Question for written answer E-001373/2025 to the Commission Rule 144 Barry Cowen (Renew)
The European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) is seeking the power to intervene in cross-border insurance sales. The change sought will give EIOPA the same powers as national supervisory authorities.
There have been some striking examples of EIOPA being less than open and transparent regarding its operations. In the last parliamentary term, a report produced by EIOPA was not shared with Members, making it impossible for Parliament to reach an informed opinion on the case.
Will the Commission commit to establishing mandatory transparency requirements regarding any increase in EIOPA’s powers to intervene in cross-border insurance sales?
Question for written answer E-001341/2025 to the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Rule 144 Bert-Jan Ruissen (ECR), Miriam Lexmann (PPE), Sebastian Tynkkynen (ECR), Carlo Fidanza (ECR)
According to the non-governmental organisation Coptic Solidarity[1], Coptic girls and women in Egypt are the victims of a hidden epidemic. Coptic girls and women are often subjected to abduction, rape, forced marriage and forced conversion to Islam. Copts make up around 9 % of Egypt’s population. Islam is Egypt’s state religion, and Sharia is the country’s principle source of legislation. Deadly attacks by Islamist mobs on Coptic Christians are not uncommon. Nor are attacks on churches. However, the violence suffered by Coptic girls and women is not widely known. According to Egyptian law, no one under 18 is permitted to marry. However, this law proves easy to circumvent. Moreover, marital rape is not recognised as such. Coptic girls and women can therefore be abducted, forced to marry, forced to convert to Islam and raped; they do not have any legal protection.
1.Is the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (VP/HR) aware of the reported violence against Coptic women and girls?
2.What is the VP/HR’s political response to this, and is the protection of minorities, especially Copts, a priority in dialogue and diplomacy with Egypt?
3.How will the VP/HR urge the Egyptian Government to take all the measures necessary to end this violence against Coptic girls and women?
Question for written answer E-001354/2025 to the Commission Rule 144 Tilly Metz (Verts/ALE)
On 16 September 2021, Parliament adopted a resolution calling to ‘accelerate the transition to innovation without the use of animals in research, regulatory testing and education’[1]. This resolution urged the development of an action plan with ambitious objectives, concrete targets for reduction and clear timelines for replacement.
This call was amplified further in 2022, as over 1.2 million citizens supported the European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI) ‘Save Cruelty Free Cosmetics – Commit to a Europe Without Animal Testing’.
In response, in July 2023, the Commission launched the development of a roadmap towards phasing out animal testing for chemical safety assessment. A draft proposal for this roadmap is set to be presented during a stakeholder workshop on 16 and 17 June 2025.
Could the Commission clarify the following:
1.Will the roadmap be published this year?
2.How will its implementation be ensured (e.g. through the revision of the REACH Regulation or through the Chemical Industry Package)?
Submitted: 2.4.2025
[1] European Parliament resolution of 16 September 2021 on plans and actions to accelerate the transition to innovation without the use of animals in research, regulatory testing and education (OJ C 117, 11.3.2022, p. 84).
Question for written answer E-001325/2025 to the Commission Rule 144 Jaroslav Bžoch (PfE), Petr Bystron (ESN), Filip Turek (PfE), Jaroslava Pokorná Jermanová (PfE), Petra Steger (PfE), Diana Iovanovici Şoşoacă (NI), Virginie Joron (PfE), Jana Nagyová (PfE), Tobiasz Bocheński (ECR), Tom Vandendriessche (PfE), Gerolf Annemans (PfE), Adrian-George Axinia (ECR), Klara Dostalova (PfE), Gheorghe Piperea (ECR), Vilis Krištopans (PfE), Elisabeth Dieringer (PfE), Ondřej Krutílek (ECR), Veronika Vrecionová (ECR), Alexandr Vondra (ECR), Tomáš Kubín (PfE)
On 29 January 2025, the Commission presented ‘A Competitiveness Compass for the EU’, an economic framework to guide its work in the coming years. One of its aims is to simplify EU legislation and thus strengthen the competitiveness of EU businesses in the global economy. Yet concerns have been raised about the impact of current legislation, particularly the Digital Markets Act (DMA), on the competitiveness of EU businesses, especially small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) that rely on online platforms in terms of advertising. This is occurring despite evidence supporting the positive impact of digital advertising on the EU economy.
Given this context:
1.Can the Commission explain the economic rationale for introducing measures that may undermine the ability of advertisers, particularly SMEs, to conduct business effectively online through personalised ads?
2.What evidence from the Commission’s analysis supports the claim that restricting personalised ads will not lead to increased costs for advertisers using online platforms?
3.If the Commission’s intention is to provide users with an alternative option, does the Commission believe that subscription models, as highlighted by the Court of Justice of the EU, are sufficient for addressing concerns regarding the DMA?
Question for written answer E-001296/2025 to the Commission Rule 144 Jorge Buxadé Villalba (PfE)
The President of the PRISA Group, Joseph Oughourlian, has accused Spanish Prime Minister, Pedro Sánchez, in an El País column[1] of using public companies to take control of that group. Oughourlian alludes to the Spanish Government’s efforts as largest shareholder of Telefónica[2] to take control of the media belonging to the PRISA Group[3]. Telefónica has received public EU money in the form of subsidies granted by the Commission.
In the light of this alarming state of affairs:
1.What aid has Telefónica and the PRISA Group received in the last 10 years and which EU programmes and funds has it benefited from?
2.How much in total has been allocated from the EU budget to those companies?
3.When will the Commission end its complicity in the social Spanish Government’s assault on democracy and the rule of law?
Priority question for written answer P-001374/2025/rev.1 to the Commission Rule 144 Branko Grims (PPE)
Shocking information from the new US administration shows that the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) funds were clearly misused to promote ‘woke’ ideology (cultural Marxism) during the last presidential term. USAID has paid money to more than 6 000 journalists (media) and hundreds of NGOs, and many of them were in the EU.
The Commission emphasises the need to fight corruption and foreign interference in elections. To our knowledge, no other interference in EU elections has been as systematic and widespread as the imposition of a left-wing agenda through USAID. While Joe Biden was in office, the leftists apparently turned USAID into a money laundering operation for the dissemination of ‘woke’ propaganda via the far-left media and NGOs corrupted by this money. For this reason, an independent investigation should be carried out into this corrupt money and its impact on EU policies and EU elections.
I am asking the Commission when it will open an investigation into who in the EU received USAID funds during the last presidential term, for what purpose, how they were spent, what the impact of said funds was on EU policy-making and on the functioning of EU institutions, and what the impact of this blatantly corrupt money was on elections in the EU and in EU Member States. When and how will the findings of this investigation be made public?
Priority question for written answer P-001395/2025 to the Commission Rule 144 Daniel Buda (PPE)
In its Communication of 1 April on the review of cohesion policy 2021-2027, the Commission proposes a reorientation of funds towards strategic priorities such as water resilience, the digitisation of water infrastructure and the ecological transition.
It refers to Member States being able to invest in the digitisation of water networks and in mitigating the effects of drought and desertification, which are key factors affecting European agriculture, especially in the vulnerable regions of Eastern Europe.
The circumstances make support for smart irrigation systems all the more relevant, including support for systems that harness treated urban waste water, as a sustainable solution for preserving water resources and reducing the pressure on natural water sources. These systems make a significant contribution to the agricultural water cycle and to adapting to climate change.
1.In the light of these new guidelines, can the Commission state whether it is possible for smart irrigation systems, which are digital and water- and energy-efficient, to be considered eligible for funding from the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) as part of the mid-term review?
2.More precisely, is it possible for these technologies – which simultaneously contribute to water resilience, digitisation and the green transition – to be built into the new cohesion programmes to be implemented from 2026?
The Commission monitors the situation of media freedom and pluralism in all Member States in its annual Rule of Law Reports[1]. It takes into account the 2021 Recommendation on the Safety of Journalists[2] which recommended Member States to ensure that public authorities create transparent, fair and non-discriminatory conditions for journalists regarding access to press conferences and documents.
The Rule of Law Report is prepared in continuous dialogue with the 27 Member States and is based on a transparent methodology, developed in consultation with the Member States in full respect of the principles of equal treatment, impartiality and objectivity. It relies on a broad variety of sources.
As regards the country chapter for Poland of the 2023 Rule of Law Report[3], to which the Honourable Member refers, it briefly and factually mentions concerns raised about the case of Pablo González under the pillar of media freedom, without taking a position.
For more details, the Commission refers the Honourable Member to its answers to parliamentary questions E-001534/2024, E-001545/2024 and E-003062/2024.
Priority question for written answer P-001388/2025 to the Commission Rule 144 Biljana Borzan (S&D)
According to Article 38 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, ‘agricultural products’ include products of the soil and products of first-stage processing of those primary products. Extra virgin and virgin olive oils are obtained solely by mechanical means, without chemical treatment, suggesting they could be classified as either primary agricultural products or products of first-stage processing.
However, there appears to be ambiguity in how this classification is interpreted across Member States. This has led to inconsistencies in regulatory and tax treatment for olive oil producers, which may create obstacles to the proper functioning of the internal market.
1.Can the Commission clarify whether extra virgin and virgin olive oils are considered primary agricultural products or processed products under EU law?
2.Are there specific legal acts – regulations, directives or delegated acts – that explicitly define the classification of these oils?
3.How does the Commission intend to ensure that this classification is interpreted uniformly across Member States, to avoid distortions in the market?
Question for written answer E-001328/2025 to the Commission Rule 144 Alexandr Vondra (ECR), Ondřej Krutílek (ECR), Kosma Złotowski (ECR), Carlo Fidanza (ECR), Ondřej Kovařík (PfE), Klara Dostalova (PfE), Aurelijus Veryga (ECR), Veronika Vrecionová (ECR), Alessandro Ciriani (ECR), Miriam Lexmann (PPE), Stefano Cavedagna (ECR), Tobiasz Bocheński (ECR), Roman Haider (PfE), Pietro Fiocchi (ECR), Charlie Weimers (ECR), Dick Erixon (ECR), Beatrice Timgren (ECR), Adrian-George Axinia (ECR), Tomáš Kubín (PfE), Bogdan Rzońca (ECR), Kristoffer Storm (ECR), Milan Uhrík (ESN), Diana Iovanovici Şoşoacă (NI), Marlena Maląg (ECR), Anna Zalewska (ECR), Jaroslav Bžoch (PfE), Sebastian Tynkkynen (ECR), Filip Turek (PfE), Tomáš Zdechovský (PPE), Jadwiga Wiśniewska (ECR), Daniel Obajtek (ECR), Sander Smit (PPE), Elena Donazzan (ECR), Waldemar Tomaszewski (ECR), Engin Eroglu (Renew), Denis Nesci (ECR), Piotr Müller (ECR), Ivaylo Valchev (ECR), Christine Singer (Renew), Laurence Trochu (ECR), Mariateresa Vivaldini (ECR), Diego Solier (ECR), Francesco Torselli (ECR), Marion Maréchal (ECR), Alberico Gambino (ECR), Jana Nagyová (PfE), Anna Maria Cisint (PfE), Petr Bystron (ESN)
The industrial action plan for the European automotive sector notes that the Commission ‘has started work on a legislative proposal to decarbonise corporate fleets, with the aim of setting out measures to support the uptake of zero-emission vehicles by corporate buyers, without putting unnecessary burden on small and medium-sized enterprises, and taking into account criteria on sustainability and resilience.’[1]
In its response to the public consultation on the future of the automotive industry of 13 February 2025, the European Automobile Manufacturers Association, representing Europe’s major carmakers, stated that ‘introducing mandatory EU-wide targets for corporate fleets for light-duty vehicles is not seen as appropriate to solve the problem of demand (…)’.[2]
Given that a free market economy has consistently proven to be the most effective driver of economic growth, and that any state or EU intervention often entails unintended negative consequences:
1.Does the Commission intend to introduce mandatory targets for electric vehicles in corporate fleets as part of its decarbonisation efforts?
2.Were mandatory targets discussed or requested by stakeholders, particularly representatives of the automotive industry, during the Strategic Dialogue?
Submitted: 1.4.2025
[1] Commission communication of 5 March 2025 entitled ‘Industrial Action Plan for the European automotive sector’ COM(2025)0095).
Question for written answer E-001349/2025 to the Commission Rule 144 Marlena Maląg (ECR)
According to information from the Ministry of Family, Labour and Social Policy, collective redundancies involving nearly 15 000 employees were announced in the first two months of 2025 alone. These affect sectors in which Poland was the EU market leader, such as the furniture industry, as well as strategic state-owned companies and the transport sector. In many cases, there are also serious concerns about respect for workers’ rights and collective bargaining agreements. However, according to the current Directive (EU) 2022/2041, Member States are obliged to promote and strengthen collective bargaining agreements. According to several sources, only 10 to 15 per cent of employees in Poland are subject to collective bargaining agreements.
I therefore ask the Commission:
1.Is the Commission monitoring the increasing number of collective redundancies in Poland?
2.Does the Commission believe that a breach of the obligation to promote collective labour agreements pursuant to Directive (EU) 2022/2041 has occurred?
3.Following these redundancies, has the Commission received any applications concerning the possible provision of support to employees as part of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund?
The Honourable Member is informed that the Council has not discussed the issue raised in his questions as the right of initiative for proposals for the next Multiannual Financial Framework and the corresponding legislation falls within the Commission’s sphere of competence.
The Honourable Member is therefore invited to put these questions to the Commission.
The Honourable Member is invited to put the first question to the Commission, as the proposal for the next Multiannual Financial Framework falls within its sphere of competence.
As regards the second question asked by the Honourable Member, the Council devotes special attention to islands. In its conclusions from December 2023 on the future of cohesion policy (16230/23), the Council stressed the importance of cohesion policy remaining a key pillar of the EU and mentions island regions as needing particular attention.
The promotion and protection of human rights are at the core of the EU’s engagement with third states and among the key objectives of its external action.
In order to put human rights at the core of its action, the EU has developed a broad range of legal and policy instruments, including the Guidelines on Human Rights Dialogues[1] adopted in 2021, which serve as guiding reference.
Human Rights Dialogues are one of the main means of implementation of the EU external human rights policy as outlined in the Joint Communication to the European Parliament and the Council ‘Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy 2020-2024’[2], which has been extended to 2027[3].
In line with the Lisbon Treaty and the role of the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (Art. 27(2) TEU[4]), the EEAS leads these dialogues.
Human rights dialogues are embedded in the overall political relationship with third states. As set out in the Joint Communication to the European Parliament and the Council ‘A Strategic Partnership with the Gulf’[5] and the relevant Council conclusions[6], the promotion and protection of human rights remains at the core of EU’s engagement with the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) and its Member States.
The EU conducts regular Human Rights Dialogues with the Members States of the GCC and discusses human rights issues as part of the political engagement with them.
The priorities set out in the action plan on Human Rights and Democracy guide those discussions. When relevant, individual cases are raised during the dialogues .
Question for written answer E-001321/2025 to the Commission Rule 144 Tiago Moreira de Sá (PfE), Tom Vandendriessche (PfE), Roberto Vannacci (PfE), Nicolas Bay (ECR), Nikola Bartůšek (PfE), Hermann Tertsch (PfE), Alexander Sell (ESN), António Tânger Corrêa (PfE), Zsuzsanna Borvendég (ESN), Diana Iovanovici Şoşoacă (NI), Malika Sorel (PfE), Irmhild Boßdorf (ESN)
The Commission is channelling millions of euro in EU taxpayers’ money into supporting South Africa, while politicians such as Julius Malema, a member of South Africa’s National Assembly and leader of the Economic Freedom Fighters party, sing murderous chants such as ‘Kill the Boer’, inciting the genocide of white farmers, and South African President Cyril Ramaphosa of the African National Congress stands by, complicit, as this minority is being destroyed. The Commission recently announced EUR 4.4 billion in support from the Global Gateway strategy for ‘fair and clean’ energy transition projects in South Africa. In this regard:
1.What financial and technical criteria have been adopted, providing all the effective cost-benefit studies, for the allocation of this Commission aid package to South Africa?
2.How is the Commission planning to protect the human rights of citizens of South Africa’s white minority against the violence to which they have been subjected, and against the new threats from several South African politicians?
3.How does this support for a regime that allows racial hatred fit into the specific principles of the Global Gateway, namely those concerning democracy, good governance and transparency, as well as the security of citizens?
This new financing addresses the country’s urgent recovery needs for water facilities; district heating; and reconstruction of social infrastructure, such as schools, housing and hospitals.
These agreements build on the €2.2 billion in emergency and recovery support that the EIB Group has already provided to Ukraine since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion.
Today, EIB President Nadia Calviño, Vice-President Teresa Czerwińska and Ukrainian Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal met to accelerate support for Ukraine with the implementation of three new EIB projects worth €300 million. The meeting and signing took place at the headquarters of the European Commission in Brussels, with the participation of EU High Representative and European Commission Vice-President Kaja Kallas, Commissioners Marta Kos and Valdis Dombrovskis. The financing, signed today, is backed by guarantees under the EU’s Ukraine Facility and supports Ukraine’s recovery efforts, including the restoration of essential public infrastructure and services. It follows the guarantee agreement approved just month ago with the European Commission unlocking €2 billion of investments.
These new projects build on the EIB Group’s numerous programmes across the country, reinforcing critical infrastructure such as heating and water to ensure the delivery of essential municipal services and support the functioning of the economy. Communities and households across Ukraine – particularly those affected by the destruction of key infrastructure such as the Kakhovka Dam – will benefit directly from these investments.
As highlighted during President Calviño’s visit to Kyiv in February, this €300 million investment will help to rebuild social and municipal facilities affected by the war and to improve access to heating, water and sanitation. The package includes:
€100 million for the Ukraine Recovery III project
€100 million for the Ukraine Water Recovery project
€100 million for the Ukraine District Heating Ukreximbank project
Ukrainian Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal said: “I am grateful to the European Investment Bank for its substantial support of the Ukrainian Government’s efforts to ensure the rapid recovery of our country. This is not only about rebuilding what has been destroyed, but also about creating modern, resilient, and energy-efficient infrastructure. Each of the projects launched today is an investment in the development of Ukrainian communities, the stability of our economy, and the secure European future of our nation.”
EIB President Nadia Calviño said: “Just one month ago, we signed a guarantee agreement with the European Commission to unlock €2 billion of support under the EU’s Ukraine Facility. And already today, we have signed three new projects with the Ukrainian government: for water, district heating, and municipal infrastructure — for schools, hospitals, and housing for internally displaced people. This is Europe at its best, speeding up support to reinforce our collective security and strong partnerships.”
“These investments will help ensure that schools, social housing, hospitals, heating, water and energy infrastructure continue to function for millions of Ukrainians despite the challenges of war. Together with our EU partners, we are working to deliver concrete support where it is needed most,” added EIB Vice-President Teresa Czerwińska, who oversees the Bank’s operations in Ukraine.
European Commissioner for Enlargement Marta Kos said: “The European Union’s support for Ukraine is a cornerstone of our broader approach to European security and resilience. By backing EIB investments through the Ukraine Facility, we are enabling the swift reconstruction of essential infrastructure, from schools and hospitals to energy. These efforts are not just about recovery; they are a strategic investment in a secure and democratic Ukraine on its EU path. Ukraine’s reconstruction is Europe’s responsibility, and part of our shared future.”
European Commissioner for Economy and Productivity, Implementation and Simplification Valdis Dombrovskis said: “The European Commission and the EIB Group continue to work together to deliver crucial support to Ukraine and its people in the face of Russia’s brutal, full-scale invasion. Today’s agreements will provide a further €300 million in financing to address Ukraine’s urgent recovery and reconstruction needs. This includes repairing critical infrastructure and ensuring essential public services like water and heating are maintained. This sends a clear signal that the EU is delivering on its commitments to Ukraine and its people.”
Rebuilding social infrastructure and essential services
The €100 million Ukraine Recovery III project will help to rehabilitate critical social infrastructure in over 100 communities across Ukraine. It will provide access to essential services including healthcare, education, social housing, water supply, sewerage and heating.
Improving access to safe water and sanitation
The €100 million Ukraine Water Recovery project will provide financing to repair and modernise water supply and wastewater treatment systems damaged by the war. Many communities across Ukraine have experienced severe disruptions to their access to safe drinking water and sanitation. This investment will help restore and secure access to clean water and essential sanitation services, contributing to better living conditions and public health for millions of Ukrainians.
Ensuring reliable district heating services in Ukraine
The €100 million Ukraine District Heating Ukreximbank project will be implemented in cooperation with Ukreximbank, which will act as an intermediary bank for on-lending to local authorities. The project will help to restore and improve district heating infrastructure across Ukraine. Investments will focus on decentralised heat generation, renewable energy solutions, and energy efficiency in public buildings. The project will enable outdated or damaged heat generation facilities to be restored and protected quickly to guarantee the supply of critical services during the winter and to improve Ukraine’s energy security.
“Ukreximbank’s ongoing partnership with the European Investment Bank, particularly through the Ukraine District Heating project, directly addresses the urgent need to boost energy efficiency in municipalities in order to lead them towards energy decentralisation and to enhance reliance on renewable energy sources. We are grateful for the EIB’s unwavering support for Ukraine and decades-long partnership with Ukreximbank in delivering large-scale social impact projects,” said Chairman of Ukreximbank’s Management Board Viktor Ponomarenko.
Background information
The EIB in Ukraine
The EIB Group has supported Ukraine’s resilience, economy and recovery efforts since the first days of Russia’s full-scale invasion, with €2.2 billion already disbursed since 2022. The Bank continues to focus on securing Ukraine’s energy supply, restoring damaged infrastructure and maintaining essential public services across the country. Under a guarantee agreement signed with the European Commission, the EIB is set to invest at least €2 billion more in urgent recovery and reconstruction. This funding is part of the European Union’s €50 billion Ukraine Facility for 2024–2027 and is fully aligned with the priorities of the Ukrainian government.
Question for written answer E-001346/2025 to the Commission Rule 144 Tomáš Zdechovský (PPE), Danuše Nerudová (PPE), Filip Turek (PfE), Ondřej Kolář (PPE), Virginijus Sinkevičius (Verts/ALE), Liudas Mažylis (PPE), Rasa Juknevičienė (PPE), Maria Grapini (S&D), Inese Vaidere (PPE)
In the light of the ongoing sanctions against the Russian Federation and the EU’s broader efforts to reduce dependence on Russian military technology, the continued use of Russian military helicopters in 13 Member States raises significant concerns. These concerns are particularly pressing given the geopolitical situation, the need to uphold the integrity of the sanctions regime, and the EU’s commitment to ensuring the security and resilience of its defence systems. Dependence on Russian military equipment not only poses potential risks to the safety and security of EU citizens but may also undermine collective efforts to reduce strategic vulnerabilities within the Union.
1.How does the Commission assess the risks associated with the continued operation of these helicopters, particularly regarding the safety of EU citizens and compliance with the sanctions regime?
2.Does the Commission plan to take concrete steps to expedite their replacement with equipment that is not reliant on Russia?
3.What support or guidance can the Commission provide to Member States to facilitate this transition in a timely and coordinated manner?
Question for written answer E-001342/2025 to the Commission Rule 144 Pál Szekeres (PfE), Malika Sorel (PfE), Tomáš Zdechovský (PPE), Tom Vandendriessche (PfE), Marie Dauchy (PfE), Miriam Lexmann (PPE)
The Council approved Directive 2024/2841 establishing the European disability card and the European parking card for persons with disabilities, marking a significant advancement in promoting the free movement of individuals with disabilities across the EU. By providing a harmonised framework, the initiative seeks to strengthen the inclusion of people with disabilities within the European single market and promote their social participation.
1.When are the implementing acts based on Chapter III, Article 9 expected to be adopted by the Commission, and what will their key provisions be?
2.How will the Commission monitor and evaluate the implementation of the directive in each Member State to ensure uniformity and effectiveness?
Question for written answer E-001345/2025 to the Commission Rule 144 Tomáš Zdechovský (PPE)
The automotive industry is struggling to meet CO2 targets as interest in electric vehicles (EVs) is declining in the absence of government support. Manufacturers also face challenges in producing small EVs profitably, as regulations fail to consider actual operational emissions.
Carmakers favour larger vehicles, which are more profitable and increase CO2 limits due to the weight-based emissions calculation, contributing to higher emissions overall. Spreading fines over several years does not resolve this issue, as the limits are based on unrealistic assumptions.
To effectively reduce CO2 emissions, regulations must:
– abandon the weight-based emission calculation;
– account for actual EV operational emissions, considering electricity consumption and the energy mix. For plug-in hybrid vehicles, emissions should reflect both combustion and electricity use.
It is actual CO2 emissions, not recalculated values, that contribute to global warming. In the light of this:
1.Why persist with the weight-based calculation, given its negative impact since 2020?
2.Why exclude actual EV operational emissions from the CO2 limits?
The Commission should adopt a more realistic methodology based on 2024 data and set progressively stricter CO2 limits.
Question for written answer E-001390/2025 to the Commission Rule 144 Biljana Borzan (S&D)
In early March 2025, the Commission reportedly declined to confirm its support for the implementation of a front-of-pack nutrient profiling system in Member States. This development raises concerns about consumers’ ability to make informed dietary choices, particularly at a time when obesity rates across Europe continue to rise.
Front-of-pack nutrition labelling has been widely recognised as a useful guidance tool for healthier food choices and encouraging reformulation by the food industry. The lack of progress in this area calls into question the EU’s broader commitments to public health, cancer prevention and the goals of the farm to fork strategy.
1.What is the Commission’s current position on the implementation of a harmonised front-of-pack nutrition labelling system?
2.Has the proposal been postponed or abandoned?
3.Does the Commission plan to revise or update its approach to nutrient profiling systems, and if so, what timeline can be expected?
Question for written answer E-001375/2025 to the Commission Rule 144 César Luena (S&D)
A recent article by a European media outlet[1] reports that the European Commission is considering various options to soften the EU’s 2040 climate target for emission reduction through ‘flexibilities’ that would neutralise opposition to the EU’s climate policies. These ‘flexibilities’ include a proposed ‘nonlinear’ path towards 2040, the use of international carbon credits, greater reliance on negative emissions and increased flexibility in sector-specific targets.
In light of the above:
1.Is the Commission still committed to the roadmap and the target of reducing emissions by 90 % by 2040?
2.How would the Commission ensure that carbon prices remain stable in the EU in the face of a potential mass influx of international credits?
3.How will the Commission ensure that these ‘flexibilities’ in reaching the 2040 objective do not compromise the final target of a 90 % reduction?
Question for written answer E-001355/2025 to the Commission Rule 144 Sakis Arnaoutoglou (S&D)
In the Greek regions of Eastern Macedonia and Thrace (Rhodope) and Thessaly (Elassona) there are serious delays in the employment of integrated or fully developed water infrastructure. The absence of irrigation networks and land consolidation and the lack of administrative readiness results in the inertia of investments with a significant impact on development and the environment.
In the municipality of Rhodope, although work on the Iasio dam has been completed, it remains inoperative as the necessary irrigation network has not been built. Land consolidation in critical areas (Arriana, Likio, Evrinos) has been delayed by more than a decade, preventing water resources from being turned to account and rural development plans from leaving the drawing board. In the municipality of Elassona, the Agioneri dam project has been abandoned, despite comprehensive and approved studies existing since the 90s. The delay in completing/implementing such projects has a number of consequences: reduced agricultural productivity, loss of water resources and increased precariousness in the face of climate change.
In light of the above, can the Commission answer the following:
1.How does it monitor the progress and implementation of land improvement projects included in the CAP strategic plans for 2023-2027, especially in regions with delays and administrative difficulties?
2.Is it possible to provide technical assistance to Greece (through JASPERS, EIB Advisory) to boost administrative readiness and speed up the preparation of projects such as the Iasio dam and land consolidation in Rhodope and Thessaly?
3.Is it possible to enable flexibility or a targeted call under the Greek CAP strategic plan or other financial tools (RRF, Cohesion Fund), in order to integrate critical irrigation network and land consolidation infrastructure that remains inoperative, even though it is already partially completed?
Question for written answer E-001351/2025 to the Commission Rule 144 Marieke Ehlers (PfE)
Under Article 25a of the Visa Code, the Commission has to assess the level of cooperation by third countries with regard to the readmission of their nationals. Where countries fail to comply with this obligation, visa-free travel can be suspended. In December 2024 the Council decided to invoke the visa suspension mechanism for Vanuatu, thereby suspending visa-free travel from that country.
1.Has the Commission identified other countries that have a poor track record when it comes to cooperation on readmission and, if so, which countries?
2.Will the Commission recommend that the visa suspension mechanism be invoked for these countries? If not, why not?
Question for written answer E-001347/2025 to the Commission Rule 144 Sophie Wilmès (Renew)
Since 2024, some candidate countries have been included in the Commission’s annual rule of law report. Stable institutions guaranteeing democracy and the rule of law, as well as respect for and protection of those values, are prerequisites to any EU accession. Including candidate countries in the report allows us to support their efforts to reform and strengthen the rule of law.
At the same time, the Commission annually publishes enlargement reports that assess the progress made in candidate countries and their priorities. These reports appear to have a wider scope than the rule of law report.
1.What is the added value of including candidate countries in the rule of law report, given that they are already assessed on an annual basis in the enlargement reports?
2.Do the authors of the enlargement reports work with Commissioner McGrath to ensure that the reports complement each other to the best degree possible?
3.In the next rule of law report, expected in July, will the Commission increase the number of candidate countries analysed and include recommendations?
The Commission fully recognises the crucial role of firefighters in the face of increasing challenges linked to wildfires and other natural disasters.
It also underlines that the framework Agreement on fixed-term work[1] aims to improve the quality of fixed-term work and to prevent misuse of successive fixed-term employment relationships.
The Commission does not have any evidence indicating that the provisions of Greek law transposing the framework Agreement are not applicable to fixed-term firefighters.
If misuse of successive fixed-term contracts occurs in violation of the national transposing provisions, it is a matter to be primarily addressed by the national courts and authorities. In its role as guardian of the Treaties, the Commission may decide to take appropriate action in accordance with the prerogatives conferred to it by the Treaty.
As the Honourable Member refers to ‘seasonal’ firefighters, the Commission recalls that, according to the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union[2], the fact that two fixed-term contracts are separated by a significant lapse of time is generally sufficient to interrupt an existing employment relationship.
Therefore, in the absence of overriding considerations based on specific circumstances, the framework Agreement does not require Member States to consider such contracts to be successive.
[1] Annexed to Directive 1999/70 Council Directive 1999/70/EC of 28 June 1999 concerning the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP (OJ L 175, 10.7.1999, p. 43 ), https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/1999/70/oj/eng
The Commission is fully committed to upholding democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights in the Member States and will continue to monitor developments at national level.
Concerning the question of the handling of parliamentary immunities by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution in Thuringia, based on the available information, it does not appear that this matter is linked to the implementation of EU law.
The fundamental right to good administration, enshrined in Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU[1], aims to fulfil the EU’s commitment to the rule of law, which pursuant to Article 2 of the Treaty on the European Union is one of the EU’s founding values.
The right to good administration has also been recognised as a general principle of EU law by the Court of Justice of the EU.
Nevertheless, Article 41 of the Charter is only addressed to the EU’s institutions, bodies, offices and agencies, and not to Member States.
For this reason, the Commission is not in a position to assess its application in the context mentioned by the Honourable Member.
[1] Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, OJ C 326, 26.10.2012, p. 391-407.
The Commission communicated transparently throughout the COVID-19 pandemic[1][2][3][4].
Despite the unprecedented challenges posed by the pandemic, the joint response of the EU and Member States successfully led the EU out of the emergency. The EU set up NextGenerationEU[5] as a groundbreaking temporary recovery instrument to support Europe’s economic recovery from the coronavirus pandemic and build a greener, more digital and more resilient future.
Critical to the pandemic period was the achievement to make safe and effective vaccines available. The World Health Organisation (WHO) has estimated that the vaccines saved at least 1.4 million lives in WHO European region[6].
The EU Digital COVID Certificate facilitated travel for millions of EU citizens and third-country nationals. The Commission adopted three reports on its implementation, including an assessment of the impact on free movement within the EU, fundamental rights and non-discrimination[7]. The setting up of green lanes for goods to continue cross borders allowed companies to continue business and supplies to reach consumers.
Member States are responsible for the definition of their national health policy and the organisation of their health services and medical care. National governments therefore decided on specific measures based on each country’s epidemiological and social situation. The response measures taken by the EU and by the Member States to protect people from the virus had a major impact on preventing its spread.
The measures taken to mitigate the impact could not prevent all costs in terms of human life and well-being. An impact on mental health was one of the consequences. Mental health fluctuated with the intensity of the pandemic and containment measures, with young people being particularly affected[8]. The comprehensive approach to mental health adopted in 2023[9] set out a variety of measures to address the issue.
[1] Drawing the early lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic (COM/2021/380).
[2] COVID-19 — Sustaining EU Preparedness and Response: Looking ahead (COM/2022/190).
[3] EU response to COVID-19: preparing for autumn and winter 2023 (COM/2022/452).
[4] See also the timeline here: https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/coronavirus-response/timeline-eu-action_en
[5] Council Regulation (EU) 2020/2094 of 14 December 2020 establishing a European Union Recovery Instrument to support the recovery in the aftermath of the COVID-19 crisis.
The Commission is aware of the fact that journalists have been questioned by the Hungarian Constitution Protection Office.
The Commission monitor incidents involving journalists in all Member States in the framework of its annual Rule of Law Report, which covers all Member States, including Hungary. The next edition will be published in July 2025.
As of 8 August 2025, Article 4(3)(a) of the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA)[1] will become applicable. The provision states that Member States shall ensure that journalistic sources and confidential communications are effectively protected. Member States shall not (…) oblige media service providers or their editorial staff to disclose information related to or capable of identifying journalistic sources or confidential communications or oblige any persons who, because of their regular or professional relationship with a media service provider or its editorial staff, might have such information to disclose it.
It is the objective of that and other safeguards in EMFA to ensure free and independent media across the EU and protect them against undue interference. The Commission will use all the tools at its disposal to ensure effective compliance with this provision across the EU.
India and UK hold 13th Economic and Financial Dialogue in London today India and UK reaffirm their commitment to continue collaboration in financial services sector, FinTech and Digital economy and between the respective regulatory bodies; collaboration at bilateral and multilateral fora to address mutual and global economic issues
13th EFD concludes with adoption of Joint Statement by Union Finance Minister of India and Chancellor of Exchequer of United Kingdom
Posted On: 09 APR 2025 8:46PM by PIB Delhi
The 13th Ministerial meeting of the India-UK Economic and Financial Dialogue (13th EFD) was held today at London. The Indian delegation, led by Smt. Nirmala Sitharaman, Union Minister for Finance and Corporate Affairs, held high-level discussions with the UK delegation led by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, The Rt. Hon. Rachel Reeves.
The Indian delegation comprised of the Finance Secretary, Chairman IFSCA, Whole Time Member from SEBI and other senior officers from Ministry of Finance and Indian High Commission in London. Governor RBI also attended the meeting in virtual mode. The UK delegation included the Governor of Bank of England, FCA CEO, Economic Secretary of Treasury, and senior officials from HM’s Treasury.
Both sides reaffirmed their commitment to continue collaboration in financial services sector, FinTech and Digital economy and between the respective regulatory bodies; collaboration at bilateral and multilateral fora to address mutual and global economic issues including mobilising affordable finance and investment for low carbon economic growth, taxation matters and illicit financial flows.
Both sides welcomed the recent announcement of UK universities establishing campus in India, release of report of the India-UK Financial Partnership (IUKFP) on direct listing in IFSC GIFT City, launching of new private sector workstream on green finance, under the auspices of the IUKFP and other new areas of focus.
The 13th EFD concluded with the adoption of the Joint Statement by Union Finance Minister of India and Chancellor of Exchequer of United Kingdom.
8th Session of India-Russia Working Group on Priority Investment Projects held in New Delhi India and Russia agree on 6 new strategic projects to boost bilateral investment cooperation
2nd Edition of India-Russia Investment Forum held alongside Working Group meeting
Posted On: 09 APR 2025 8:35PM by PIB Delhi
The 8th Session of the India-Russia Working Group on Priority Investment Projects (IRWG-PIP) under the India-Russia Intergovernmental Commission on Trade, Economic, Scientific, Technological and Cultural Cooperation was held in New Delhi today.
The Working Group meeting was held successfully, with the co-chairs signing a protocol highlighting multiple projects of strategic importance to both nations. The session aimed at strengthening economic ties between India and Russia by identifying and advancing collaborative projects in sectors of mutual interest.
The Working Group also reviewed the outcomes of the 7th session, and both sides agreed to include six new strategic projects aimed at deepening bilateral investment cooperation. Discussions were held in a constructive atmosphere, with both countries reaffirming their commitment to expand investment collaboration across various sectors.
On the sidelines of the 8th Session of IRWG-PIP, the 2nd Edition of the India-Russia Investment Forum was also organised, in collaboration with Invest India, Indian Chamber of Commerce (ICC), and the Ministry of Economic Development of the Russian Federation.
The Session was co-chaired by Secretary, Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade, Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Shri Amardeep Singh Bhatia from the Indian side, and Deputy Minister of the Ministry for Economic Development of the Russian Federation, H.E. Mr. Vladimir Ilichev, from the Russian side.
The India-Russia Investment Forum saw enthusiastic participation from over 80 Indian and Russian businesses, including entrepreneurs, financial institutions, cargo companies, business chambers, researchers, and officials.