francetvinfo.fr/bourgogne-franche-comte/saone-et-loire/macon/un-pylone-de-telecommunication-incendie-800-000-abonnes-prives-de-television-et-de-telephone-la-piste-criminelle-envisagee-3083758.html
    • [12] This question is supported by a Member other than the authors: Valérie Deloge (PfE)

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Humanitarian subsidies or incitement to political regime change? – E-001729/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-001729/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Virginie Joron (PfE)

    Saudi Arabia finances 1.6 % of global development aid, as does Switzerland.

    By contrast, in 2023 the Commission and the Member States provided EUR 101 billion, which accounts for 41 % of development aid. According to the European Parliament’s research service, just 3.8 % of this amount was spent on health and 3.3 % on water supply and sanitation[1].

    Since 10 March 2025, the Trump presidency has put an end to 83 % of the US Agency for International Development’s programmes falsely termed as ‘humanitarian’.

    In these circumstances, it is questionable why Brussels uses the term ‘humanitarian’ and what the purpose of this aid actually is.

    • 1.How much is the Commission spending on values, democracy and other non-urgent actions outside Europe?
    • 2.Which are the three main humanitarian NGOs funded by the Commission? What is the annual remuneration of their directors?

    Submitted: 30.4.2025

    • [1] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/ATAG/2025/769540/EPRS_ATA(2025)769540_EN.pdf
    Last updated: 15 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Monitoring planning errors by national electricity operators – E-001844/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-001844/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Dolors Montserrat (PPE)

    On 28 April 2025, Spain suffered the largest power outage in recent history, with a total system collapse affecting the general supply and critical infrastructure. This episode followed other incidences of instability in previous days, and came against a backdrop of increasing use of renewable energies and planned decommissioning of nuclear power plants.

    It should be noted that the current Chair of REDEIA, Beatriz Corredor – who was the Socialist Minister for Housing between 2008 and 2010 – stated publicly in 2021 that there was ‘no risk of a power outage’, describing Spain’s electricity system as ‘the safest and most advanced in the world’.

    In view of the above:

    • 1.Does the Commission consider that the system operator made errors in its planning, monitoring or operational response?
    • 2.What monitoring mechanisms can it activate to review the national operators’ compliance with its guidelines in order to prevent similar incidents in the future?
    • 3.Does it believe that the plan to close nuclear power plants in Spain should be revised, now that the stability of the electricity system has been shown to be vulnerable with its current energy mix?

    Submitted: 7.5.2025

    Last updated: 15 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS): a critical environmental challenge – E-001846/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-001846/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Catarina Martins (The Left)

    PFAS represent a significant environmental challenge. Current studies consistently demonstrate that these persistent and mobile pollutants contaminate various environmental compartments. Numerous contamination cases have been reported near Brussels in Belgium, severely affecting water supply due to groundwater contamination.

    The contamination of groundwater, surface water and oceans already incurs substantial public health costs due to the toxicity of these substances. Soils are the primary recipients of PFAS contamination, yet research efforts under the Horizon Europe programme, namely the mission soil initiative, are notably lacking.

    • 1.How is the Commission planning to address this problem, and which concrete steps will it take to develop the methodological and analytical capabilities of the EU research centres?
    • 2.Does the Commission intend to make an inventory of current soil contamination across Europe, which is essential for taking necessary action?
    • 3.Given the high level of toxicity of these chemicals, does the Commission envisage any research in soil pollution modelling to predict future contamination levels and transfer pathways, considering their risk to humans, plants and animals, as well as to surface water, groundwater and oceans?

    Submitted: 7.5.2025

    Last updated: 15 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Strategic dependence: Brussels losing its soul in American clouds (cloud services of Microsoft, AWS/Amazon, Google) – E-001866/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-001866/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Virginie Joron (PfE)

    The Commission has chosen non-European giants like Microsoft, Amazon Web Services and Google for its software and cloud infrastructure. The consequences are severe and immediate: strategic dependence and transfers of data outside Europe. That, at least, is the opinion of the European Data Protection Supervisor.

    This dependence is unnecessary and incompatible with the objectives of European digital sovereignty and strategic autonomy, especially when equivalent solutions are available from European providers, who need to participate in a number of public contracts to develop their expertise and capacities. The Commission must lead by example by prioritising purchases from European providers.

    • 1.What percentage of the contract has the Commission awarded to each cloud service provider so far?
    • 2.When can it legally terminate, even partially, the contracts concluded with Microsoft, Amazon (AWS) and Google, or when do these contracts end?
    • 3.What tangible measures (revising the SIDE III and CLOUD III contract guidelines to explicitly favour European providers when offering equivalent solutions, or introducing a quota for European providers) is it taking to migrate its systems to the open and interoperable solutions of European operators, without waiting for 2026?

    Submitted: 8.5.2025

    Last updated: 15 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: REPORT on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2023/956 as regards simplifying and strengthening the carbon border adjustment mechanism – A10-0085/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Committee on the Environment, Climate and Food Safety
    Rapporteur: Antonio Decaro
    (Simplified procedure – Rule 52(2) of the Rules of Procedure)

    DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

    on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2023/956 as regards simplifying and strengthening the carbon border adjustment mechanism

    (COM(2025)0087 – C10‑0035/2025 – 2025/0039(COD))

    (Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

    The European Parliament,

    – having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2025)0087),

    – having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 192(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C10-0035/2025),

    – having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

    – having regard to the budgetary assessment by the Committee on Budgets,

    – having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 29 April 2025[1],

    – after consulting the Committee of the Regions,

    – having regard to Rules 60 and 58 of its Rules of Procedure,

    – having regard to the opinions of he Committee on International Trade and the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy,

    – having regard to the report of the Committee on the Environment, Climate and Food Safety (A10-0085/2025),

    1. Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

    2. Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it replaces, substantially amends or intends to substantially amend its proposal;

    3. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

     

    Amendment  1

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital 25 a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    (25a) The CBAM applies to importation of electricity, but it should not apply to electricity generated entirely in the exclusive economic zone of an EEA Member State and imported directly into the customs territory of the Union ;

    Amendment  2

    Proposal for a regulation

    Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b a (new)

    Regulation (EU) 2023/956

    Article 2 – paragraph 3 b (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    (ba) the following paragraph 3b is inserted:

     

    3b. By way of derogation from paragraphs 1 and 2, this Regulation shall not apply to electricity generated entirely in the exclusive economic zone of an EEA Member State and imported directly into the customs territory of the Union.

    Amendment  3

    Proposal for a regulation

    Annex I – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)

    Regulation (EU) 2023/956

    Annex IV – point 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 5

     

    Present text

    Amendment

     

    (1a) In point 3, in the notes explaining the formula for SEEg in the first paragraph, the note for EEImpMat is replaced by the following:

    EEInpMat

    EEInpMat

    are the embedded emissions of the input materials (precursors) consumed in the production process. Only input materials (precursors) listed as relevant to the system boundaries of the production process as specified in the implementing act adopted pursuant to Article 7(7) are to be considered. The relevant EEInpMat are calculated as follows:

    are the embedded emissions of the input materials (precursors) consumed in the production process. Only input materials (precursors) listed in Annex I and originating in third countries and territories that are not exempted pursuant to Annex III, Section 1 are to be considered. The relevant EEInpMat are calculated as follows:

    ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR HAS RECEIVED INPUT

    The rapporteur declares under his exclusive responsibility that he did not receive input from any entity or person to be mentioned in this Annex pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure.

     

     

    28.4.2025BUDGETARY ASSESSMENT OF THE COMMITTEE ON BUDGETS

    for the Committee on the Environment, Climate and Food Safety

    on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2023/956 as regards simplifying and strengthening the carbon border adjustment mechanism

    (COM(2025)0087 – C10‑0035/2025 – 2025/0039(COD))

    Rapporteur for budgetary assessment: Sandra Gómez López 

    The Committee on Budgets has carried out a budgetary assessment of the proposal under Rule 58 of the Rules of Procedure and has reached the following conclusions:

    A. whereas the proposal by the Commission to simplify the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism(CBAM) aims at achieving significant savings in terms of administrative costs for EU importers of CBAM goods;

    B. whereas the proceeds of the CBAM are to become an EU own resource according to the amended Commission proposal of 23 June 2023 for a Council decision amending Decision (EU, Euratom) 2020/2053 on the system of own resources of the European Union (COM(2023)0331); whereas Parliament approved this proposal in its legislative resolution of 9 November 2023[2];

    C. whereas the Council has failed to implement the steps set out in the legally binding roadmap towards the introduction of new own resources laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement (IIA), the objectives of this roadmap being to introduce sufficient new own resources to at least cover the repayment of NextGenerationEU (NGEU) debt;

    D. whereas the estimated revenue from the CBAM would diminish in proportion to the CO2 emissions captured in the scope of the simplified regulation; whereas this impact would remain modest, presumably within one per cent of the overall estimated revenue;

    E. whereas the Commission proposal entails additional operational expenditure in Heading 3 to be financed by means of redeployment from a budget line in Heading 4 and administrative expenditure for human resources in Heading 7 to be financed by redeployment within Heading 7;

    F. whereas the penalties for CBAM declarants in breach of the regulation are, in principle, to be aligned with excess emission penalties under the Emissions Trading System (ETS); whereas the national competent authorities remain in charge of establishing and enforcing such measures based on implementing acts;

    1. Takes note of the proposal to simplify the CBAM regulation in the context of an overall initiative to improve the EU’s competitiveness;

    2. Recalls that Parliament has repeatedly endorsed a new own resource based on the CBAM and is keenly aware that this own resource is one of the few candidates that also enjoy tangible support from the Member States in the Council; regrets, therefore, that the embedded emissions covered under the reduced scope of the CBAM would lead to proportionately lower own resources revenue from the CBAM; acknowledges, however, that the amounts (in the order of EUR 20 million per year) and share (1 %) concerned are modest compared to the overall figures that the CBAM is expected to produce in terms of revenue;

    3. Confirms that the amending regulation remains compatible with Parliament’s consultative opinion of 9 November 2023, which approves the Commission’s proposal for an amended Council decision on the system of own resources, including a new own resource based on the CBAM;

    4. Considers that there are no provisions in the amending regulation that would fall under Rule 58(4), i.e. covering exclusively budgetary aspects which the committee responsible for the subject matter would not be allowed to amend; considers, furthermore, that no legislative amendments in this regard are necessary at this stage;

    5. Recalls that the amendments or compromises in the course of the negotiations must not lead to any provisions contradicting Parliament’s established position on the use of CBAM revenue as an own resource; considers it necessary, therefore, to take part in the further negotiations, including the trilogues, in order to monitor the consistency with Parliament’s position on own resources and other pertinent budget-related provisions, and to ensure that the final agreement is compatible with the current MFF;

    6. Observes certain flaws and errors in the Legislative Financial and Digital Statement (LFS) that should be rectified in the course of the further process, in a revised version of the Statement; questions, in this respect, the annual amounts listed in the table under Section 3.3 and, in particular, whether there will already be any revenue collected in 2026; also considers that the budget line (which is from the expenditure title) mentioned in this section is incorrect; recalls that in order to be consistent with present practice and the proposed own resources legislation, amounts indicated in this section should be shown ‘net’ of the 25 % collection costs to be retained by Member States and converted into current prices;

    7. Acknowledges that the level of revenue foregone, in the order of EUR 21 million as of 2030, is non-material compared to the cost savings for companies, especially SMEs, and acceptable in view of the overall revenue expected from the CBAM;

    8. Takes note of the necessary additional operational and administrative appropriations as indicated in the LFS; reiterates its long-standing position that new tasks and responsibilities should, in principle, be financed by fresh resources; deplores the limited margins available in the MFF and acknowledges that they could justify a certain level of reallocation; warns that the additional operational amounts will use a sizeable share of the remaining margin under Heading 3; also recognises that the redeployment from the instrument for financial support for customs control equipment (CCEI) implies the creation of some additional margin in Heading 4; determines that the amounts mentioned under points 3.2.1, 3.2.3 and 3.2.6 in the LFS are compatible with the MFF ceilings in Headings 3, 4 and 7, but will require adjustments in the financial programming; questions, nonetheless, whether such redeployment operations are in line with the ring-fencing logic of the MFF headings;

    9. Questions why a reduction of the scope, by an alleged 90 %, of companies to be registered as authorised CBAM declarants does not lead to a lower level of administrative needs under Heading 7;

    10. Acknowledges that any substantive changes in the governance of the implementation and enforcement of the CBAM, such as those related to the penalties for non-compliance, would be beyond the scope of this simplification initiative; considers, however, in light of the planned revision of the CBAM regulation, that the proceeds of the penalties could eventually be considered as general revenue for the EU budget;

    11. Notes that the simplification initiative is also presented as a key enabler for a potential future extension of the scope of the CBAM; expects that such an extension would have significant budgetary implications, including for revenue flows;

    12. Recalls that the Union’s budget is under strain and stresses the need for additional sustainable and resilient revenue; points to the legally binding roadmap towards the introduction of new own resources laid down in the IIA, in which Parliament, the Council and the Commission undertook to introduce sufficient new own resources to at least cover the repayment of NGEU debt; recalls its support for the amended Commission proposal on the system of own resources; is deeply concerned by the complete absence of progress on the system of own resources in the Council; calls on the Council to adopt this proposal as a matter of urgency and urges the Commission to spare no effort in supporting the adoption process; calls, furthermore, on the Commission to continue efforts to identify additional genuine new own resources beyond those specified in the IIA.

    As part of its budgetary assessment, the Committee on Budgets also submits the following amendments to the proposal:

    Amendment  1

    Proposal for a regulation

    Recital [10] a (new)

     

    Text proposed by the Commission

    Amendment

     

    ([10]a). This Regulation has implications for the Union budget. Accordingly, the European Parliament’s Committee on Budgets adopted a budgetary assessment, which forms an integral part of Parliament’s mandate for negotiations.

    ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS
    FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR FOR BUDGETARY ASSESSMENT HAS RECEIVED INPUT

    The rapporteur for budgetary assessment declares under her exclusive responsibility that she did not receive input from any entity or person to be mentioned in this Annex pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure.

     

    PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR BUDGETARY ASSESSMENT

    Title

    Amending Regulation (EU) 2023/956 as regards simplifying and strengthening the carbon border adjustment mechanism

    References

    COM(2025)0087 – C10-0035/2025 – 2025/0039(COD)

    Committee(s) responsible

    ENVI

     

     

     

     Date announced in plenary

    BUDG

    31.3.2025

    Rapporteur for budgetary assessment

     Date appointed

    Sandra Gómez López

    26.3.2025

    Discussed in committee

    31.3.2025

     

     

     

    Date adopted

    23.4.2025

     

     

     

    Result of final vote

    +:

    –:

    0:

    23

    9

    1

    Members present for the final vote

    Georgios Aftias, Rasmus Andresen, Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, Olivier Chastel, Thomas Geisel, Jean-Marc Germain, Sandra Gómez López, Monika Hohlmeier, Alexander Jungbluth, Fabienne Keller, Giuseppe Lupo, Siegfried Mureşan, Matjaž Nemec, Danuše Nerudová, João Oliveira, Ruggero Razza, Karlo Ressler, Bogdan Rzońca, Julien Sanchez, Hélder Sousa Silva, Nicolae Ştefănuță, Carla Tavares, Nils Ušakovs, Lucia Yar, Auke Zijlstra

    Substitutes present for the final vote

    Stine Bosse, Rasmus Nordqvist, Jacek Protas

    Members under Rule 216(7) present for the final vote

    Marie-Luce Brasier-Clain, Tobias Cremer, Marieke Ehlers, Julien Leonardelli, Philippe Olivier

     

    FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL
    IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR BUDGETARY ASSESSMENT

    23

    +

    NI

    Thomas Geisel

    PPE

    Georgios Aftias, Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, Monika Hohlmeier, Siegfried Mureşan, Danuše Nerudová, Jacek Protas, Karlo Ressler, Hélder Sousa Silva

    Renew

    Stine Bosse, Olivier Chastel, Fabienne Keller, Lucia Yar

    S&D

    Tobias Cremer, Jean-Marc Germain, Sandra Gómez López, Giuseppe Lupo, Matjaž Nemec, Carla Tavares, Nils Ušakovs

    Verts/ALE

    Rasmus Andresen, Rasmus Nordqvist, Nicolae Ştefănuță

     

    9

    –

    ECR

    Bogdan Rzońca

    ESN

    Alexander Jungbluth

    PfE

    Marie-Luce Brasier-Clain, Marieke Ehlers, Julien Leonardelli, Philippe Olivier, Julien Sanchez, Auke Zijlstra

    The Left

    João Oliveira

     

    1

    0

    ECR

    Ruggero Razza

     

    Key to symbols:

    + : in favour

    – : against

    0 : abstention

     

    OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE (24.4.2025)

    for the Committee on the Environment, Climate and Food Safety

    on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2023/956 as regards simplifying and strengthening the carbon border adjustment mechanism

    (COM(2025)0087 – C10‑0035/2025 – 2025/0039(COD))

    Rapporteur for opinion: Karin Karlsbro

     

     

    The Committee on International Trade calls on the Committee on the Environment, Climate and Food Safety, as the committee responsible, to propose that Parliament adopt its position at first reading, taking over the Commission proposal.

    ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS
    FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR HAS RECEIVED INPUT

    The rapporteur for opinion declares under her exclusive responsibility that she did not receive input from any entity or person to be mentioned in this Annex pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure.

    PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

    Title

    Amending Regulation (EU) 2023/956 as regards simplifying and strengthening the carbon border adjustment mechanism

    References

    COM(2025)0087 – C10-0035/2025 – 2025/0039(COD)

    Committee(s) responsible

    ENVI

     

     

     

    Opinion by

     Date announced in plenary

    INTA

    31.3.2025

    Rapporteur for the opinion

     Date appointed

    Karin Karlsbro

    19.3.2025

    Simplified procedure – date of decision

    7.4.2025

    Discussed in committee

    7.4.2025

     

     

     

    Date adopted

    23.4.2025

     

     

     

    Result of final vote

    +:

    –:

    0:

    36

    2

    0

    Members present for the final vote

    Manon Aubry, Christophe Bay, Udo Bullmann, Andi Cristea, Raphaël Glucksmann, Markéta Gregorová, Svenja Hahn, Taner Kabilov, Karin Karlsbro, Rihards Kols, Sebastian Kruis, Bernd Lange, Ilia Lazarov, Miriam Lexmann, Thierry Mariani, Gabriel Mato, Javier Moreno Sánchez, Daniele Polato, Kathleen Van Brempt, Marie-Pierre Vedrenne, Catarina Vieira, Jörgen Warborn, Bogdan Andrzej Zdrojewski, Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez

    Substitutes present for the final vote

    Petras Auštrevičius, Nicolas Bay, Saskia Bricmont, Markus Buchheit, João Cotrim De Figueiredo, Fabio De Masi, Jean-Marc Germain, Hana Jalloul Muro, Sandra Kalniete, David McAllister, Jessika Van Leeuwen

    Members under Rule 216(7) present for the final vote

    Alexander Bernhuber, Daniel Buda, Fabrice Leggeri

     

    FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL
    BY THE COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

    36

    +

    ECR

    Nicolas Bay, Rihards Kols, Daniele Polato

    NI

    Fabio De Masi, Taner Kabilov

    PPE

    Alexander Bernhuber, Daniel Buda, Sandra Kalniete, Ilia Lazarov, Miriam Lexmann, David McAllister, Gabriel Mato, Jessika Van Leeuwen, Jörgen Warborn, Bogdan Andrzej Zdrojewski, Juan Ignacio Zoido Álvarez

    PfE

    Christophe Bay, Sebastian Kruis, Fabrice Leggeri, Thierry Mariani

    Renew

    Petras Auštrevičius, João Cotrim De Figueiredo, Svenja Hahn, Karin Karlsbro, Marie-Pierre Vedrenne

    S&D

    Udo Bullmann, Andi Cristea, Jean-Marc Germain, Raphaël Glucksmann, Hana Jalloul Muro, Bernd Lange, Javier Moreno Sánchez, Kathleen Van Brempt

    Verts/ALE

    Saskia Bricmont, Markéta Gregorová, Catarina Vieira

     

    2

    –

    ESN

    Markus Buchheit

    The Left

    Manon Aubry

     

     

    Key to symbols:

    + : in favour

    – : against

    0 : abstention

    OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON INDUSTRY, RESEARCH AND ENERGY (23.4.2025)

    for the Committee on the Environment, Climate and Food Safety

    on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2023/956 as regards simplifying and strengthening the carbon border adjustment mechanism.

    (COM(2025)0087 – C10‑0035/2025 – 2025/0039(COD))

    Rapporteur for opinion: Filip Turek

    (Simplified procedure – Rule 52(2) and (3) of the Rules of Procedure)

     

    SHORT JUSTIFICATION

    The European Commission’ proposals aims at simplifying the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) obligations for small importers—primarily SMEs and individuals—by introducing a new de minimis exemption for imports below 50 tonnes mass. These importers bring in minor volumes of CBAM goods, resulting in negligible levels of embedded emissions entering the EU from third countries. Despite this exemption, approximately 99% of total embedded emissions would remain covered under CBAM, while around 90% of importers would be relieved from its obligations. For those importers who continue to fall within the CBAM scope, the proposal also includes a series of simplifications aimed at easing compliance. These measures involve streamlining the authorisation process for declarants, simplifying emission calculation procedures and improving the management of CBAM-related financial liabilities.

    The initiative takes a more pragmatic approach for improving the overall functioning of CBAM, particularly by easing the obligations placed on smaller economic actors. Thus, the proposed exemption marks a necessary and welcome simplification. This, along with the accompanying set of procedural facilitations, represents a step forward in ensuring that the CBAM can be administratively manageable.

    Within the Omnibus framework, it is appropriate to concentrate on the elements explicitly opened by the Commission, while awaiting the upcoming comprehensive review, which will provide a more suitable occasion to consider structural and far-reaching revisions, including concerns on the effectiveness of CBAM.

    In its current design, CBAM disproportionately affects certain energy-intensive sectors and risks being an ineffective tool to ensure a level playing field for EU industries and to prevent carbon leakage. In fact, it could undermine the EU competitiveness by increasing the production costs and the administrative burdens for EU companies.

    The structural revision is therefore urgent to address the risks of resource reshuffling and circumvention. Equally pressing is the postponement (or the deletion) of the phase out from the ETS free allowances, as well as the need to implement effective solutions for EU exporters. Moreover, the possible extension of CBAM to downstream products should be preceded by a thorough and comprehensive impact assessment. 

    While the ITRE Committee will refrain from tabling amendments to the proposal, the threshold could have merited more in-depth consideration. The de minimis exemption may in fact be too low to reflect meaningfully the reality of many SMEs and micro-enterprises. Data indicates that several businesses, including those officially categorized as “micro,” regularly exceed the threshold of 50 tonnes. Hence, a balanced solution could be raising it to at least 110 tons. This adjustment would strike a more realistic and equitable balance, enhancing the administrative feasibility of the CBAM, while continuing to capture the vast majority of emissions within the scope of the Mechanism (according to Commission estimates, still over 98%). The exemption of more importers from CBAM obligations would also generate additional cost savings, without significantly undermining the ratio of the proposal.

    In conclusion, waiting for the upcoming comprehensive review, which will provide a timely opportunity to address the outstanding issues, the Rapporteur notes the willingness of the ITRE Committee to not table amendments and supports the Commission’s initiative.

     

    *******

    The Committee on Industry, Research and Energy calls on the Committee on the Environment, Climate and Food Safety, as the committee responsible, to propose that Parliament adopt its position at first reading, taking over the Commission proposal.

     

    ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS
    FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR FOR THE OPINION HAS RECEIVED INPUT

    Pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure, the rapporteur declares that he received input from the following entities or persons in the preparation of the report, prior to the adoption thereof in committee:

    Entity and/or person

    Confederation of Industry of the Czech Republic

    ČEZ Group

    Emerson International

    Italian Confederation of Craft Trades and Small- and Medium-Sized Enterprises

    European Express Association

    Round Table on Climate Change and Sustainable Transition

    Office of the Government of the Czech Republic

    The list above is drawn up under the exclusive responsibility of the rapporteur.

     

    Where natural persons are identified in the list by their name, by their function or by both, the rapporteur declares that he has submitted to the concerned natural persons the European Parliament’s Data Protection Notice No 484 (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/data-protect/index.do), which sets out the conditions applicable to the processing of their personal data and the rights linked to that processing.

     

    PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

    Title

    Amending Regulation (EU) 2023/956 as regards simplifying and strengthening the carbon border adjustment mechanism

    References

    COM(2025)0087 – C10-0035/2025 – 2025/0039(COD)

    Committee(s) responsible

    ENVI

     

     

     

    Opinion by

     Date announced in plenary

    ITRE

    31.3.2025

    Rapporteur for the opinion

     Date appointed

    Filip Turek

    25.3.2025

    Simplified procedure – date of decision

    18.3.2025

    Date adopted

    24.4.2025

     

     

     

    Result of final vote

    +:

    –:

    0:

    73

    5

    6

    Members present for the final vote

    Wouter Beke, Tom Berendsen, Michael Bloss, Barbara Bonte, Paolo Borchia, Markus Buchheit, Borys Budka, João Cotrim De Figueiredo, Raúl de la Hoz Quintano, Elena Donazzan, Matthias Ecke, Sofie Eriksson, Jan Farský, Niels Fuglsang, Bruno Gonçalves, Nicolás González Casares, Giorgio Gori, Niels Flemming Hansen, Eero Heinäluoma, Ivars Ijabs, Fernand Kartheiser, Seán Kelly, Rudi Kennes, Ondřej Krutílek, Eszter Lakos, Isabella Lövin, Yannis Maniatis, Sara Matthieu, Marina Mesure, Angelika Niebler, Ville Niinistö, Thomas Pellerin-Carlin, Tsvetelina Penkova, Pascale Piera, Jüri Ratas, Aura Salla, Elena Sancho Murillo, Jussi Saramo, Paulius Saudargas, Diego Solier, Marcin Sypniewski, Beata Szydło, Dario Tamburrano, Bruno Tobback, Matej Tonin, Yvan Verougstraete, Mariateresa Vivaldini, Andrea Wechsler, Elena Yoncheva, Auke Zijlstra, Nicola Zingaretti

    Substitutes present for the final vote

    Christophe Bay, Adam Bielan, Marc Botenga, Andi Cristea, Kamila Gasiuk-Pihowicz, Chiara Gemma, Andreas Glück, Michalis Hadjipantela, Martin Hojsík, Radan Kanev, Katri Kulmuni, Sergey Lagodinsky, András László, Marion Maréchal, Virginijus Sinkevičius, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, Pierre-Romain Thionnet, Francesco Torselli, Marie Toussaint

    Members under Rule 216(7) present for the final vote

    Magdalena Adamowicz, Marie-Luce Brasier-Clain, Krzysztof Brejza, Jaroslav Bžoch, José Cepeda, Vivien Costanzo, Ton Diepeveen, Siegbert Frank Droese, Anne-Sophie Frigout, Svenja Hahn, Andrzej Halicki, Ilia Lazarov, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Vlad Vasile-Voiculescu, Axel Voss

     

    FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL
    BY THE COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

    73

    +

    ECR

    Adam Bielan, Elena Donazzan, Chiara Gemma, Fernand Kartheiser, Ondřej Krutílek, Marion Maréchal, Diego Solier, Beata Szydło, Francesco Torselli, Mariateresa Vivaldini

    NI

    Elena Yoncheva

    PPE

    Magdalena Adamowicz, Wouter Beke, Tom Berendsen, Krzysztof Brejza, Raúl de la Hoz Quintano, Jan Farský, Kamila Gasiuk-Pihowicz, Michalis Hadjipantela, Andrzej Halicki, Niels Flemming Hansen, Radan Kanev, Seán Kelly, Eszter Lakos, Ilia Lazarov, Angelika Niebler, Jüri Ratas, Aura Salla, Paulius Saudargas, Matej Tonin, Axel Voss, Andrea Wechsler

    PfE

    Christophe Bay, Paolo Borchia, Marie-Luce Brasier-Clain, Jaroslav Bžoch, Anne-Sophie Frigout, András László, Pascale Piera, Pierre-Romain Thionnet

    Renew

    João Cotrim De Figueiredo, Andreas Glück, Svenja Hahn, Martin Hojsík, Ivars Ijabs, Katri Kulmuni, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, Vlad Vasile-Voiculescu, Yvan Verougstraete

    S&D

    José Cepeda, Vivien Costanzo, Andi Cristea, Matthias Ecke, Sofie Eriksson, Niels Fuglsang, Bruno Gonçalves, Nicolás González Casares, Giorgio Gori, Eero Heinäluoma, Yannis Maniatis, Thomas Pellerin-Carlin, Tsvetelina Penkova, Elena Sancho Murillo, Bruno Tobback, Nicola Zingaretti

    Verts/ALE

    Michael Bloss, Sergey Lagodinsky, Isabella Lövin, Sara Matthieu, Ville Niinistö, Virginijus Sinkevičius, Marie Toussaint

     

    5

    –

    The Left

    Marc Botenga, Rudi Kennes, Marina Mesure, Jussi Saramo, Dario Tamburrano

     

    6

    0

    ESN

    Markus Buchheit, Siegbert Frank Droese, Marcin Sypniewski

    PfE

    Barbara Bonte, Ton Diepeveen, Auke Zijlstra

     

    Key to symbols:

    + : in favour

    – : against

    0 : abstention

    PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

    Title

    Amending Regulation (EU) 2023/956 as regards simplifying and strengthening the carbon border adjustment mechanism

    References

    COM(2025)0087 – C10-0035/2025 – 2025/0039(COD)

    Date submitted to Parliament

    27.2.2025

     

     

     

    Committee(s) responsible

    ENVI

     

     

     

    Committees asked for opinions

     Date announced in plenary

    BUDG

    23.4.2025

    INTA

    31.3.2025

    ITRE

    31.3.2025

     

    Rapporteurs

     Date appointed

    Antonio Decaro

    10.3.2025

     

     

     

    Simplified procedure – date of decision

    10.3.2025

    Discussed in committee

    18.3.2025

     

     

     

    Budgetary assessment

     Date of budgetary assessment

    BUDG

    23.4.2025

     

     

     

    Date adopted

    13.5.2025

     

     

     

    Result of final vote

    +:

    –:

    0:

    85

    1

    1

    Members present for the final vote

    Bartosz Arłukowicz, Sakis Arnaoutoglou, Anja Arndt, Thomas Bajada, Barbara Bonte, Stine Bosse, Lynn Boylan, Jorge Buxadé Villalba, Pascal Canfin, Laurent Castillo, Christophe Clergeau, Annalisa Corrado, Ivan David, Antonio Decaro, Ondřej Dostál, Viktória Ferenc, Pietro Fiocchi, Emma Fourreau, Anne-Sophie Frigout, Heléne Fritzon, Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy, Hanna Gronkiewicz-Waltz, Esther Herranz García, Martin Hojsík, Pär Holmgren, Romana Jerković, Marc Jongen, Ondřej Knotek, Stefan Köhler, Ewa Kopacz, András Tivadar Kulja, Peter Liese, Javi López, César Luena, Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska, Ignazio Roberto Marino, Tilly Metz, Dolors Montserrat, Dan-Ştefan Motreanu, Jana Nagyová, Rasmus Nordqvist, Jacek Ozdoba, Jutta Paulus, Michele Picaro, Jessica Polfjärd, Carola Rackete, Massimiliano Salini, Lena Schilling, Christine Schneider, Günther Sidl, Jonas Sjöstedt, Sander Smit, Claudiu-Richard Târziu, Ingeborg Ter Laak, Beatrice Timgren, Dimitris Tsiodras, Alexandr Vondra, Emma Wiesner, Michal Wiezik, Tiemo Wölken, Anna Zalewska

    Substitutes present for the final vote

    Biljana Borzan, Marie-Luce Brasier-Clain, Stefano Cavedagna, Susanna Ceccardi, Sebastian Everding, Michalis Hadjipantela, Paolo Inselvini, Adam Jarubas, Nora Junco García, Karin Karlsbro, Billy Kelleher, Norbert Lins, Letizia Moratti, Maria Ohisalo, Virgil-Daniel Popescu, Manuela Ripa, André Rodrigues, Elena Sancho Murillo, Christine Singer, Liesbet Sommen, Sebastiaan Stöteler, Anna Stürgkh, Bruno Tobback, Raffaele Topo

    Members under Rule 216(7) present for the final vote

    Javier Moreno Sánchez, Séverine Werbrouck

    Date tabled

    14.5.2025

     

    FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL BY THE COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

    85

    +

    ECR

    Stefano Cavedagna, Pietro Fiocchi, Paolo Inselvini, Nora Junco García, Jacek Ozdoba, Michele Picaro, Claudiu-Richard Târziu, Beatrice Timgren, Alexandr Vondra, Anna Zalewska

    ESN

    Anja Arndt, Ivan David, Marc Jongen

    NI

    Ondřej Dostál

    PPE

    Bartosz Arłukowicz, Laurent Castillo, Hanna Gronkiewicz-Waltz, Michalis Hadjipantela, Esther Herranz García, Adam Jarubas, Stefan Köhler, Ewa Kopacz, András Tivadar Kulja, Peter Liese, Norbert Lins, Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska, Dolors Montserrat, Letizia Moratti, Dan-Ştefan Motreanu, Jessica Polfjärd, Virgil-Daniel Popescu, Manuela Ripa, Massimiliano Salini, Christine Schneider, Sander Smit, Liesbet Sommen, Ingeborg Ter Laak, Dimitris Tsiodras

    PfE

    Barbara Bonte, Marie-Luce Brasier-Clain, Jorge Buxadé Villalba, Viktória Ferenc, Anne-Sophie Frigout, Ondřej Knotek, Jana Nagyová, Sebastiaan Stöteler, Séverine Werbrouck

    Renew

    Stine Bosse, Pascal Canfin, Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy, Martin Hojsík, Karin Karlsbro, Billy Kelleher, Christine Singer, Anna Stürgkh, Emma Wiesner, Michal Wiezik

    S&D

    Sakis Arnaoutoglou, Thomas Bajada, Biljana Borzan, Christophe Clergeau, Annalisa Corrado, Antonio Decaro, Heléne Fritzon, Romana Jerković, Javi López, César Luena, Javier Moreno Sánchez, André Rodrigues, Elena Sancho Murillo, Günther Sidl, Bruno Tobback, Raffaele Topo, Tiemo Wölken

    The Left

    Lynn Boylan, Sebastian Everding, Carola Rackete, Jonas Sjöstedt

    Verts/ALE

    Pär Holmgren, Ignazio Roberto Marino, Tilly Metz, Rasmus Nordqvist, Maria Ohisalo, Jutta Paulus, Lena Schilling

     

    1

    –

    The Left

    Emma Fourreau

     

    1

    0

    PfE

    Susanna Ceccardi

     

    Key to symbols:

    + : in favour

    – : against

    0 : abstention

     

     

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Pending approval of state aid for the biomass package – E-001850/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-001850/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Christine Schneider (PPE)

    Germany’s ‘biomass package’ (Act Amending the Renewable Energy Sources Act for Greater Flexibility and Ongoing Support for Biogas Plants) entered into force on 25 February 2025. Among other things, the act incentivises flexible electricity generation from biomass and fine-tunes requirements for agriculture. These measures can only be implemented once state aid approval is forthcoming from the Commission. The delay in approval is having significant consequences on biomass plant operators’ investment planning and undermining efforts to achieve the EU’s climate targets.

    • 1.At present, how far advanced is the state aid approval procedure for the German biomass package?
    • 2.What is the Commission specifically doing to ensure the approval procedure for the biomass package is completed in time for the new rules to be applied by the forthcoming deadline of 1 October 2025 for applications – applications submitted by the previous deadline of 1 April 2025 had to be processed under the previous legal framework since the state aid law had not yet been approved – and thus eliminate any further investment uncertainty and financial disadvantages that may affect operators in the sector?

    Submitted: 7.5.2025

    Last updated: 15 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: EU will give €120 million in humanitarian aid to Latin America and the Caribbean in 2025

    Source: European Commission

    European Commission Press release Brussels, 15 May 2025 The European Commission will provide €120 million in humanitarian aid to several Latin American and Caribbean countries this year to help the region’s most vulnerable, in view of the recent natural disasters and armed conflicts.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI: Best Payday Loans Online: Fast $255 Payday Loans Near Me With Heart Paydays Loans And No Credit Check, Bad Credit

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    ROMFORD, United Kingdom, May 15, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Life happens quickly, and sometimes it throws us unexpected financial challenges. Whether it’s a car repair, an urgent medical bill, or just the need to make it to payday, these emergencies often require fast access to money. Unfortunately, not everyone has the savings to cover these sudden costs.

    This is where payday loans come in. Payday loans are short-term loans designed to help people bridge the gap between paychecks. They offer a quick solution when you need money fast. But with so many payday lenders available online, it can be tough to know where to turn.

    Need fast cash for emergencies? Click here to get started with Heart Paydays Loans and apply for payday loans online today!

    In this article, we will discuss the best payday loans online, focusing on Heart Paydays Loans as a top provider for quick, flexible, and trustworthy payday loans. Whether you’re looking for payday loans near me, payday loan bad credit, or quick payday loans no credit check, we’ll explore how Heart Paydays Loans stands out as a reliable option for urgent financial needs.

    Why Payday Loans Are a Great Option for Emergencies

    Emergencies can hit at any time, and often, they don’t come with a lot of warning. You may find yourself needing money for a car repair, hospital visit, or unexpected travel expenses. Traditional loan options can be slow, require lots of paperwork, and be out of reach for people with poor credit. That’s where payday loans come in as a lifeline.

    1. Quick and Easy Access to Funds

    When you need money fast, payday loans near me can be a great option. Online payday loans, especially through Heart Paydays Loans, are fast, with many people receiving their funds in as little as 1 hour. Whether it’s an emergency or a small unexpected cost, payday loans provide the speed you need.

    2. Accessible Even for Those with Bad Credit

    Not everyone has a perfect credit score, and some people may be dealing with payday loan bad credit situations. With traditional loans, a low credit score could mean an automatic rejection. But payday lenders like Heart Paydays Loans don’t just rely on credit scores. They look at your income and ability to repay the loan, making it easier for individuals with poor credit to get the money they need. Many lenders like Heart Paydays Loans offer best payday loans for bad credit, which is great news for those needing immediate funds.

    Worried about your credit score? Click here to check your credit score online for free and see where you stand!

    3. Simple Application Process

    Applying for a payday loan is often easier than applying for traditional bank loans. The application process is usually done online and can be completed in just a few minutes. Heart Paydays Loans offers a streamlined online application, meaning you can apply and get approved without leaving your house.

    4. Flexible Loan Terms

    Another benefit of payday loans is flexibility. You can choose the loan amount you need and select repayment terms that work for your budget. Whether you’re looking for a small loan or a larger one, payday loans offer flexibility to fit your needs.

    Looking for payday loans near you? Click here to find a Heart Paydays Loans location or apply online now!

    What to Look for in the Best Payday Loans Online

    When searching for the best payday loans online, it’s crucial to consider certain factors that can help you avoid excessive debt and ensure you’re getting the best deal for your financial situation. Here are some key features to look for:

    1. Low Interest Rates

    One of the most important aspects to consider when applying for payday loans is the interest rate. Many payday lenders charge high interest rates, which can make it difficult to repay the loan and avoid falling into a cycle of debt.

    Look for loans that offer reasonable Annual Percentage Rates (APR)—ideally, below 36%—to avoid sky-high rates that could leave you paying far more than you initially borrowed. Some online lenders, like Heart Paydays Loans, are known for offering competitive and transparent rates, making them a good option for those who need funds quickly without breaking the bank.

    2. Clear Terms and Transparency

    A reputable payday loan provider will offer clear terms with no hidden fees or surprises. Before agreeing to any loan, make sure you understand the full terms of repayment, including the APR, the total amount to be repaid, and any associated fees. Good payday loan providers will be transparent about the costs, ensuring that you know exactly what to expect from the start.

    For example, Heart Paydays Loans provides detailed loan terms up front, so borrowers don’t have to worry about hidden fees or unclear conditions. You’ll know how much you’re borrowing, what the interest rate is, and how much you’ll pay back at the end of the loan.

    3. Fast Disbursement

    When you need emergency funds, quick funding is essential. Look for payday loans that are approved and funded within hours, ideally within one business day or less. Many payday loan providers, like Heart Paydays Loans, offer fast approval and disbursement of funds, often as quickly as within 1 hour of approval. This is especially important when you’re dealing with an urgent financial situation, like medical bills or car repairs, where timing is critical.

    4. Flexible Repayment Terms

    Repayment terms that fit your budget are key to successfully managing a payday loan. The best payday loans offer flexible repayment schedules, allowing you to choose a plan that suits your pay frequency. For example, you may prefer weekly, bi-weekly, or monthly repayment options depending on how often you’re paid.

    Many payday lenders, like Heart Paydays Loans, offer repayment terms that are tailored to your needs. This flexibility helps you avoid falling behind on payments and makes it easier to manage the loan without straining your finances.

    5. Avoiding Predatory Lenders

    Unfortunately, some payday lenders engage in predatory lending practices by charging excessive fees and high interest rates that can trap borrowers in a cycle of debt. It’s important to avoid lenders who offer loans with extreme terms, such as 1-hour payday loans no credit check with hidden fees or quick payday loans no credit check that come with unreasonable interest rates.

    Reputable lenders like Heart Paydays Loans prioritize fair lending practices and transparent terms, helping you get the funds you need without getting stuck in a debt trap. Always read the fine print, and if something doesn’t seem right, don’t hesitate to look for another lender.

    Compare rates and get the best payday loans for bad credit today. Click here to apply with Heart Paydays Loans and find the perfect loan for your needs!

    Heart Paydays Loans: The Best Payday Loans Online

    When it comes to finding best payday loans online, Heart Paydays Loans stands out as a top choice. With a wide range of loan options and a focus on providing fast and reliable service, Heart Paydays Loans is ideal for those in need of quick cash.

    1. Fast Approval and Funding

    One of the standout features of Heart Paydays Loans is how quickly they process applications. Once you apply, the approval process is fast, often taking only minutes. If you are approved, funds can be transferred directly into your bank account in as little as 1 hour payday loans no credit check—giving you quick access to the money you need without unnecessary delays.

    2. No Credit Check or Bad Credit Accepted

    If you’re worried about your credit score, don’t be. Heart Paydays Loans provides quick payday loans no credit check. They understand that credit scores don’t always reflect your ability to repay a loan. As long as you have a steady income and are able to repay the loan, you can still qualify for the loan you need—even if your credit score is less than perfect. So, for anyone struggling with payday loan bad credit, Heart Paydays Loans offers a chance to get back on track.

    3. Flexible Loan Amounts and Terms

    With Heart Paydays Loans, you can borrow anywhere from $100 to $5,000, depending on your financial needs. Whether it’s a small emergency or a larger unexpected expense, they offer a range of loan options to suit different budgets. Repayment terms are typically flexible, with options ranging from a few weeks to several months, allowing you to select a plan that works best for you.

    4. No Hidden Fees

    One of the common complaints about payday loans is the hidden fees and high-interest rates. With Heart Paydays Loans, transparency is key. They outline all fees and rates upfront, so you can make an informed decision about your loan. There are no surprise charges, and you’ll know exactly what to expect before you sign any agreement.

    How to Apply for Payday Loans Online

    Getting a payday loan through Heart Paydays Loans is simple. Here’s a step-by-step guide to help you navigate the process:

    1. Visit the Website

    Start by visiting the Heart Paydays Loans website. Their platform is user-friendly and easy to navigate, making it simple to find the loan option that fits your needs. Whether you’re looking for payday loans near me or an online loan, Heart Paydays Loans provides a convenient solution.

    2. Fill Out the Application Form

    The application process is quick and straightforward. You’ll need to provide some basic personal details, such as your name, address, phone number, and employment information. You’ll also need to enter details about your income and bank account, so they can deposit the loan funds directly into your account.

    3. Review the Loan Terms

    Before submitting your application, you’ll be given the chance to review your loan offer. You’ll see the loan amount, the repayment terms, and any interest rates or fees. This is your opportunity to make sure the loan terms are right for you.

    4. Submit Your Application and Get Approved

    Once you’ve reviewed the terms, submit your application. Heart Paydays Loans will quickly review your information and give you an answer. If you’re approved, you’ll receive your loan funds within a very short time frame.

    Ready to apply? Click here to fill out your application with Heart Paydays Loans and get your payday loan funds in no time!

    The Advantages of Heart Paydays Loans

    Here are some key benefits of choosing Heart Paydays Loans for your payday loan needs:

    1. Speed and Convenience

    Need a payday loan quickly? Heart Paydays Loans is one of the best options for 1 hour payday loans no credit check. Their fast approval process and rapid funding mean you won’t have to wait long to get the cash you need.

    2. No Credit Checks or Cosigner Requirements

    Heart Paydays Loans doesn’t require a cosigner, and they don’t rely on credit scores alone to approve your application. This makes it a great option for individuals dealing with payday loan bad credit.

    3. Flexibility

    Heart Paydays Loans offers flexibility in both loan amounts and repayment terms, allowing you to tailor the loan to your specific needs.

    4. Safe and Secure

    Your personal and financial information is protected with top-notch encryption. Heart Paydays Loans is committed to keeping your data safe.

    5. Transparent Terms

    With clear and upfront terms, Heart Paydays Loans ensures that there are no hidden fees or unexpected charges. You’ll know exactly what you’re getting before you agree to the loan.

    What to Look for When Choosing Payday Loans Online

    When searching for best payday loans online, it’s important to consider a few key factors to ensure you’re getting the best deal:

    1. Interest Rates and Fees

    Make sure the payday loan provider offers competitive interest rates. While payday loans generally have higher interest rates than traditional loans, you can still find reasonable options. Always check the fees and make sure you understand what you’ll be paying.

    2. Loan Terms

    Look for payday loans with flexible terms that match your financial situation. Some lenders offer short repayment periods, while others may give you up to a year to repay the loan.

    3. Speed of Funding

    If you need money quickly, look for payday lenders who offer fast funding, such as 1 hour payday loans no credit check.

    4. Lender Reputation

    Choose a lender with a good reputation. Heart Paydays Loans is known for its transparent practices, fast service, and customer satisfaction.

    If you have bad credit, click here to see how Heart Paydays Loans can help you get approved for payday loans even with less-than-perfect credit!

    Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

    Q: What are payday loans?

    Payday loans are short-term loans designed to cover emergencies or unexpected expenses until your next paycheck. They are usually small loans that are paid back in full on your next payday or over a few months.

    Q: Can I get a payday loan with bad credit?

    Yes, Heart Paydays Loans offers payday loans bad credit options, meaning that even if you have a low credit score, you may still qualify for a loan.

    Q: How fast can I get my payday loan?

    Heart Paydays Loans offers fast approval and disbursement. In many cases, you can receive your loan within one hour after approval.

    Q: Is it possible to get payday loans with no credit check?

    Yes, Heart Paydays Loans offers quick payday loans no credit check, which means your credit score will not be the main deciding factor for approval.

    Q: How much can I borrow with Heart Paydays Loans?

    Heart Paydays Loans offers payday loans ranging from $100 to $5000, depending on your financial needs and eligibility.

    Conclusion

    When searching for best payday loans online, it’s crucial to prioritize lenders offering low interest rates, clear repayment terms, and fast disbursement. By focusing on these factors, you can ensure that the loan meets your immediate financial needs without becoming a long-term burden. Heart Paydays Loans offers fast and flexible loan options, including 1-hour payday loans no credit check, making it a great choice for those in urgent need of funds.

    If you have bad credit, don’t worry—there are still options available. Many online lenders specialize in providing payday loans for bad credit, helping you secure the funds you need without the high fees or stringent requirements of traditional lenders. However, it’s important to avoid predatory lenders with excessive rates or unclear terms that could leave you trapped in debt.

    Ultimately, choosing the best payday loans online is about finding a lender who offers reasonable terms, transparent fees, and quick funding. By researching and applying to trusted providers like Heart Paydays Loans, you can get the financial help you need while maintaining control of your budget. Apply now to see your loan options and get the support you need today!

    Don’t wait! Click here to apply for the best payday loans online with Heart Paydays Loans and get the funds you need today!

    Project name: Heart Paydays

    Email – support@heartpaydays.com

    Full Company address:Floor 2, 1-5 High Street, Romford, RM1 1JU, United Kingdom

    Company website: heartpaydays.com

    Contact person : Chloe Simon

    email : chloe@heartpaydays.com

    Disclaimer: The information provided in this article is for informational purposes only. Payday loans, including those offered through Heart Paydays Loans, may carry high-interest rates and fees, which can vary based on your location and the terms of the loan. It’s important to understand the full terms, fees, and repayment schedule before applying. Borrowers should only consider payday loans for short-term financial needs and ensure they are able to repay the loan on time to avoid further financial difficulties. Heart Paydays Loans is not responsible for any financial consequences resulting from the use of payday loans. We encourage you to explore all options, including traditional loans or financial counseling, before proceeding with payday loans. Always read the fine print and consult with a financial advisor if necessary.

    Photos accompanying this announcement are available at:

    https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/7ff1ca3b-e405-4107-8793-a65390cae147

    https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/b7dca294-2850-494d-b258-c6ee433e869b

    The MIL Network –