NewzIntel.com

Category: Europe

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Israel’s policy of water deprivation in the West Bank – is the EU funding water apartheid policy in the occupied Palestinian territories (oPts)? – E-001734/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-001734/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Matjaž Nemec (S&D), Cecilia Strada (S&D), Irena Joveva (Renew), Mimmo Lucano (The Left), Tineke Strik (Verts/ALE), Catarina Vieira (Verts/ALE), Marc Botenga (The Left), Aodhán Ó Ríordáin (S&D), Vladimir Prebilič (Verts/ALE), Thomas Bajada (S&D), Hana Jalloul Muro (S&D), Rudi Kennes (The Left), Ana Miranda Paz (Verts/ALE), Daniel Attard (S&D), Jaume Asens Llodrà (Verts/ALE), Mounir Satouri (Verts/ALE), Chloé Ridel (S&D), Carola Rackete (The Left), Catarina Martins (The Left), Robert Biedroń (S&D), Majdouline Sbai (Verts/ALE), Hanna Gedin (The Left), Jonas Sjöstedt (The Left), Jussi Saramo (The Left), Marco Tarquinio (S&D), Lynn Boylan (The Left), João Oliveira (The Left), Villy Søvndal (Verts/ALE), Alex Agius Saliba (S&D), Marit Maij (S&D), Li Andersson (The Left), Brando Benifei (S&D), Rima Hassan (The Left), Per Clausen (The Left), Saskia Bricmont (Verts/ALE), Barry Andrews (Renew), Benedetta Scuderi (Verts/ALE)

    Israel’s policy of water deprivation in the West Bank has long affected many Palestinians and is well-documented by numerous civil society organisations.

    The Israeli company Mekorot, Israel’s national water company and the country’s top agency for water management, has been implementing an apartheid policy in water management in the occupied Palestinian territories (oPts), illegally restricting access to water, depriving Palestinians of a sufficient water supply, and violating World Health Organization recommendations. In addition, Mekorot operates approximately 42 wells in the West Bank, mainly in the Jordan Valley region, which primarily supply Israeli settlements.

    The EU previously funded Mekorot’s technological capacity. During the 7th Framework Programme cycle, Mekorot received EUR 474.394.36 in funding, and during the Horizon 2020 cycle, the EU financed three projects with a total EU contribution of EUR 866.300.

    We therefore ask the Commission the following:

    • 1.Does the EU still provide funding to Mekorot?
    • 2.How is the Commission monitoring and ensuring that EU funds are not used to finance the water apartheid policy in the oPts?

    Submitted: 30.4.2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Workshops – Consent-based rape legislation in the EU – 19-05-2025 – Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality

    Source: European Parliament

    On Monday, 19 May 2025, the Policy Department for Citizens, Equality and Culture, at the request of the FEMM Committee, will organise a workshop entitled ‘Consent-based rape legislation in the EU’.

    The workshop will examine key aspects of consent, the state of play of consent-based rape legislation throughout the EU, as well as awareness raising and capacity building in this regard. The workshop proceedings will feed into the joint LIBE-FEMM own-initiative report on the ‘Importance of consent-based rape legislation in the EU’. Members will debate with Sara Uhnoo (University of Gothenburg), Kristien Michielsen (KU Leuven) and Donna von Allemann (Women against Violence Europe Network (WAVE)).

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Loss of biodiversity in Doñana due to overexploitation of water – E-002864/2024(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    The Commission is aware of the issue raised by the Honourable Member and has taken legal action against Spain to address the problems of water overexploitation and biodiversity loss in Doñana through the correct application of the Habitats Directive[1] and the Water Framework Directive[2].

    As a result, the Court of Justice of the EU found in a judgment of 24 June 2021[3] that Spain had failed to fulfil obligations under the above-mentioned Directives.

    It is for Spain to implement all the necessary measures to comply with the judgment of the Court under the supervision of the Commission.

    The Commission sent to Spain a letter of formal notice[4] under Article 260(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union on 15 July 2022.

    Since then, the Commission has held several bilateral discussions with the Spanish authorities to discuss the measures they have taken and plan to take.

    Spain has put in place a holistic plan to comply with the judgment, including measures in relation to illegal abstraction. The Commission will continue to closely monitor the implementation of the ruling and take any necessary step to ensure that it is fully complied with.

    EU funding is available to help Spain solve this issue, for instance, both Recovery and Resilience Facility[5] and the European Regional Development Fund[6] can provide support for such type of investments.

    • [1] Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7-50.
    • [2] Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy, OJ L 327, 22.12.2000, p. 1-73.
    • [3] Case C-559/19: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:62019CJ0559
    • [4] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/inf_22_3768
    • [5] https://commission.europa.eu/business-economy-euro/economic-recovery/recovery-and-resilience-facility_en
    • [6] https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/funding/erdf_en
    Last updated: 8 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Highlights – BUDG-CONT-ECON – Joint hearing on Smart Conditionality – 13.05 – Committee on Budgets

    Source: European Parliament

    The objective of the joint public hearing is to provide the Members of the BUDG, CONT and LIBE Committees with input from academics and practitioners on how to ensure that final beneficiaries and recipients can continue to receive EU funding where the EU has suspended payments to a Member State due to rule of law breaches by the central government.

    o Although the Rule of law Conditionality Regulation explicitly requires Member States whose EU funds have been (partially) suspended due to rule of law breaches to respect their obligations towards final recipients and beneficiaries, in practice, the latter are often deprived of EU funding. The concept of ‘smart conditionality’ should ensure that final recipients and beneficiaries, including local and regional authorities, NGOs, students and other stakeholders, are not punished for the rule of law violations by the central government.

    The public hearing should feed into Parliament’s forthcoming implementation report on the Rule of law conditionality Regulation and the political discussions on the EU’s post-2027 multiannual financial framework by gathering input on how smart conditionality can be implemented in practice. This includes in particular the necessary legislative changes, if any, to implement the concept.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Prosecution of infringements of the Transport Regulation on the protection of animals during transport and related operations – E-001752/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-001752/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Marianne Vind (S&D)

    Article 25 of Regulation (EC) No 1/2005 requires Member States to lay down and enforce effective penalties for infringements of the rules on the protection of animals during transport. For long journeys, a journey log must be drawn up and submitted to the authority of the country of departure within one month after the journey concerned has been completed[1]. Logs identify infringements in particular. However, the regulation does not specify how authorities should act in the event of infringements outside their jurisdiction. Article 28 only stipulates that notification must be given to authorities that gave authorisation to the transport operators concerned, but not, for example, to authorities in transit countries.

    Documents provided by Animal Protection Denmark show that cases involving foreign firms are usually dropped, either because Denmark does not have jurisdiction or because of a lack of proportionality between resources and the expected penalty. The information available suggests that there are similar practices in other Member States.

    In the light of the above:

    • 1.Does the Commission have an overview of Member States’ prosecutions in these cases, and does the Commission regard it as compatible with EU law[2]for Member States not to prosecute in such situations?
    • 2.How should Member States fulfil their obligations under EU law in this respect?
    • 3.Does the Commission intend to bring infringement proceedings against Member States that fail to prosecute, or what measures is the Commission considering introducing in the forthcoming revision of the Transport Regulation so as to ensure that infringements established on the basis of return journey logs are prosecuted regardless of where they are committed and of where transport operators are based?

    Submitted: 30.4.2025

    • [1] See Annex II, point 8.
    • [2] Including Article 25 of the Transport Regulation and the duty of loyalty under Article 4(3) TFEU.
    Last updated: 8 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Conviction of opposition figures in Tunisia – E-001765/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-001765/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Tineke Strik (Verts/ALE)

    On 19 April 2025, a Tunisian court sentenced 40 people to prison sentences ranging between 13 and 66 years for conspiracy against internal and external state security[1]. Among those sentenced include journalists, opposition politicians and other individuals critical of the regime. Their conviction led to fierce criticism from civil society and legal experts, suggesting that these charges were politically motivated.

    • 1.Has the Commission monitored or engaged with the Tunisian authorities in relation to the aforementioned case, and if so, using what methods?
    • 2.On the basis of what assessment does the Commission have sufficient trust in the independence of the Tunisian judiciary, given the significant amount of EU funding benefiting the Tunisian Ministry of Justice?
    • 3.What impact will the conviction of these prominent opposition figures have on EU-Tunisia relations, notably on the inclusion of Tunisia on the recently published ‘safe countries of origin’[2] list?

    Submitted: 30.4.2025

    • [1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/apr/20/tunisia-court-prison-sentences-kais-saied.
    • [2] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_25_1070.
    Last updated: 8 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Apollo Vredestein workers fall victim to inadequate State aid rules – P-001790/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Priority question for written answer  P-001790/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Tom Berendsen (PPE)

    Just over a year from now, the Apollo Vredestein tyre factory in Enschede will close its doors and around 500 employees will lose their jobs[1]. The Indian parent company intends to move production primarily to the plant in Hungary.

    With this, the worst-case scenario has unfortuantely become reality. Like many companies in the manufacturing industry, Vredestein is suffering from higher costs, especially energy costs. At the same time, this decision seems to have been facilitated by the State aid the company received for its plant in Hungary. Concerns about this have been around for quite some time, as evidenced, inter alia, by the questions I and other colleagues have already raised about this with the Commission[2].

    The closure of Apollo Vredestein has a major impact on the 500 employees, their families and the Twente region more generally. Moreover, such developments undermine the level playing field in the Union and thus public support for European cooperation. Accordingly:

    • 1.Does the Commission still believe that all those involved in this case acted in accordance with the spirit and letter of the current State aid rules?
    • 2.Does the Commission share my view that the State aid rules should be revised so that similar situations can be avoided in the future?
    • 3.What can the Commission do to help the affected workers and the Twente region cope with this economic blow?

    Submitted: 2.5.2025

    • [1] https://www.tubantia.nl/enschede/zwarte-dag-voor-twente-vredestein-sluit-volledige-fabriek-500-medewerkers-op-straat~a4fafae3/.
    • [2] Questions for written answer E-001536/2020, P-003353/2020, E-004663/2020, E-006949/2020, E-003607/2021 and E-005190/2021.
    Last updated: 8 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Enhancing EU efforts to combat abuses in online commerce – E-001749/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-001749/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Dan-Ştefan Motreanu (PPE)

    The Commission has taken significant steps to combat abuses related to online commerce, particularly concerning the sale of non-compliant products on various online platforms. Despite the Commission’s proactive approach, including ongoing investigations and the application of the Digital Services Act, concerns remain regarding the slow response times and limited resources available for monitoring the vast number of products entering Europe via these platforms.

    The challenge is compounded by the rapid pace at which online platforms operate, making it difficult for regulatory bodies to keep up with the speed of new market entrants and the evolving nature of e-commerce. Although the Commission has undertaken numerous investigations, the time lag between identifying issues and taking corrective actions remains a significant hurdle.

    The growing concern is that the delays in addressing proven violations not only undermine consumer protection, but also hinder the fair functioning of the internal market.

    Given these challenges, what measures does the Commission intend to implement to improve the speed and efficiency of monitoring online commerce, ensure faster enforcement of regulations and better protect consumers in the digital marketplace?

    Submitted: 30.4.2025

    Last updated: 8 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Multiannual financial framework support for EU regions bordering Russia – E-001735/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-001735/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Mika Aaltola (PPE)

    Russia’s war against Ukraine has had far-reaching consequences, not only for Ukraine but also for many EU Member States, particularly those sharing a border with Russia. The economic and geopolitical impact on these border regions has been substantial.

    Currently, the allocation of EU Cohesion Fund financing is primarily based on gross domestic product, a metric that does not adequately reflect the specific challenges faced by countries such as Finland. Given Finland’s 1 350 km border with Russia, the repercussions of the conflict have been especially acute, in terms of economic, social and security concerns.

    • 1.In the light of these challenges, could the Commission consider an alternative mechanism for allocating funds to support regions bordering Russia in the upcoming multiannual financial framework?
    • 2.Additionally, given the security risks posed by Russia in the region, how does the Commission plan to ensure adequate investments in security measures?

    Submitted: 30.4.2025

    Last updated: 8 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Chemical recycling – E-001741/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-001741/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Dan-Ştefan Motreanu (PPE)

    The EU Competitiveness Compass emphasises the need for a competitive and circular European economy. However, the plastics sector faces significant challenges: EU plastics production declined by 8.3 % in 2023, while global production grew by 3.4 %. At the same time, circularity remains limited, with plastic incineration increasing by 15 % since 2018 and 23.5 % of plastic waste still landfilled. This hampers the Member States’ ability to meet EU recycling targets.

    Chemical recycling could play a vital role by boosting recycling rates, supporting circular value chains, and reducing incineration and landfill use. However, unlocking investment in chemical recycling requires a clear, trusted mass balance methodology for accounting recycled content.

    The Commission is preparing an implementing act under the Single-Use Plastics Directive to define this mass balance approach. Given its strategic importance:

    • 1.Will the Commission support the creation of a robust business case for chemical recycling, as highlighted in the Draghi report?
    • 2.How will the Commission ensure that the mass balance methodology remains technology-neutral, encouraging investments and enabling the repurposing of existing assets, such as refineries, to help lower recycling costs?

    Submitted: 30.4.2025

    Last updated: 8 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Raw materials deal between the UK and Ukraine – E-001756/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-001756/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Barbara Bonte (PfE)

    It would appear that not only the United States is showing great interest in Ukrainian critical minerals. In January, the UK reportedly signed a 100-year partnership agreement with Ukraine for the mining of critical minerals and rare earths.

    These are raw materials which are essential in many high-tech sectors and it would be nothing short of a defeat for the EU should Ukraine, despite all the EU’s support in the war with Russia, choose non-EU partners for the mining concessions. Such a move would probably weigh heavily on the Union’s strategic autonomy and technological innovation capacity for many decades to come.

    • 1.At what point was the Commission informed of the agreement between Ukraine and the UK on critical raw materials?
    • 2.Was the Commission aware of the deal between the UK and Ukraine before January 2025?
    • 3.How does the Commission see the Union’s strategic autonomy/innovation capacity evolving in the light of such raw-materials deals concluded by non-EU countries?

    Submitted: 30.4.2025

    Last updated: 8 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Urgent initiatives to review phytosanitary policies – E-001767/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-001767/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Stefano Cavedagna (ECR), Carlo Fidanza (ECR), Nicola Procaccini (ECR), Antonella Sberna (ECR), Sergio Berlato (ECR), Michele Picaro (ECR), Francesco Ventola (ECR)

    In the last few years, increasingly restrictive EU rules on pesticides have widened the competitive gap between EU agriculture and that of third countries, such as Mercosur, which have less stringent standards.

    This disparity penalises European producers, who are already working on sustainability and have been hit by structural crises linked to energy costs, labour shortages and emergencies caused by extreme weather.

    In this context, many agricultural operators are calling for a better balance between environmental requirements and economic sustainability, as well as for a more gradual and realistic approach to the introduction of new pesticide restrictions, which takes account of the time needed to develop and market effective alternative solutions.

    In the light of the above:

    • 1.What measures does the Commission intend to adopt to guarantee fair competition for EU and non-EU producers, in view of the impact of phytosanitary policies on the competitiveness of agriculture?
    • 2.What measures does the Commission plan to take to promote innovation in plant health products in full respect for the agricultural sector’s needs, while coordinating research and development on effective alternatives to the active ingredients subject to restrictions?

    Submitted: 30.4.2025

    Last updated: 8 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Use of the Signal platform in diplomatic communications – E-001740/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-001740/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Danilo Della Valle (The Left), Valentina Palmisano (The Left), Dario Tamburrano (The Left), Gaetano Pedulla’ (The Left)

    In the light of reports by qualified news sources, it appears that the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (VP/HR) and the Ministers for Foreign Affairs of some Member States use the Signal encrypted messaging platform for informal institutional communications. The European External Action Service (EEAS) has confirmed this, invoking operational confidentiality requirements.

    This situation raises concerns about compliance with Article 5(1)(a), (b) and (f) and Article 33 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 and with the guidelines of the European Union Agency for Cybersecurity (ENISA) on protecting institutional communications.

    In view of this, can the VP/HR answer the following questions:

    • 1.Was the use of the Signal platform preceded by a data protection impact assessment (DPIA) and by security audits as required by current EU legislation?
    • 2.What technical and organisation measures have been taken to ensure the confidentiality, integrity and availability of the diplomatic communications, to prevent the risk of compromise arising from informal use?
    • 3.Do they intend to issue cogent guidelines within the EEAS for the use of digital tools by institutional leaders, to avoid the improper dissemination of strategic information due to procedural or organisational failures?

    Submitted: 30.4.2025

    Last updated: 8 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Deportations of refugees from Germany to countries of first entry such as Greece – E-001763/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-001763/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Kostas Papadakis (NI), Lefteris Nikolaou-Alavanos (NI)

    The unacceptable and dangerous decision by the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany to deport two refugees to Greece, claiming that the refugees had first been granted asylum there and could secure ‘bread, bed and soap’, paves the way for mass deportations of thousands of uprooted people to countries of first entry and to Greece, on the basis of reactionary EU and government guidelines. It thus promotes the perpetuation of their being trapped in them. The decision follows the reactionary package of measures in the EU’s Pact on Migration and Asylum. This Pact, inter alia, maintains the provision for entrapping people in their country of first entry on the basis of the Dublin regulations for recognised refugees and asylum seekers.

    In view of this:

    • 1.What is the Commission’s position on the fact that the deportation by the German authorities of two recognised refugees to Greece, which constitutes an application of the Pact on Migration and Asylum, preserving the responsibility of the first country of entry under the Dublin regulations, paves the way for dangerous mass deportations to Greece and other countries of first entry?
    • 2.What is the Commission’s position on the fact that, on the basis of the above, conditions are being created for the perpetuation of the entrapment of refugees, contrary to their rights stemming from the Geneva Refugee Convention and their right to be able to travel to their countries of destination?

    Submitted: 30.4.2025

    Last updated: 8 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Assigning collection of self-employed and small professionals’ insurance debts to private collection companies – E-001761/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-001761/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Kostas Papadakis (NI)

    Law 5193/2025 on the ‘Strengthening of the Capital Market and other provisions’, led the New Democracy Government – inter alia – to assign the management and collection of the overdue debts that professionals and self-employed persons had with the National Social Security Agency [EFKA]/Social Security Debt Collection Centre [KEAO] to private debt management companies. Specifically, it invokes the objective of improving the ‘management’ and ‘collectibility’ of due insurance contributions.

    Assigning the collection of insurance debts to private companies aligns Greek legislation with EU guidelines, the memorandum obligations and directives of the ECB and the European Commission, with the stated aim of reducing bad loans. Subsequently, with the European Directive (EU) 2021/2167 on credit servicers and credit purchasers, the operation of servicers has been institutionalised at EU level.

    The transfer of insurance debts – especially the individual insurance debts of self-employed persons – to private managers will mean the intensification of extortionate collection practices, the threat of auctions and reinforced insecurity for thousands of small professionals.

    In view of this:

    • 1.What is the Commission’s position on the fact that EU guidelines and directives are shaping a legal framework that will lead hundreds of thousands of freelancers to become prey to the claws of debt collectors, funds and servicers, facing the risk of auctions and evictions from their workplaces?
    • 2.What is the Commission’s position on the fact that state social security services are being transformed into a field of activity for business groups and that registers of insured persons are being handed over to all kinds of exploitation by private individuals, with all that this entails for personal data?

    Submitted: 30.4.2025

    Last updated: 8 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Inverness gull study

    Source: Scotland – Highland Council

    The Highland Council, with input from NatureScot, have appointed an independent consultancy to undertake a baseline census and distribution study of gulls in the centre of Inverness.

    Leader of Inverness and Area, Councillor Ian Brown said: “While Highland Council has no statutory duty to take action against any type of gull, the Council hopes that the findings from this study will provide evidence for and inform any future development of a Gull Management Plan for the City of Inverness.”

    The survey will take place in May and has been designed to coincide with the start of the nesting period when gull numbers will be reaching their peak, and birds are at their most active.

    The survey will follow an adapted methodology from the Joint Nature Conservation Committee Seabird Monitoring Programme’s Urban Gull Census.

    Covering an area of over 5km2 of central Inverness from Bught Park in the south to the Kessock Bridge in the north, the survey will include the commercial heart of Inverness, the Longman Industrial Estate, Crown Circus and popular riverside locations including Eden Court Theatre, Inverness Cathedral, Inverness Castle and Ness Walk.

    The survey will also assess an additional 20 key buildings across the wider city, including the Council’s school estate.

    The work will primarily be ground-based and will count all gull species present with their location noted on mobile GIS recording software along with gull behaviour, whether nesting, occupying territory, foraging or resting.

    Information on gulls can be found on the Council’s website at this link.

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Murder of indigenous guards and ancestral wise men in Colombia – E-001750/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-001750/2025
    to the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy
    Rule 144
    Leila Chaibi (The Left)

    Representatives of the Nasa people recently denounced the willingness of armed actors to destabilise their social fabric and to take control of their territories, even referring to acts of ethnocide. According to their reports, since the 2016 peace agreement, 43 indigenous guards and 16 ancestral wise men have been killed, and many others are currently in danger. The Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples stresses that the spiritual authorities and indigenous guards are central institutions for the physical and cultural survival of these communities, and that they face intimidation, threats and killings.

    The Indigenous Guard of Cauca – Kiwe Thegnas (Defenders of Life and Territory) is a community movement of peaceful resistance, made up of women, men and children defending their territories. It has been recognised by international organisations and received the Front Line Defenders Award in 2020.

    • 1.In this context, does the European Union support the protection of indigenous peoples and their ancestral authorities?
    • 2.What specific action is it taking to protect these communities and their defence structures?
    • 3.Does it intend to give public support to the Indigenous Guard as an autonomous mechanism for indigenous peoples to ensure their protection?

    Submitted: 30.4.2025

    Last updated: 8 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – The EU directive that in practice undermines the signing of collective agreements – E-001731/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-001731/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Lefteris Nikolaou-Alavanos (NI), Kostas Papadakis (NI)

    The Nea Dimokratia Government in Greece appears to acknowledge ‘the need to meet the target of 80% coverage of workers by collective agreements’ and invokes Directive (EU) 2022/2041 on adequate minimum wages in the European Union.

    The directive, which is falsely represented as a means of ‘strengthening collective bargaining’, does not lay down any obligation to draw up collective agreements. Its only ‘obligation’ is for governments to draw up ‘action plans’. Moreover, it states that nothing in the directive may be construed as imposing an obligation on any Member State to declare any collective agreement universally applicable.

    In light of the above, can the Commission answer the following:

    • 1.What view does it take of the fact that Law 5163/2024 of the Greek Government, which fully transposes Directive (EU) 2022/2041, has led to poverty-level minimum wages and at the same time increased employer arbitrariness and organised planning by large employers to refuse to sign collective agreements or to avoid being bound by existing collective agreements through various arrangements (e.g. a refusal to set up employers’ organisations or to integrate them into employers’ organisations, etc.)?
    • 2.What view does it take of the fact that the target of ‘80% coverage of workers by collective agreements’, supposedly pursued by the directive, is not a binding objective, since the directive does not require that collective agreements are universally applicable, nor does it oblige employers to sign and implement them, and nor does it provide any monitoring or sanction mechanism for countries or companies that infringe workers’ rights, including the right to collective bargaining with employers?

    Submitted: 30.4.2025

    Last updated: 8 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Strengthening European rail infrastructure to enhance defence preparedness and strategic resilience – E-001745/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-001745/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Dan-Ştefan Motreanu (PPE)

    The Community of European Railway and Infrastructure Companies (CER) has called on political leaders, businesses and stakeholders to prioritise investment in rail infrastructure and rolling stock in order to support the EU’s defence capabilities and resilience. In the current geopolitical context, the ability to efficiently transport military assets is crucial. Railways serve as the backbone of Europe’s defence logistics, underpinning both military mobility and broader strategic objectives.

    CER’s position paper of 18 February 2025 identifies key actions needed, including expanding rail network capacity and interoperability, investing in digital systems, replenishing and adapting rolling stock for military purposes, safeguarding infrastructure against cyberthreats and hybrid threats, and strengthening intermodal connections.

    This need is even more pressing in Member States such as Romania, which, due to its proximity to conflict zones, plays a critical role in ensuring rapid and secure military mobility. Modern and resilient infrastructure in these border regions is vital for the EU’s collective security and for maintaining supply chains that are under strain.

    In the light of these strategic imperatives, what measures does the Commission intend to propose to strengthen targeted investment in rail infrastructure and military mobility, particularly in frontline Member States, to ensure Europe’s resilience and defence readiness?

    Submitted: 30.4.2025

    Last updated: 8 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Chairs appointed to Poverty and Equality Commission for Highland

    Source: Scotland – Highland Council

    Maggie Cunningham and Dr. Jim McCormick have been appointed as co-chairs of a new multi-partnership Poverty and Equality Commission Board.

    These two key appointments will be instrumental in supporting The Highland Council and Community Planning Partners in gaining a better understanding of how poverty affects families in the Highlands and how service delivery needs to change to better address poverty-related issues.

    Maggie Cunningham worked at a senior level in the BBC for over twenty years including roles of Head of Radio, Scotland and Joint Head of Programmes and Services, Scotland. She is currently Chair of An Comunn Gàidhealach, which runs the Royal National Mòd and supports 20 local Mòds.

    Since 2009, she has worked as a leadership and executive coach. She served six years as a Content Board member of Ofcom until October 2024 and chaired the Board of MG Alba for six years from 2012. She chairs Kyle and Lochalsh Community Development Trust and was an independent member of the Edinburgh Festivals Forum for eight years. She was a founding Board member of Sistema Scotland until 2019 and is a Director of Highland Tourism Community Interest Company (CIC).

    Jim McCormick is Chief Executive of The Robertson Trust, an independent grant-making charity which funds, supports and influences solutions to poverty and trauma across Scotland. He joined the Trust in 2020.

    Previously he was Associate Director Scotland with the Joseph Rowntree Foundation (2017-20), ran an independent research consultancy and was Director of the Scottish Council Foundation think-tank.

    He is a member of the Living Wage Commission. He was previously Chair of the independent Disability and Carers Benefits Advisory Group reporting to the Scottish Social Security Minister (until 2023), Chair of the Edinburgh Poverty Commission (2018-20) and a member of the Social Security Advisory Committee (SSAC) until 2020, which scrutinises the Department for Work and Pensions’ GB regulations.

    In 2018 he was a travelling Churchill Fellow looking at the impact of mentoring programmes for children and young people facing disadvantage in the USA, Canada and New Zealand.

    Leader of the Council, Cllr Raymond Bremner said: “I congratulate Maggie Cunningham and Jim McCormick on their appointments as Chairs of the Poverty and Equality Commission. Highland Councillors have given cross-party support to the creation of the Commission, and I look forward to the progressive and positive work of the Commission that will make a difference to people’s lives.”

    Convener of the Councillor, Cllr Bill Lobban added: “As non-elected independent experts the co-chair appointments will ensure that there is impartial expertise at the centre of the Commission’s Board and its activities. I welcome the Chairs’ appointments who, along with Members of the Commission Board will work to identify strategies, actions and approaches to ease and prevent poverty in Highland.”

    Leader of the Opposition, Cllr Alasdair Christie said: “I am fully supportive of the appointment of the two new chairs who will bring a breadth of knowledge and understanding to the work of the Poverty and Equality Commission. Their specialist awareness will help to support the Commission’s work which will seek to improve the lives of many individuals and children and their families across Highland communities.”

    The Poverty and Equality Commission will report directly to The Highland Council, providing recommendations for action, change and transformation. Updates from the Commission will

    In addition to the two co-chairs appointed the Commission Board will be made up of elected Highland councillors and members from public sector partner organisations, third sector or community representatives.

    The first meeting of the Poverty and Equality Commission was held on 1 May 2025 following which an update on progress to establish the Poverty and Equality Commission will be presented to The Highland Council meeting in June.

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Illegal trafficking of pesticides – E-001736/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-001736/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Benoit Cassart (Renew), Olivier Chastel (Renew), Hilde Vautmans (Renew)

    In June 2024, Europol, supported by Italian, Romanian, Spanish and Portuguese authorities, conducted two major operations to combat the trafficking of illegal pesticides in the EU. The first investigation focused on a company importing counterfeit pesticides from China, while the second investigation targeted a Spanish company illegally importing Portuguese pesticides banned in Spain under the cover of fake denomination of the products.

    The EU Serious and Organised Crime Threat Assessment report entitled ‘The changing DNA of serious and organised crime’ underlines the growing concerns over the trade in counterfeit and illicit pesticides produced in and imported from Asia to the EU, but also highlights EU-based production networks with advanced equipment operating within the EU.

    What actions does the Commission intend to take to combat the illegal trafficking of pesticides, mitigate the negative impact on the environment and ensure the protection of European consumers?

    Submitted: 30.4.2025

    Last updated: 8 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Advancing EU efforts to fully implement the rights of persons with disabilities – E-001744/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-001744/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Dan-Ştefan Motreanu (PPE)

    A recent report by the European Disability Forum (EDF) highlights areas where the EU could further strengthen its compliance with the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), ratified by the EU in 2011. The report points to challenges such as the need for more systematic assessments of legislation’s impact on persons with disabilities, a more robust anti-discrimination framework and the removal of remaining barriers to freedom of movement and political participation.

    While significant progress has been made, the EDF underlines the opportunity for the EU to adopt a more coherent and ambitious approach to promote the rights of the 100 million Europeans with disabilities. Strengthening these rights is essential not only for upholding fundamental values of dignity, equality and inclusion, but also for enabling millions of citizens to participate fully in society, education, employment and democratic life.

    In this context, and in view of the upcoming UN review, what further measures does the Commission intend to take to strengthen the protection of the rights of persons with disabilities and ensure the full and effective implementation of the CRPD at EU level?

    Submitted: 30.4.2025

    Last updated: 8 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Potential fraudulent exploitation of Erasmus+ funds – E-001738/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-001738/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Danuše Nerudová (PPE)

    Media reports have highlighted that certain organisations, including the Turkish organisation Zift, may be potentially misusing the Erasmus+ programme. A recurring scheme reportedly involves the recruitment of individuals – often students – to establish non-governmental organisations or so-called informal youth groups in their names. Such entities are then allegedly used to apply for grants, while actual control and financial management remain with the recruiting organisations. Reports suggest that these actors have submitted inflated budgets, misrepresented expenses and diverted funds through affiliated companies, often without providing the intended educational or cultural activities. When these projects collapse, the students – who are listed as legal representatives – are said to be left financially and legally liable.

    • 1.What measures is the Commission taking to strengthen financial oversight and prevent the potential exploitation of Erasmus+ funds by fraudulent organisations?
    • 2.Is the Commission considering reforms to enhance auditing, accountability and enforcement mechanisms within Erasmus+, particularly to address the risks posed by intermediary actors involved in such schemes?

    Submitted: 30.4.2025

    Last updated: 8 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Gaza ceasefire, humanitarian aid and reconstruction – E-001245/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    The European Union welcomes the Arab Recovery and Reconstruction Plan endorsed at the Cairo Summit on 4 March 2025 and is ready to engage with Arab partners, as well as with other international partners, on that basis[1].

    Any plan for the future of Gaza must provide credible solutions for reconstruction, governance and security. Recovery and reconstruction efforts must be based upon a solid political and security framework acceptable to both Israelis and Palestinians, which provides peace and security to both sides. The EU is determined that there must be no future role for Hamas in Gaza’s governance.

    In that context, the EU continues to support the Palestinian Authority and its reform agenda, also to help it prepare for its return to govern Gaza.

    On 14 April 2025, the Commission announced a multiannual Comprehensive Support Programme worth up to EUR 1.6 billion, to foster Palestinian recovery and resilience[2]. While no specific EU budget exists to support reconstruction yet, the Commission is committed to exploring available instruments to establish a contribution once conditions permit.

    The EU deplores the breakdown of the ceasefire in Gaza and calls for an immediate return to the full implementation of the ceasefire-hostage release agreement[3].

    The EU has continuously supported the efforts by the mediators and urges the parties to swiftly find a solution to prevent further loss of life.

    The EU has repeatedly called for humanitarian aid access and distribution, as well as the supply of electricity to Gaza, to be resumed immediately[4].

    • [1] https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/viyhc2m4/20250320-european-council-conclusions-en.pdf
    • [2] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_25_1055
    • [3] https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/viyhc2m4/20250320-european-council-conclusions-en.pdf
    • [4] https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/viyhc2m4/20250320-european-council-conclusions-en.pdf https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/statement_25_1052
    Last updated: 8 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – The future of public interventions in price setting for the supply of electricity – E-000929/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    Article 5 of the Electricity Directive[1] provides that suppliers are free to determine the price at which they supply electricity to customers .

    It also provides that Member States may derogate from this provision and implement public i nterventions on price setting under specific conditions[2]. Such interventions must be notified to the Commission.

    Member States were required by the directive to submit reports by 1 January 2025 to the Commission on the implementation of Article 5, the necessity and proportionality of public interventions, and an assessment of the progress towards achieving effective competition and the transition to market-based prices. By now, the Commission has received 14 reports from the Member States[3].

    The Commission is required by 31 December 2025 to review and submit a report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the implementation of Article 5 together with or followed by a legislative proposal, if appropriate.

    This report will be based on the reports submitted by each Member State and on a study on the post-crisis retail market which the Commission is currently steering. It is not possible for the time being to prejudge any of the conclusions of the study or the report.

    • [1] Directive (EU) 2019/944 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 June 2019 on common rules for the internal market for electricity and amending Directive 2012/27/EU, OJ L 158, 14.6.2019, p. 125-199.
    • [2] Defined in Article 5 of the Electricity Directive (EU) 2019/944.
    • [3] Austria, Belgium, Germany, Estonia, Spain, Finland, France, Hungary, Ireland, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia.
    Last updated: 8 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Addressing problems relating to the Greece-Cyprus electricity interconnection project – E-001111/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    The Commission is well informed of the latest developments concerning the Great Sea Interconnector project and the associated risks regarding the project implementation schedule.

    The Commission is in regular contact with the Greek and Cypriot authorities, at both Ministerial and technical level, as well as with the energy regulatory authorities of the two countries and the project promoter.

    As a project of common interest under the regulation (EU) 2022/869 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2022 on guidelines for trans-European energy infrastructure (‘TEN-E Regulation’)[1], the Great Sea Interconnector continues to have the full support of the European Commission, as it is intended to end the energy isolation of Cyprus, allow for a higher share of renewables in its energy mix, bring the potential to lower energy prices for consumers and increase the security of energy supply of two EU Member States and the EU system altogether.

    Projects of common interest are closely monitored by the Commission and there are regular contacts with both governments concerned. So far, the designation of a European coordinator under Article 6 of the TEN-E Regulation has not been considered for the project in question.

    • [1] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2022/869/oj
    Last updated: 8 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Job losses in the German automotive industry – Commission countermeasures – E-001251/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    The Commission is fully aware that the European automotive sector is facing a critical turning point. The sector is undergoing a structural transformation as the global shift to clean and digital mobility is accelerating, while rapid technological changes and increasing competition are posing significant challenges.

    At the same time, the sector faces global supply chain risks and dependencies on raw materials and battery imports, an over-reliance on fossil fuels, fierce competition for talent, cost gaps in key inputs, and an increasingly volatile geopolitical context.

    This is why, on 5 March 2025, the Commission adopted an Industrial Action Plan for the European automotive sector, building on the Strategic Dialogue on the Future of the European Automotive Industry[1].

    The action plan stresses that the CO2 standards provide long-term certainty and predictability for investors along the value chain, while allowing sufficient lead time for a fair transition.

    It sets out a comprehensive set of measures to ensure a fair and socially equitable transition in the sector and to guarantee its international competitiveness, prioritising high-quality jobs and supporting workers through the changes ahead.

    To address the employment challenges that come with the transition, the EU has already put in place various initiatives, such as funding from the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+) and the European Globalisation Fund for Displaced Workers (EGF).

    In 2026, support through Erasmus+ grants of up to EUR 90 million will be made available for the relevant Large-Scale Skills Partnerships, including the one for the automotive sector . The Commission will also set up a European Fair Transition Observatory, which will identify future job risks and skills gaps.

    • [1] https://transport.ec.europa.eu/document/download/89b3143e-09b6-4ae6-a826-932b90ed0816_en?filename=Communication%20-%20Action%20Plan.pdf

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Access to open air areas for young organic poultry – E-001189/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    Access to open air areas for poultry for at least one third of their life is one of the key features for the organic production of poultry and iconographic images of this requirement are often used as a marketing tool.

    Rules on access to open air areas for poultry were reviewed by Regulation (EU) 2018/848 on organic production and labelling of organic products[1] following the recommendations of the Expert Group for Technical Advice on Organic Production[2].

    Regulation (EU) 2018/848 provides a certain flexibility in the implementation of continuous daytime open-air access for poultry in relation to the physiological and physical conditions of the birds (feather coverage) or temporary animal health restrictions imposed on the basis of EU legislation but does not cover permanent structural settings without any access to open air areas or only access to verandas[3].

    Article 14 of Regulation (EU) 2018/848 empowers the Commission to set minimum surfaces for outdoor areas for poultry production. Annex I part IV to Regulation (EU) 2020/464[4] sets minimum outdoors area surfaces for different categories of poultry that may be adapted by Member States. Article 26(7) of that regulation[5] sets transitional periods for poultry producers to adapt in case where structural changes are needed.

    The current regulatory framework provides high animal welfare standards for organic production in the EU.

    • [1] http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2018/848/2024-12-01
    • [2] https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/document/download/580c76bb-6cef-4183-9713-28afaa983161_en?filename=final_report_on_poultry.pdf
    • [3] Points 1.6.5 and 1.9.4.4 of Part II of Annex II to Regulation (EU) 2018/848 ‘1.6.5. Open air areas may be partially covered. Verandas shall not be considered as open air areas. 1.9.4.4 (h) open air areas for poultry shall be covered mainly with vegetation’.
    • [4] http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2020/464/2021-11-25
    • [5] http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2020/464/oj Article 26(7) of Regulation (EU) 2020/464: ‘7. By way of derogation from Section 2 of Part IV of Annex I to this regulation, for holdings or production units producing pullets in poultry facilities built, refurbished or brought into use before the date of entry into application of this regulation in compliance with Regulations (EC) No 834/2007 and (EC) No 889/2008 and for which major adaptations of the structure of the poultry houses or additional land acquisition are necessary to comply with the rules of Section 2 of Part IV of Annex I to this regulation, shall comply with the stocking density and the minimum surface of indoor and outdoor areas for pullets and brother roosters laid down in Section 2 of Part IV of Annex I to this regulation as from 1 January 2030 at the latest’.
    Last updated: 8 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Green harvesting – E-001016/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    Since January 2023, green harvesting in the wine sector is regulated by Articles 58(1)(c) and 59(3) of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115[1] and Article 17 of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2022/126[2].

    During the previous programming period (2014-2022), the Commission provided examples of eligible costs for green harvesting. As the intervention has not changed, Member States can rely on these examples when calculating the Union financial support for green harvesting under Regulation (EU) 2021/2115.

    The approach described by the Honourable Member could be adopted by a Member State, provided the aforementioned legal provisions are respected. Beneficiaries are invited to directly contact their competent authorities with a view to receiving examples of calculation methods.

    • [1] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/2115/oj/eng
    • [2] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/search.html?scope=EURLEX&text=Regulation+%28EU%29+2022%2F126+.&lang=en&type=quick&qid=1745908469522
    Last updated: 8 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Struggling farmers and livestock breeders – E-001030/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    1. The Commission is fully aware of the challenges faced by many farmers, including in Greece. To address these challenges, the Vision for Agriculture and Food presented on 19 February 2025[1] contains an ambitious roadmap towards an agri-food system that is attractive, competitive, future-oriented, sustainable and fair for current and future generations, including trade and simplification. In particular, the work on the livestock and the simplification package, will look at improving the competitiveness and resilience of the livestock sector.

    2. The current Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) supports interventions that help farmers implement actions to prevent crisis situations and build on medium and long-term resilience. The CAP Strategic Plan 2023-2027 (CSP)[2] for Greece includes tools to support farmers to mitigate short-term impacts, such as direct payments, sectoral and rural development interventions aiming to stabilise farmers’ incomes. In addition, the CSP envisages also support for investments to restore agricultural potential following natural disasters, adverse climatic or catastrophic events.

    Regarding the requests for input subsidies and State guaranteed prices, the Commission is and remains in favour of market orientation. In this context, the Vision states that farmers must get a better revenue from the market and that for this they need to benefit from a fair and equitable food chain. To this end, the Commission already on 10 December 2024[3] adopted a proposal to rebalance the positions in the chain and it will consider further initiatives.

    Other suggestions in relation to taxes, or pensions are largely in the remit of the national authorities or control bodies.

    • [1]  https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/vision-agriculture-food_en#:~:text=Shaping%20the%20future%20of%20farming%20and%20the%20agri-food,entire%20value%20chain%20within%20the%20EU%20and%20globally
    • [2]  https://www.agrotikianaptixi.gr/category/sskap-2023-2027/sskap-egkrisi-tropopoiiseis/
    • [3]  COM(2024) 576 and 577 final.
    Last updated: 8 May 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News –