Category: housing

  • MIL-OSI USA: SBA Offers Relief to Alaska Businesses, Nonprofits and Residents Affected by October Storm

    Source: United States Small Business Administration

    SACRAMENTO, Calif. – The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) announced the availability of low‑interest federal disaster loans to Alaska businesses, nonprofits and residents affected by the severe storm and flooding occurring Oct. 20-23, 2024. The SBA issued a disaster declaration in response to a request received from Gov. Mike Dunleavy on Feb. 27, 2025.

    The disaster declaration covers the Northwest Artic Borough in Alaska.

    Businesses and nonprofits are eligible to apply for business physical disaster loans and may borrow up to $2 million to repair or replace disaster-damaged or destroyed real estate, machinery and equipment, inventory, and other business assets.

    Homeowners and renters are eligible to apply for home and personal property loans and may borrow up to $100,000 to replace or repair personal property, such as clothing, furniture, cars, and appliances. Homeowners may apply for up to $500,000 to replace or repair their primary residence.

    Applicants may also be eligible for a loan increase of up to 20% of their physical damages, as verified by the SBA, for mitigation purposes. Eligible mitigation improvements include strengthening structures to protect against high wind damage, upgrading to wind rated garage doors, and installing a safe room or storm shelter to help protect property and occupants from future damage.

    “One distinct advantage of SBA’s disaster loan program is the opportunity to fund upgrades reducing the risk of future storm damage,” said Chris Stallings, associate administrator of the Office of Disaster Recovery and Resilience at the SBA. “I encourage businesses and homeowners to work with contractors and mitigation professionals to improve their storm readiness while taking advantage of SBA’s physical damage loans.”

    SBA’s Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) program is available to eligible small businesses, small agricultural cooperatives, nurseries and private nonprofit organizations with financial losses directly related to this disaster. The SBA is unable to provide disaster loans to agricultural producers, farmers, or ranchers, except for aquaculture enterprises.

    EIDLs are for working capital needs caused by the disaster and are available even if the business did not suffer any physical damage. They may be used to pay fixed debts, payroll, accounts payable, and other bills not paid due to the disaster.

    The loan amount can be up to $2 million with interest rates as low as 4% for small businesses, 3.25% for nonprofits and 2.81% for homeowners and renters with terms up to 30 years. The SBA determines eligibility and sets loan amounts and terms based on each applicant’s financial condition. Interest does not begin to accrue, and monthly payments are not due, until 12 months from the date of the initial disbursement.

    Beginning Monday, March 17, SBA customer service representatives will be on hand at a Virtual Disaster Loan Outreach Center to answer questions about SBA’s disaster loan program, explain the application process and help individuals complete their application.

    Virtual Disaster Loan Outreach Center
    Monday – Friday
    8:00 a.m. – 4:30 p.m. Pacific Time
    FOCWAssistance@sba.gov
    (916) 735-1501

    Opens Monday, March 17 at 8:00 a.m.

    The SBA encourages applicants to submit their loan applications promptly. Applications will be prioritized in the order they are received, and the SBA remains committed to processing them as efficiently as possible.

    To apply online visit sba.gov/disaster. Applicants may also call SBA’s Customer Service Center at (800) 659-2955 or email disastercustomerservice@sba.gov for more information on SBA disaster assistance. For people who are deaf, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability, please dial 7-1-1 to access telecommunications relay services.

    The deadline to return for physical damage applications is May 12. The deadline to return economic injury applications is Dec. 15.

    ###

    About the U.S. Small Business Administration

    The U.S. Small Business Administration helps power the American dream of business ownership. As the only go-to resource and voice for small businesses backed by the strength of the federal government, the SBA empowers entrepreneurs and small business owners with the resources and support they need to start, grow, expand their businesses, or recover from a declared disaster. It delivers services through an extensive network of SBA field offices and partnerships with public and private organizations. To learn more, visit www.sba.gov.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: SBA Offers Relief to Oregon Businesses, Nonprofits and Residents Affected by Summer Wildfires

    Source: United States Small Business Administration

    SACRAMENTO, Calif. – The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) announced the availability of low‑interest federal disaster loans to Oregon businesses, nonprofits and residents affected by the wildfires occurring July 10-Aug. 23, 2024. The SBA issued a disaster declaration in response to a request received from Gov. Tina Kotek on Feb. 25, 2025.

    The disaster declaration covers Wheeler County in Oregon.

    Businesses and nonprofits are eligible to apply for business physical disaster loans and may borrow up to $2 million to repair or replace disaster-damaged or destroyed real estate, machinery and equipment, inventory, and other business assets.

    Homeowners and renters are eligible to apply for home and personal property loans and may borrow up to $100,000 to replace or repair personal property, such as clothing, furniture, cars, and appliances. Homeowners may apply for up to $500,000 to replace or repair their primary residence.

    Applicants may also be eligible for a loan increase of up to 20% of their physical damages, as verified by the SBA, for mitigation purposes. Eligible mitigation improvements include strengthening structures to protect against high wind damage, upgrading to wind rated garage doors, and installing a safe room or storm shelter to help protect property and occupants from future damage.

    “One distinct advantage of SBA’s disaster loan program is the opportunity to fund upgrades reducing the risk of future damage,” said Chris Stallings, associate administrator of the Office of Disaster Recovery and Resilience at the SBA. “I encourage businesses and homeowners to work with contractors and mitigation professionals to improve their storm readiness while taking advantage of SBA’s physical damage loans.”

    SBA’s Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) program is available to eligible small businesses, small agricultural cooperatives, nurseries and private nonprofit organizations impacted by financial losses directly related to this disaster. The SBA is unable to provide disaster loans to agricultural producers, farmers, or ranchers, except for aquaculture enterprises.

    EIDLs are for working capital needs caused by the disaster and are available even if the business did not suffer any physical damage. They may be used to pay fixed debts, payroll, accounts payable, and other bills not paid due to the disaster.

    The loan amount can be up to $2 million with interest rates as low as 4% for businesses, 3.25%for nonprofits and 2.688% for homeowners and renters with terms up to 30 years. Interest does not begin to accrue, and payments are not due until 12 months from the date of the first loan disbursement. The SBA sets loan amounts and terms based on each applicant’s financial condition.

    Beginning Monday, March 17, SBA customer service representatives will be on hand at a Virtual Disaster Loan Outreach Center to answer questions about SBA’s disaster loan program, explain the application process and help individuals complete their application.

    Virtual Disaster Loan Outreach Center
    Monday – Friday
    8:00 a.m. – 4:30 p.m.
    FOCWAssistance@sba.gov
    (916) 735-1501

    Opens Monday, March 17 at 8:00 a.m.

    The SBA encourages applicants to submit their loan applications promptly. Applications will be prioritized in the order they are received, and the SBA remains committed to processing them as efficiently as possible.

    To apply online visit sba.gov/disaster. Applicants may also call SBA’s Customer Service Center at (800) 659-2955 or email disastercustomerservice@sba.gov for more information on SBA disaster assistance. For people who are deaf, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability, please dial 7-1-1 to access telecommunications relay services.

    The deadline to return for physical damage applications is May 12. The deadline to return economic injury applications is Dec. 15.

    ###

    About the U.S. Small Business Administration

    The U.S. Small Business Administration helps power the American dream of business ownership. As the only go-to resource and voice for small businesses backed by the strength of the federal government, the SBA empowers entrepreneurs and small business owners with the resources and support they need to start, grow, expand their businesses, or recover from a declared disaster. It delivers services through an extensive network of SBA field offices and partnerships with public and private organizations. To learn more, visit www.sba.gov.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Governor Kehoe Signs Executive Order 25-19 Activating State Emergency Operations Plan in Preparation for Severe Weather

    Source: US State of Missouri

    MARCH 14, 2025

     — Today, Governor Mike Kehoe signed Executive Order 25-19 declaring a State of Emergency in Missouri in anticipation of severe weather forecasted throughout the state. Under this Order, the Missouri State Emergency Operations Plan has been activated, which enables state agencies to coordinate directly with local jurisdictions to provide assistance.

    “The National Weather Service has warned that this fast-approaching storm is likely to bring severe weather across the state, including high winds and an increased risk of tornadoes,” said Governor Kehoe. “I urge all Missourians to stay alert, monitor weather forecasts, and follow official warnings.”

    “While I hope this declaration proves unnecessary, ensuring our emergency management teams are fully prepared is my top priority. The state’s emergency operations center will be activated at 1 p.m. today to support coordination efforts.”

    Severe storms are expected to move into the western edge of Missouri at approximately 3 p.m. and intensify as they move east into the evening and overnight hours. Damaging wind and strong tornadoes (EF2+), as well as large hail, are significant concerns with this weather system.

    Missourians are strongly encouraged to postpone outdoor activities and time travel to avoid being on the road when storms hit. Follow local forecasts and have multiple ways to receive severe weather alerts, especially overnight or in case one fails.

    These storms will be extremely fast-moving, so it is critical to identify a safe place in advance and be prepared to take shelter quickly. Remember, the safest place to be during a tornado is an interior room with no windows on the lowest floor of sturdy structure, preferably in a basement. Never attempt to shelter in a mobile home – consider staying with a friend, family member or at local storm shelter and plan to arrive well before storms move into your area.

    Executive Order 25-19 will expire on April 14, 2025. To view the order, see attached.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: U.S. Department of Justice Dismisses Biden-Era Lawsuit Against Alabama in order to have more Secure Elections

    Source: US State of North Dakota

    Today, the U.S. Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division filed a dismissal of the complaint in United States v. Alabama. The previous administration had filed the action in 2024 after the Secretary of State in Alabama had taken steps to remove ineligible alien voters from their voter rolls in the run-up to the 2024 presidential election.   

    “States are required to maintain accurate voting rolls and remove ineligible voters,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Mac Warner of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division. “This Administration supports the efforts of states like Alabama that engage in voting security measures that ensure only citizens are voting in our elections. We are dismissing this case from the prior Administration to permit Alabama the time and space to develop a legal, efficient, and effective process to remove noncitizens from their voting roll and secure the vote for their citizens in upcoming elections.”

    In mid-August 2025, Alabama Secretary of State Wes Allen announced a “process to remove non-citizens registered to vote in Alabama,” citing over 3,200 people who he said registered to vote and were not U.S. citizens. The stipulated notice of dismissal filed today ends the lawsuit brought by the prior administration challenging that procedure. Because of that lawsuit, Alabama was forced to cease its process in 2024.

    By ending the Department of Justice’s action against them, Alabama should now have the opportunity develop a new process to ensure that ineligible voters are removed from its voter rolls, as it is required to do under Section 8 of the NVRA.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Building a Colorado For All: Gov. Polis Visits New Marriage Equality Exhibit, Meets with Members of LGBTQ Community

    Source: US State of Colorado

    BOULDER – Today, Governor Polis visited the Boulder Museum to view a new exhibit, “Bending the Arc”, a uniquely Boulder story of LGBTQ+ rights which celebrates the 50th anniversary of six marriage licenses issued to same-sex couples in 1975 and met with members of Colorado’s LBGTQ community to hear directly about their experiences with the new administration in Washington D.C. 

    “It was great to hear from LGBTQ Coloradans today as we work to build a Colorado for all. These are uncertain times, and it’s more important now than ever that we work together to protect and enhance freedoms. Colorado is for everyone, no matter who you are or who you love. This exhibit highlights a story of Boulder bravery, and I am honored to see the wonderful work of artists in our community that have brought this heartwarming story of LGBTQ rights to life again. This exhibit reminds us all of the importance of our Colorado For All,” said Governor Polis. 

    On March 26, 1975, a marriage license was issued at the Boulder County Courthouse to Dave McCord and Dave Zamora by the County Clerk, Clela Rorex. This was the first documented time in the country that two men had been granted a marriage license. Colorado has enshrined marriage equality in the State Constitution and banned conversion therapy, ensuring that in a Colorado For All everyone can marry who they love. 

    The Governor’s conversation with LGBTQ Coloradans covered a range of topics, including a recently-issued Department of Defense memorandum intended to remove transgender members of the military. The state recently learned the order would include transgender National Guard members as well. 

    “Removing already trained, capable people from military service would make Colorado and our country less safe. If there are well-qualified and dedicated members of our national guard who were born a different gender, it’s frankly none of the government’s business. We value everyone who contributes and if someone is doing a great job keeping us safe, we want them in the Guard. Our Colorado National Guard members help our state respond to many situations, including natural disasters like floods and wildfires, and help keep us safe. The people who admirably step up to serve in our National Guard – who take time away from their families and jobs to serve their state and their nation – should not be used as a political football,” said Colorado Governor Jared Polis. 

    Governor Polis supported a ballot measure to remove discriminatory language regarding marriage equality from Colorado’s constitution this election and has signed various laws to protect access to services and care for LGBTQ people. 

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Federal Assistance Available for Bronx Apartment Fire

    Source: US State of New York

    overnor Kathy Hochul today announced federal assistance is available to New Yorkers in Bronx County and the contiguous counties of New York, Westchester, Queens and Nassau impacted by a five-alarm apartment fire on Jan. 10. The fire occurred in a 98-unit apartment building located at 2910 Wallace Ave. in Allerton — a neighborhood in the East Bronx — and resulted in significant damage to all 98 units in the building. Homeowners, renters and businesses are now eligible to apply for the U.S. Small Business Administration’s low-interest loans to aid in their recovery from the effects of the fires that resulted in significant damage.

    “New Yorkers in the Bronx are still recovering from the tragic apartment fire in Allerton that displaced dozens of families earlier this year,” Governor Hochul said. “Families, homeowners and businesses can now rely on federal funding to help them rebuild and recover, because when disaster strikes, we work hard to ensure there are resources available for everyone to get back on their feet.”

    Homeowners, residents and businesses in the declared counties are now eligible for U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) loans. SBA loans can be very helpful to eligible parties who need financial assistance to get on the road to recovery following weather-related disasters and other emergencies.

    This declaration provides low interest loans to repair or replace damaged property incurred as a result of the event for:

    • Businesses or private, non-profit organizations up to $2 million
    • Homeowners or renters up to $100,000 to help repair or replace personal property
    • Homeowners up to $500,000 to repair or restore their primary home to pre-disaster condition

    The filing deadline to return applications for physical property damage is May 12, and the deadline to return economic injury applications is Dec. 15.

    New York State Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Services Commissioner Jackie Bray said, “Thank you to Governor Hochul and our federal partners for working diligently for the people of New York. This funding will go a long way to help residents and businesses recover from the devastating impacts that a fire can have.”

    Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer said, “In January, a five-alarm fire in the Bronx significantly damaged nearly 100 apartment units. Homeowners, renters and business owners can now access U.S. Small Business Administration low-interest loans to make critical repairs and replace destroyed property. I strongly supported Governor Hochul’s request for these urgent federal loans to support people and businesses following the devastating fire.”

    New Yorkers can find additional information, download applications and apply online here. They may also call SBA’s Customer Service Center at (800) 659-2955 or email [email protected].

    Individuals who are deaf, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability, can dial 7-1-1 to access telecommunications relay services.

    About the Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Services
    The Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Services provides leadership, coordination and support for efforts to prevent, protect against, prepare for, respond to, and recover from terrorism, natural disasters, threats, fires and other emergencies. For more information, visit NYSDHSES on Facebook, X — formerly known as Twitter — Instagram and LinkedIn, and visit dhses.ny.gov.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Governor Hochul is a Guest on Telemundo 47

    Source: US State of New York

    arlier today, Governor Kathy Hochul was a guest on Telemundo 47 with Rosarina Bretón. The Governor spoke on Immigration and Customs Enforcement in New York, the Fiscal Year 2026 Executive Budget, putting money back in the pockets of New Yorkers and her proposal for distraction-free schools.

    AUDIO: The Governor’s remarks are available in audio form here.

    A rush transcript of the Governor’s remarks is available below:

    Rosarina Bretón, Telemundo 47: So, let’s talk about business here in the great State of New York, and we understand all the immigration challenges that we have right now. You received a visit yesterday in Albany from Tom Homan, and he’s saying that he wants more ICE here in the city and the state. So, my question is, how are you going to protect the sanctuary city from ICE?

    Governor Hochul: Well, he was very threatening when he arrived and what I want to remind everyone is that when it comes to someone who has committed a crime in their home country, committed a crime here or is on a terrorism watch list, we’ll help ICE remove individuals who could do harm to the residents, and the citizens, and the visitors and the undocumented who live here — I want to protect the entire community.

    That’s my number one job is to protect people. So, we’ll provide assistance like we did under the Biden administration. I mean, this is not a new policy to assist ICE in those cases. But, I have been very clear: You will not come here and divide families, separate mothers from children — as we saw in the last Trump administration — to separate people who’ve done nothing wrong.

    I mean, so many people came here, just like my immigrant grandparents — left great, great poverty. My grandfather left Ireland as a teenager; he became a migrant farm worker himself in South Dakota. It’s the only job he could find.

    This is the immigrant story, and people came here fleeing either great poverty, or economic circumstances or even political persecution. They come here and we embrace them because we actually need them. Our economy thrives because of the people who come here willing to work hard and support themselves and their families, and that’s how we’ll be stronger as a state. So, we’ll help in one area, but in other areas, you know, we have said we will not, and that’s just our policy.

    Rosarina Bretón, Telemundo 47: So, good immigrants could be in peace?

    Governor Hochul: I can’t stop them if they take a step beyond what we want them to do, but we will not cooperate with them. That is what sanctuary city means — that I will cooperate in certain circumstances. If you have a warrant for someone’s arrest, you know they’ve committed a crime, of course we’ll help you to protect our streets. But also, we’re not going to provide assistance in a situation where we just want to remove people because all they did was cross the border.

    Rosarina Bretón, Telemundo 47: Of course. And let’s talk about congestion pricing because a Siena Poll recently showed that a lot of New Yorkers are in favor. However, March 21 — the deadline that the Republican government gave — it’s approaching. Are you turning on or off the cameras?

    Governor Hochul: We’re keeping the cameras on. I have said that. And when the Trump administration sent us a very threatening letter about this — and President Trump said, “I’m killing congestion pricing. Long live the King,” I reacted very negatively to that. I did a press conference in the subway and said, “We do not live under a king. We haven’t for 250 years in this country.” So, we stood up, said, “Our cameras are staying on,” and we’re going to do everything we can to fight this in the courts.

    I believe we’ll be successful because it has had an incredible effect on people. Even those who opposed it first, those who are commuting into Manhattan, the Central Business District, are finding traffic is going faster. The businesses are seeing a lot more foot traffic, people stopping inside and more people are taking the subways. People are coming in from New Jersey, for example — they’re shaving off a lot of time in their morning commute. And the money will be used to build a Second Avenue Subway up in Harlem and help open up many more job opportunities for people to get to faster. And we’ll also connect infrastructure from Brooklyn to Queens through an expressway there as well — the Interborough Express, we call it.

    So, we have a lot of great things. We’re going to keep investing in this. I know that so many people rely on this to get to their jobs, and their schools, and their doctor’s appointments and to see family. We can’t let anything happen to the subway system. It is our lifeline. But also, we have to have the money to support it as well.

    Rosarina Bretón, Telemundo 47: And I feel this is an adjustment and it’s going to take time, but we’ve seen the improvement and that’s very important.

    Governor Hochul: Yes, we have.

    Rosarina Bretón, Telemundo 47: And Governor, let’s talk about money. Let’s talk about your Budget.

    I know that you have a lot of good plans for our families, specifically hardworking families. And we know there’s a credit that being debated right now in the Legislature in Albany. What do you expect to happen with that important money that you want to give back to the people?

    Governor Hochul: Here’s my issue: I’m very aware that New York families are struggling. I didn’t need an election to tell me that. I’ve known that for a long time. I’ve been fighting for affordability since I first became Governor three years ago. It is huge. People are paying for child care and utility bills and their rent, and just the cost of living is so high. Groceries cost so much. The cost of eggs keeps going up higher and higher — $11, $12 here in the City.

    So, families are really hurting and what I wanted to do was find a way through my Budget — that I unveiled a couple months ago to put more money back into people’s pockets — because I said, “Your family is my fight. I will fight for them.” What are we looking to do? If you have children under the age of four — before I became Governor, there were no tax credits for the parents at all — you got zero. I put it to $330. I said, “Let’s triple it to $1,000.” If you have a child under the age of four, you’ll get a $1,000 check rebate or rebate on your taxes. If you have a school age child — $500. What about a tax cut? Middle class tax cut, the largest tax rate cut in 70 years — I proposed that as well.

    Also, everybody knows inflation takes so much more money out of our pockets because everything costs more. So, I want to put it back in people’s pockets, right where it came from. We collected over $3 billion more in surplus sales tax revenue because the cost of everything was so much higher — little kids’ clothes and sneakers and backpacks. So, we’re going to give a rebate check for $500 to every single family.

    When I walk around the bodegas, and I walk in the stores, people — when I tell them this — they are so excited. This could help with their utility bills and the grocery bills for if even for only a month. So, I want to do that. But also, making sure that across the state — the State will cover the cost of school breakfast and lunches, and that puts about $1,600 back in a parent’s pocket per child as well.

    So, you add all this up — the inflation rebate, the tax cut, the savings from not having to cover the cost of lunches and everything else we’re doing — it adds up to about $5,000 back in the pockets of hardworking families with little kids. So, I want to get this done. The Legislature wants to do something else with the money for the inflation rebate — I disagree. I think we should do one shot this year and give it to everybody earning under $300,000. Let them know we’re paying attention, and I will fight for that. The Legislative process, the Budget process is just beginning and I know who I’m standing with — I’m standing with New York families.

    Rosarina Bretón, Telemundo 47: With your proposal for the free lunches, I posted a video on my social media — people were so happy about the idea. So, you can tell that it will be amazing for a lot of our families. Let’s talk about cellphones. A lot of legislatures — or some legislatures in Albany — they want to modify how you present the school ban cellphones in schools. What do you think about that?

    Governor Hochul: I want to fight to accomplish the full bell-to-bell to ban distraction in schools, and to create a distraction-free environment. No smart phones, no ear buds, no cell phones, and here’s why: The mental health of our children, especially middle school and high school, is really declining — and a lot of it comes from what I heard from young women.

    I’ve been in a roundtable in the Bronx with Latinas and girls asking, “What is going on in your lives?” And they said they’re under so much pressure; there’s bullying; they mock each other out and criticize their clothing and it makes them feel that they’re not invited to the parties where the cool kids are, and it’s taking them down to such a dark place. It’s really affecting their emotional wellbeing as well as their academic performance.

    So, we need to get our kids back — let them have a childhood again. I mean, people my age and even my older children’s age, they didn’t have to deal with this distraction. Teachers cannot teach anymore. They’re competing with the cellphone. They just want to say, “Can I have that child all day long? And I’ll make them the best they can be.” And then after school, kids can do whatever they want.

    But I will not water it down. I have to stand firm that we’re not going to just create this scenario where it’s in-and-out of the pockets all day long. It’s hard for the teachers. And I know a lot of parents stand with me on this. So, this is just one of the issues we have to take on in the legislature this year.

    Rosarina Bretón, Telemundo 47: And I’m so glad because we don’t want distractions. I’m a mom and I wish that my son would never see his cellphone on any school day. So, I’m very happy for that. We are going to talk about municipal politics because we know there’s a race coming up. There are 10 candidates and there’s a lot — you’ve been having a lot of pressure for Mayor Eric Adams to step down. You have the power to do so. I remember that you appointed — or a committee that would oversee him. What is Albany doing, because I know that you need an approval in order to have that all set.

    Governor Hochul: That’s the Legislature. Here’s what happens: There are many, many people running for office. Historically, the governors and the mayors in this state, in this city, have been in conflict — a lot of fighting — and I’ve never thought that that was good for the residents of New York City. I also represent the 8.3 million residents of New York City. These are my constituents, I live here at least half of the week. I walk the streets. I go everywhere and I’m proud to do that. But I think that the Mayor and the Governor should be working together, hand-in-hand.

    For example, when we talk about safety, I have done more than any Governor in the history of the state to help safety in the city. I’m, right now, using state dollars to pay for the overtime for the New York Police to be on our subways all night long — two police officers on every train. The subway crimes have gone down dramatically. The National Guard I put in the subways.

    Rosarina Bretón, Telemundo 47: Are you going to keep them?

    Governor Hochul: I’m going to keep them, yes. I want people to feel the sense of security when they get on the subway system, and we’re making great progress. And helping get people’s mental health problems off the subways. The subways should not be a rolling homeless shelter either.

    We have to focus on this. So, my point is, I want someone I can work with. Someone who will roll up their sleeves, understand my priorities are public safety, dealing with the mental health crisis, building more housing — that’s one of the reasons life is so expensive in the city because there’s not enough housing supply.

    If we built more housing, more apartments, more affordable homes — people could afford to live here more easily. So, I’ve had to fight to get that done as well. I need a partner. So I know it’s complicated for everyone to look at all these choices, but I need someone who commits to working with me.

    Rosarina Bretón, Telemundo 47: What is your message to voters when we’re seeing so many candidates, like Mr. Cuomo?

    Governor Hochul: Right, there’s many candidates to choose from. You know, certainly the incumbent Eric Adams is running for re-election. There’s a lot of candidates. We have a new entry, I know the Speaker just started. Speaker Adrienne Adams just joined the race. So, it’s a lot for people to process, but I think it’s a little bit early in the process. People still need to put out their agendas. See what they’re going to do for people, look through their past records, look at their life stories and it’s a lot to evaluate, but it’s really one of the most important decisions they’ll make this year.

    And I will work with whomever the voters of this great city decide should be my partner, if they’re willing to do that. And so, it’ll be over in a few months, but there’s a lot more information to come out over the next few months between now and the end of June.

    Rosarina Bretón, Telemundo 47: I appreciate so much that you took your time to sit down with the ethnic media today, and make your voice be heard with so many people that love you in our communities, and believe that you can protect them.

    Governor Hochul: It’s a privilege to be with you, and this is something that’s important to me.

    Ethnic media really is the voice of the community, so I pay close attention to the issues you raise, but also to have the opportunity to speak in my own voice to the community that I care so deeply about, that I really treasure, and I thank you. Muchas gracias.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Governor Stein Visits Haywood County Farm, Urges General Assembly to Pass Hurricane Helene Relief Funding

    Source: US State of North Carolina

    Headline: Governor Stein Visits Haywood County Farm, Urges General Assembly to Pass Hurricane Helene Relief Funding

    Governor Stein Visits Haywood County Farm, Urges General Assembly to Pass Hurricane Helene Relief Funding
    lsaito

    Raleigh, NC

    Today, Governor Josh Stein visited a dairy farm in Haywood County to hear how Hurricane Helene impacted the family who runs it and to survey damage the storm caused. Governor Stein also called on the General Assembly to pass Hurricane Helene relief funding, which stalled earlier this week. 

    “Many family farms have been struggling after Hurricane Helene,” said Governor Josh Stein. “They need us to do our jobs, so I urge the House and Senate to come together and send me a bill to get western North Carolina aid as quickly as possible.” 

    In his first State of the State address, Governor Stein called on the General Assembly to pass Hurricane Helene relief and highlighted dedicated citizen heroes who are helping their neighbors recover after Helene. 

    Since taking office, Governor Stein has approached western North Carolina’s recovery with urgency, focus, transparency, and accountability:

    • Today, Governor Stein and emergency management officials encouraged western North Carolinians to apply for the Private Road and Bridge Program.
    • This month, FEMA granted Governor Stein’s requests for 30-day extensions for its Public Assistance program and the Individual Assistance Program.
    • Last month, Governor Stein requested an additional $19 billion in federal funds to restore infrastructure, support home repair and renovation, and reduce impacts from future natural disasters.
    • Governor Stein continues to seek state funding to address immediate needs in the aftermath of Hurricane Helene, following his request for $1.07 billion. 
    • The Governor’s Recovery Office for Western North Carolina has launched a recovery dashboard with updates, resources, and information detailing progress of Helene recovery efforts. 
    Mar 14, 2025

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Security: Cheektowaga man charged with attempted sex trafficking and cocaine possession

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    BUFFALO, N.Y. – U.S. Attorney Michael DiGiacomo announced today that Darryl Lamont Paul, a/k/a Darryl Lamont, 59, of Cheektowaga, NY, was arrested and charged by criminal complaint with attempted sex trafficking by force, fraud, and coercion and possession with the intent to distribute cocaine, which carry a mandatory minimum penalty of 15 years in prison and a maximum of life.

    Assistant U.S. Attorney Caitlin M. Higgins, who is handling the case, stated that for the last 25 years, Lamont has owned NoLimit Entertainment (NLE), a company that provides entertainment, including nude dancers and topless bartenders, for parties such as stags and birthdays. Throughout the years, Lamont has maintained a friendship and business relationship with the owner of Pharoah’s Gentleman’s Club, with the two men sharing employees. Lamont would recruit young vulnerable women from Pharoah’s to work for NLE, and he would also refer young women to Pharoah’s for additional employment.

    According to the complaint, in early July 2024, Lamont invited a 19-year-old woman (victim), to his residence to audition for NLE. During the audition, Lamont instructed the victim to strip completely naked so he could inspect her body. After her audition, Lamont invited the victim to “shadow” at stag party, where she observed two dancers engaging in sexual activity with each other.  

    Lamont also arranged for the victim to audition at an area strip club. After the audition, he took her back to his apartment for “training.” While there, Lamont forced the victim to snort cocaine and drink alcohol. The victim observed Lamont with what appeared to be a large quantity of cocaine. According to the victim, Lamont said that working for him would make her a lot of money and that he knew a lot of important people. He also claimed to know the names of the victim’s family members. The victim believed Lamont told her these things to intimidate her. Lamont also had the victim sign a nondisclosure agreement (NDA) prohibiting her from telling anyone anything that occurred at Lamont’s house or the stag parties. When the victim told Lamont that she was felt extremely uncomfortable and no longer wanted  to work for NLE, Lamont threatened that if she did not work for him, then she would not be allowed to work at the strip club.

    Lamont made an initial appearance this morning before U.S. Magistrate Judge Jeremiah J. McCarthy and was held pending a detention hearing on March, 18, 2025.

    The complaint is a result of an investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, under the direction of Special Agent-in-Charge Matthew Miraglia.

    The fact that a defendant has been charged with a crime is merely an accusation and the defendant is presumed innocent until and unless proven guilty.

    # # # #

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-Evening Report: No apologies over fabricated terror plot from pollies or lobby groups

    COMMENTARY: By Greg Barns

    When it comes to antisemitism, politicians in Australia are often quick to jump on the claim without waiting for evidence.

    With notable and laudable exceptions like the Greens and independents such as Tasmanian federal MP Andrew Wilkie, it seems any allegation will do when it comes to the opportunity to imply Arab Australians, the Muslim community and Palestinian supporters are trying to destroy the lives of the Jewish community.

    A case in point. The discovery in January this year of a caravan found in Dural, New South Wales, filled with explosives and a note that referenced the Great Synagogue in Sydney led to a frenzy of clearly uninformed and dangerous rhetoric from politicians and the media about an imminent terrorist attack targeting the Jewish community.

    It was nothing of the sort as we now know with the revelation by police that this was a “fabricated terrorist plot”.

    As the ABC reported on March 10: “Police have said an explosives-laden caravan discovered in January at Dural in Sydney’s north-west was a ‘fake terrorism plot’ with ties to organised crime”, and that “the Australian Federal Police said they were confident this was a ‘fabricated terrorist plot’,” adding the belief was held “very early on after the caravan was located”.

    One would have thought the political and media class would know that it is critical in a society supposedly underpinned by the rule of law that police be allowed to get on with the job of investigating allegations without comment.

    Particularly so in the hot-house atmosphere that exists in this nation today.

    Opportunistic Dutton
    But not the ever opportunistic and divisive federal opposition leader Peter Dutton.

    After the Daily Telegraph reported the Dural caravan story on January 29,  Dutton was quick to say that this “was potentially the biggest terrorist attack in our country’s history”. To his credit, Prime Anthony Albanese said in response he does not “talk about operational matters for an ongoing investigation”.

    Dutton’s language was clearly designed to whip up fear and hysteria among the Jewish community and to demonise Palestinian supporters.

    He was not Robinson Crusoe sadly. New South Wales Premier Chris Minns told the media on January 29 that the Dural caravan discovery had the potential to have led to a “mass casualty event”.

    The Zionist Federation of Australia, an organisation that is an unwavering supporter of Israel despite the horror that nation has inflicted on Gaza, was even more overblown in its claims.

    It issued a statement that claimed: “This is undoubtedly the most severe threat to the Jewish community in Australia to date. The plot, if executed, would likely have resulted in the worst terrorist attack on Australian soil.”

    Note the word “undoubtedly”.

    Uncritical Israeli claims
    Then there was another uncritical Israel barracker, Sky News’ Sharri Markson, who claimed; “To think perpetrators would have potentially targeted a museum commemorating the Holocaust — a time when six million Jews were killed — is truly horrifying.”

    And naturally, Jilian Segal, the highly partisan so-called “Antisemitism Envoy” said the discovery of the caravan was a “chilling reminder that the same hatred that led to the murder of millions of Jews during the Holocaust still exists today”.

    In short, the response to the Dural caravan incident was simply an exercise in jumping on the antisemitism issue without any regard to the consequences for our community, including the fear it spread among Jewish Australians and the further demonising of the Arab Australian community.

    No circumspection. No leadership. No insistence that the matter had not been investigated fully.

    As the only Jewish organisation that represents humanity, the Jewish Council of Australia, said in a statement from its director Sarah Schwartz on March 10 the “statement from the AFP [Australian Federal Police] should prompt reflection from every politician, journalist and community leader who has sought to manipulate and weaponise fears within the Jewish community.

    ‘Irresponsible and dangerous’
    “The attempt to link these events to the support of Palestinians — whether at protests, universities, conferences or writers’ festivals — has been irresponsible and dangerous.” Truth in spades.

    And ask yourself this question. Let’s say the Dural caravan contained notes about mosques and Arab Australian community centres. Would the media, politicians and others have whipped up the same level of hysteria and divisive rhetoric?

    The answer is no.

    One assumes Dutton, Segal, the Zionist Federation and others who frothed at the mouth in January will now offer a collective mea culpa. Sadly, they won’t because there will be no demands to do so.

    The damage to our legal system has been done because political opportunism and milking antisemitism for political ends comes first for those who should know better.

    Greg Barns SC is national criminal justice spokesperson for the Australian Lawyers Alliance. This article was first published by Pearls and Irritations social policy journal and is republished with permission.

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI USA: Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Addresses Risks from Paul Weiss

    US Senate News:

    Source: The White House
    SUSPENDING SECURITY CLEARENCES TO PROTECT THE NATIONAL INTEREST: Today, President Donald J. Trump signed an Executive Order to suspend security clearances held by individuals at Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP (Paul Weiss) pending a review of whether such clearances are consistent with the national interest.
    Security clearances held by Paul Weiss employees and Mark Pomerantz will be immediately suspended, pending a review of whether their access to sensitive information is consistent with the national interest.
    The Federal Government will halt all material and services, including sensitive compartmented information facility (SCIF) access provided to Paul Weiss and restrict its employees’ access to government buildings.
    Federal Agencies will also refrain from hiring Paul Weiss employees unless specifically authorized.

    To ensure taxpayer dollars no longer go to contractors whose earnings subsidize activities not aligned with American interests, the Federal Government will terminate contracts that involve Paul Weiss.
    The practices of Paul Weiss will be reviewed under Title VII to ensure compliance with civil rights laws against racial bias.
    SAFEGUARDING TAXPAYER FUNDS: The Trump Administration will no longer support taxpayer funds from sponsoring activities that make our communities less safe, increase burdens on local businesses, limit constitutional freedoms, and degrade the quality of American elections.
    Paul Weiss hired unethical attorney Mark Pomerantz, who had previously left the firm to join the Manhattan District Attorney’s office solely to manufacture a prosecution against President Trump.
    According to his coworkers, Pomerantz had unethically led witnesses in ways designed to implicate President Trump.
    After being unable to convince Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg that a fraud case was feasible, Pomerantz engaged in a media campaign to gin up support for this unwarranted prosecution.

    Paul Weiss has been accused of discriminating against its own employees on the basis of race and other categories prohibited by civil rights laws.
    ENDING THE WEAPONIZATION OF GOVERNMENT: President Trump is delivering on his promise to end the weaponization of government and protect the nation from partisan actors who exploit their influence.  
    President Trump is refocusing government operations to their core mission—serving the citizens of the United States.  
    President Trump signed an Executive Order to end the weaponization of the Federal Government on his first day in office after promising to “end forever the weaponization of government and the abuse of law enforcement against political opponents.”
    President Trump revoked security clearances held by dozens of intelligence officials who falsely claimed in a 2020 letter, during the height of the U.S. presidential election season, that Hunter Biden’s laptop was tantamount to Russian disinformation.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Additional Recissions of Harmful Executive Orders and Actions

    US Senate News:

    Source: The White House
    class=”has-text-align-left”>By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:
    Section 1.  Purpose.  In Executive Order 14148 of January 20, 2025 (Initial Rescissions of Harmful Executive Orders and Actions), I rescinded 78 Presidential orders and memoranda issued by then-President Biden.  I also directed the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy, the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy, and the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs to compile lists of additional orders, memoranda, and proclamations issued by the prior administration that should be rescinded.  I have determined that the following additional rescissions are necessary to advance the policy of the United States to restore common sense to the Federal Government and unleash the potential of American citizens. 
    Sec. 2.  Revocation of Orders and Actions.  The following executive actions are hereby revoked:(a)  Executive Order 13994 of January 21, 2021 (Ensuring a Data-Driven Response to COVID-19 and Future High-Consequence Public Health Threats).(b)  National Security Memorandum 3 of February 4, 2021 (Revitalizing America’s Foreign Policy and National Security Workforce, Institutions, and Partnerships).(c)  Presidential Memorandum of February 4, 2021 (Advancing the Human Rights of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, and Intersex Persons Around the World).(d)  Executive Order 14026 of April 27, 2021 (Increasing the Minimum Wage for Federal Contractors).(e)  Presidential Memorandum of March 31, 2022 (Finding of a Severe Energy Supply Interruption).(f)  Presidential Determination 2022-13 of May 18, 2022 (Delegating Authority Under the Defense Production Act to Ensure an Adequate Supply of Infant Formula).(g)  Presidential Determination 2022-15 of June 6, 2022 (Presidential Determination Pursuant to Section 303 of the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended, on Solar Photovoltaic Modules and Module Components).(h)  Presidential Determination 2022-16 of June 6, 2022 (Presidential Determination Pursuant to Section 303 of the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended, on Insulation).(i)  Presidential Determination 2022-17 of June 6, 2022 (Presidential Determination Pursuant to Section 303 of the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended, on Electrolyzers, Fuel Cells, and Platinum Group Metals).(j)  Presidential Determination 2022-18 of June 6, 2022 (Presidential Determination Pursuant to Section 303 of the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended, on Electric Heat Pumps).(k)  Executive Order 14081 of September 12, 2022 (Advancing Biotechnology and Biomanufacturing Innovation for a Sustainable, Safe, and Secure American Bioeconomy).(l)  Presidential Memorandum of January 17, 2023 (Delegation of Authority Under Section 6501(b)(2) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2022).(m)  National Security Memorandum 18 of February 23, 2023 (United States Conventional Arms Transfer Policy).(n)  Presidential Memorandum of February 27, 2023 (Presidential Waiver of Statutory Requirements Pursuant to Section 303 of the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended, on Department of Defense Supply Chains Resilience).(o)  Presidential Memorandum of November 16, 2023 (Advancing Worker Empowerment, Rights, and High Labor Standards Globally).(p)  Executive Order 14112 of December 6, 2023 (Reforming Federal Funding and Support for Tribal Nations to Better Embrace Our Trust Responsibilities and Promote the Next Era of Tribal Self-Determination).(q)  Executive Order 14119 of March 6, 2024 (Scaling and Expanding the Use of Registered Apprenticeships in Industries and the Federal Government and Promoting Labor-Management Forums).(r)  Executive Order 14126 of September 6, 2024 (Investing in America and Investing in American Workers).
    Sec. 3.  General Provisions.  (a)  Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:(i)   the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or(ii)  the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.(b)  This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.(c)  This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
                                   DONALD J. TRUMP
    THE WHITE HOUSE,    March 14, 2025.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Global: Why was it hard for the GOP to pass its spending bill?

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Charlie Hunt, Assistant Professor of Political Science, Boise State University

    U.S. Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania was one of 10 Democrats who voted to break the filibuster on the GOP funding bill. Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

    Facing a threat of imminent government shutdown, nine Democrats joined GOP Senate colleagues to defeat a filibuster, moving a six-month government funding bill to final passage in a late-day vote on March 14, 2025.

    Since January 2025, Republicans in Washington have enjoyed what’s commonly known as a governing “trifecta”: control over the executive branch via the president, combined with majorities for their party in both the House and the Senate.

    You might think that a trifecta, which is also referred to as “unified government” by political scientists, is a clear recipe for easy legislative success. In theory, when political parties have unified control over the House, the Senate and the presidency, there should be less conflict between them. Because these politicians are part of the same political party and have the same broad goals, it seems like they should be able to get their agenda approved, and the opposing minority party can do little to stop them.

    But not all trifectas are created equal, and not all are dominant. And several weaknesses in the Republicans’ trifecta made passing their six-month stopgap spending bill so difficult, and they help explain why the federal government came so close to shutting down completely.

    Research shows that political gridlock can still happen even under a unified government for reasons that have been on display ever since Republicans assumed leadership of Congress and the presidency in January.

    With a slim majority, will GOP House Speaker Mike Johnson, left, be able to pass Donald Trump’s priorities?
    Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

    Majority size matters

    A unified government clearly makes President Donald Trump’s ability to enact his agenda much easier than if, for example, Democrats controlled the U.S. House, as they did during the second half of his first term, from 2021-2022. But tight margins in both congressional chambers have meant that, even with a trifecta, it hasn’t been an easy.

    Trump was the sixth consecutive president with a trifecta on Day 1 of his second term. But history – and simple math – show that presidents with trifectas have an easier time passing partisan legislation with bigger majorities. Bigger majorities mean majority-party defections won’t easily sink controversial or partisan legislation. A bigger majority also means that individual members of Congress from either party have less leverage to water down the president’s policy requests.

    Trump also held a trifecta during the beginning of his first term in office; in particular, a big Republican majority in the House, which passed major legislation with relative ease and put pressure on Senate colleagues to comply. Trump signed a major tax reform package in 2017 that was the signature legislative achievement of his first term.

    But Trump has a much smaller advantage this time.

    Every president since Bill Clinton has entered office with a trifecta, but Trump’s seat advantage in the House on Day 1 of his second term was the smallest of all of them. This slim House margin meant that Republicans could afford to lose only a handful of their party’s votes on their spending bill in order for it to pass over unanimous Democratic opposition.

    And Trump’s relatively small advantage in the Senate meant that Republicans needed at least eight Democratic votes to break a filibuster. Nine Democrats ultimately voted to advance the bill to final passage.

    Majority party troubles

    In addition to opposition from Democrats in Congress, Trump and other Republican leaders have continued to confront internal divisions within their own party.

    In a closely divided House or Senate, there are plenty of tools that Democrats, even as the minority party, can use to stymie Trump’s agenda. This most notably includes the filibuster, which would have forced Republicans to garner 60 votes for their short-term spending bill. A small proportion of Democrats ultimately bailed out Senate Republicans in this case; but any major defections within the GOP would have required even more Democratic support, which Republicans were unlikely to get.

    Even dominant legislative trifectas, again like the one former President Barack Obama enjoyed when he took office in 2009, can’t prevent divisions within political parties, as different politicians jockey for control of the party’s agenda.

    Despite entering office with a 17-vote advantage in the Senate, 11 more than Trump enjoys now, Obama’s signature legislative achievement – the Affordable Care Act, also sometimes known as Obamacare – had to be watered down significantly to win a simple majority after backlash from conservative Democrats.

    Obama’s trifecta was bigger in size; but in a polarized America, a large majority also means an ideologically diverse one.

    Just as Republican leaders did in the last Congress, Trump has faced similar pushback behind the scenes and in public from members of his own party in his second term. For the past two years, the Republican-led House has been repeatedly riven by leadership struggles and an often aimless legislative agenda, thanks to a lack of cooperation from the the party’s far-right flank.

    This group of ideologically driven lawmakers remains large enough to stall any party-line vote that Speaker Mike Johnson hopes to pass, and the spending bill very nearly fell victim to this kind of defection.

    Even though the GOP squeaked out a win on this spending bill, the potential for continued chaos is monumental, especially if Trump pursues more major reform to policy areas such as immigration.

    Competing pressures

    Despite Congress’ reputation as a polarized partisan body, members of Congress ultimately serve multiple masters. The lingering Republican divisions that made it so difficult to pass this resolution reflect the competing pressures of national party leaders in Washington and the local politics of each member’s district, which often cut against what party leaders want.

    For example, some Republicans represent heavily Republican districts and will be happy to go along with Trump’s agenda, regardless of how extreme it is. Others represent districts won by Kamala Harris in 2024 and might be more inclined to moderate their positions to keep their seats in 2026 and beyond. There admittedly aren’t many of this latter group; but likely enough to sink any party-line legislation Speaker Johnson has in mind.

    What’s next?

    Republicans managed to pass a hurried, stopgap spending bill on March 14, 2025 only by the skin of their teeth. Failing to do so would have driven the federal government into shutdown mode. Small margins, internal divisions and conflicting electoral pressures will continue to make legislating difficult over the next two years or more.

    Thanks to these complications, it may be that congressional Republicans will continue to rely on the executive branch, including Elon Musk and the efforts at the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, to do the policymaking for them, even if it means handing over their own legislative power to Trump.

    This is an updated version of a story first published on Nov. 19, 2024.

    Charlie Hunt does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    ref. Why was it hard for the GOP to pass its spending bill? – https://theconversation.com/why-was-it-hard-for-the-gop-to-pass-its-spending-bill-252257

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Global: Why was it hard for the GOP – which controls Congress – to pass its spending bill?

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Charlie Hunt, Assistant Professor of Political Science, Boise State University

    U.S. Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania was one of 10 Democrats who voted to break the filibuster on the GOP funding bill. Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

    Facing a threat of imminent government shutdown, nine Democrats joined GOP Senate colleagues to defeat a filibuster, moving the six-month government funding bill to final passage in a late-day vote on March 14, 2025.

    Since January 2025, Republicans in Washington have enjoyed what’s commonly known as a governing “trifecta”: control over the executive branch via the president, combined with majorities for their party in both the House and the Senate.

    You might think that a trifecta, which is also referred to as “unified government” by political scientists, is a clear recipe for easy legislative success. In theory, when political parties have unified control over the House, the Senate and the presidency, there should be less conflict between them. Because these politicians are part of the same political party and have the same broad goals, it seems like they should be able to get their agenda approved, and the opposing minority party can do little to stop them.

    But not all trifectas are created equal, and not all are dominant. And several weaknesses in the Republicans’ trifecta made passing their six-month stopgap spending bill so difficult, and they help explain why the federal government came so close to shutting down completely.

    Research shows that political gridlock can still happen even under a unified government for reasons that have been on display ever since Republicans assumed leadership of Congress and the presidency in January.

    With a slim majority, will GOP House Speaker Mike Johnson, left, be able to pass Donald Trump’s priorities?
    Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

    Majority size matters

    A unified government clearly makes President Donald Trump’s ability to enact his agenda much easier than if, for example, Democrats controlled the U.S. House, as they did during the second half of his first term, from 2021-2022. But tight margins in both congressional chambers have meant that, even with a trifecta, it hasn’t been an easy.

    Trump was the sixth consecutive president with a trifecta on Day 1 of his second term. But history – and simple math – show that presidents with trifectas have an easier time passing partisan legislation with bigger majorities. Bigger majorities mean majority-party defections won’t easily sink controversial or partisan legislation. A bigger majority also means that individual members of Congress from either party have less leverage to water down the president’s policy requests.

    Trump also held a trifecta during the beginning of his first term in office; in particular, a big Republican majority in the House, which passed major legislation with relative ease and put pressure on Senate colleagues to comply. Trump signed a major tax reform package in 2017 that was the signature legislative achievement of his first term.

    But Trump has a much smaller advantage this time.

    Every president since Bill Clinton has entered office with a trifecta, but Trump’s seat advantage in the House on Day 1 of his second term was the smallest of all of them. This slim House margin meant that Republicans could afford to lose only a handful of their party’s votes on their spending bill in order for it to pass over unanimous Democratic opposition.

    And Trump’s relatively small advantage in the Senate meant that Republicans needed at least eight Democratic votes to break a filibuster. Nine Democrats ultimately voted to advance the bill to final passage.

    Majority party troubles

    In addition to opposition from Democrats in Congress, Trump and other Republican leaders have continued to confront internal divisions within their own party.

    In a closely divided House or Senate, there are plenty of tools that Democrats, even as the minority party, can use to stymie Trump’s agenda. This most notably includes the filibuster, which would have forced Republicans to garner 60 votes for their short-term spending bill. A small proportion of Democrats ultimately bailed out Senate Republicans in this case; but any major defections within the GOP would have required even more Democratic support, which Republicans were unlikely to get.

    Even dominant legislative trifectas, again like the one former President Barack Obama enjoyed when he took office in 2009, can’t prevent divisions within political parties, as different politicians jockey for control of the party’s agenda.

    Despite entering office with a 17-vote advantage in the Senate, 11 more than Trump enjoys now, Obama’s signature legislative achievement – the Affordable Care Act, also sometimes known as Obamacare – had to be watered down significantly to win a simple majority after backlash from conservative Democrats.

    Obama’s trifecta was bigger in size; but in a polarized America, a large majority also means an ideologically diverse one.

    Just as Republican leaders did in the last Congress, Trump has faced similar pushback behind the scenes and in public from members of his own party in his second term. For the past two years, the Republican-led House has been repeatedly riven by leadership struggles and an often aimless legislative agenda, thanks to a lack of cooperation from the the party’s far-right flank.

    This group of ideologically driven lawmakers remains large enough to stall any party-line vote that Speaker Mike Johnson hopes to pass, and the spending bill very nearly fell victim to this kind of defection.

    Even though the GOP squeaked out a win on this spending bill, the potential for continued chaos is monumental, especially if Trump pursues more major reform to policy areas such as immigration.

    Competing pressures

    Despite Congress’ reputation as a polarized partisan body, members of Congress ultimately serve multiple masters. The lingering Republican divisions that made it so difficult to pass this resolution reflect the competing pressures of national party leaders in Washington and the local politics of each member’s district, which often cut against what party leaders want.

    For example, some Republicans represent heavily Republican districts and will be happy to go along with Trump’s agenda, regardless of how extreme it is. Others represent districts won by Kamala Harris in 2024 and might be more inclined to moderate their positions to keep their seats in 2026 and beyond. There admittedly aren’t many of this latter group; but likely enough to sink any party-line legislation Speaker Johnson has in mind.

    What’s next?

    Republicans managed to pass a hurried, stopgap spending bill on March 14, 2025 only by the skin of their teeth. Failing to do so would have driven the federal government into shutdown mode. Small margins, internal divisions and conflicting electoral pressures will continue to make legislating difficult over the next two years or more.

    Thanks to these complications, it may be that congressional Republicans will continue to rely on the executive branch, including Elon Musk and the efforts at the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, to do the policymaking for them, even if it means handing over their own legislative power to Trump.

    This is an updated version of a story first published on Nov. 19, 2024.

    Charlie Hunt does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    ref. Why was it hard for the GOP – which controls Congress – to pass its spending bill? – https://theconversation.com/why-was-it-hard-for-the-gop-which-controls-congress-to-pass-its-spending-bill-252257

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Unlocking renewables opportunities

    Source: Scottish Government

    £3.2 million to realise high-value supply chain investment.

    A public-private agreement has been reached to help expand operations and attract new investment at the Port of Montrose.

    A Scottish Enterprise grant of £3.2 million will support a £7.2 million project to acquire and develop land just under two miles from the port.

    The new strategically-important site, Montrose Port Industrial Park, will offer both existing and new companies greater flexibility to grow and adapt alongside Scotland’s thriving renewables sector.

    The Scottish Enterprise investment is part of the Scottish Government’s commitment to invest up to £500 million over five years to develop the offshore wind supply chain and leverage an additional £1.5 billion of private investment.

    Deputy First Minister Kate Forbes said:

    “Scotland’s offshore wind sector is already creating significant opportunities, delivering jobs and attracting major investment across the country. 

    “The Scottish Government has made it clear that Scotland is open for business and we are working closely with Scottish Enterprise and public sector partners to maximise investment and drive growth in the sector.

    “The Port of Montrose is a key asset in supporting Scotland’s offshore wind industry. This investment is the latest in a series of strategic commitments we have made to unlock new opportunities and secure Scotland’s future as a renewables powerhouse.

    Scottish Enterprise CEO Adrian Gillespie said:

    “The expansion of Montrose Port is hugely important to providing new infrastructure and space to support the continued growth of the offshore wind sector.

    “Montrose Port Authority has exciting plans for the future and we are pleased to back that kind of ambition which will attract further investment into Scotland’s economy.”

    CEO of Montrose Port Authority Tom Hutchison said:

    “This investment marks a pivotal moment for Montrose Port, further establishing our role as a key hub in Scotland’s renewable energy sector. By expanding capacity and attracting new investment, we are creating valuable opportunities for business growth, job creation and long-term economic prosperity – both locally and across Scotland.

    “We are delighted that Scottish Enterprise recognises the potential of this project and supports our vision for sustainable growth. This development reinforces Montrose’s position at the forefront of Scotland’s energy transition, ensuring we continue to drive innovation and play a vital role in the offshore wind sector for years to come.”

    Background

    Recent investments made as part of the Scottish Government’s commitment of up to £500 million include:

    Scottish Ministers will host a Global Offshore Wind Investment Forum on Monday 17th March 2025 as part of a Green Industrial Strategy commitment to raise the profile of Scotland as a destination for capital investment.

    Montrose Port Authority (MPA), the world’s largest chain and anchor port, is a key hub for transport, logistics and energy on Scotland’s North East Coast. As a trust port, MPA drives sustainability, supports economic growth and plays a vital role in Scotland’s energy transition.

    A leading hub for renewable energy, MPA has become a major Operations & Maintenance (O&M) base for offshore wind. The port is home to the O&M base for Scotland’s largest offshore wind farm, Seagreen, and will be the base for the forthcoming Inch Cape wind project which will begin construction later this year.

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Financial News: Corporate Loan Portfolio to Return to Moderate Growth Rates in 2025

    Translartion. Region: Russians Fedetion –

    Source: Central Bank of Russia –

    Corporate lending slowed to 2.9% in Q4 2024, partly due to active debt repayment by companies that received compensation under government contracts. Growth for the year was a fairly strong 17.9%, but a more moderate increase of 8-13% is expected in 2025.

    The growth rate of the mortgage portfolio also continued to decline and amounted to 1.5% for the quarter, mainly due to a reduction in market mortgages in the context of high rates. For the whole of 2024, mortgages increased by 13.4%, and in 2025 growth is expected at the level of 3-8%.

    The consumer loan portfolio decreased by 2% in the quarter, and increased by 11.2% overall for the year. According to the Bank of Russia, in 2025 its growth will slow down to a level of -1 to 4%, including due to tight monetary and macroprudential policies.

    Corporate funds in banks grew by 11.9% by the end of the year, while household funds grew by 26.1%. In 2025, more moderate dynamics of funds of both organizations (5–10%) and households (7–12%) are expected.

    It is expected that in 2025 there will be a slight compression of the net interest margin and a significant increase in the cost of risk. This will lead to a decrease in profit to 3.0-3.5 trillion rubles.

    More detailed information is provided in the quarterly review “Banking sector”.

    Preview photo: Ultramansk / Shutterstock / Fotodom

    Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    Please Note; This Information is Raw Content Directly from the Information Source. It is access to What the Source Is Stating and Does Not Reflect

    HTTPS: //VVV.KBR.ru/Press/Event/? ID = 23459

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-Evening Report: Dramatic growth of NZ’s Māori economy highlights new report

    By Emma Andrews, RNZ Henare te Ua Māori journalism intern

    Māori contributions to the Aotearoa New Zealand economy have far surpassed the projected goal of “$100 billion by 2030”, a new report has revealed.

    The report conducted by the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment’s (MBIE) and Te Puni Kōkiri, Te Ōhanga Māori 2023, shows Māori entities have grown from contributing $17 billion to New Zealand’s GDP in 2018 to $32 billion in 2023, turning a 6.5 percent contribution to GDP into 8.9 percent.

    The Māori asset base has grown from $69 billion in 2018 to $126 billion in 2023 — an increase of 83 percent.

    Of that sum, there is $66 billion in assets for Māori businesses and employers, $19 billion in assets for self-employed Māori and $41 billion in assets for Māori trusts, incorporations, and other Māori collectives including post settlement entities.

    In 2018, $4.2 billion of New Zealand’s economy came from agriculture, forestry, and fishing which made it the main contributor.

    Now, administrative, support, and professional services have taken the lead contributing $5.1 billion in 2023.

    However, Māori collectives own around half of all of New Zealand’s agriculture, forestry, and fishing assets and remain the highest asset-rich sector.

    Focused on need
    Te Rūnanga o Toa Rangatira manages political and public interests on behalf of Ngāti Toa, including political interests, treaty claims, fisheries, health and social services, and environmental kaitiakitanga.

    Tumu Whakarae chief executive Helmut Modlik said they were not focused on making money, but on “those who need it most”.

    Te Rūnanga o Toa Rangatira tumu whakarae chief executive Helmut Karewa Modlik . . . “We focus on long-term benefits rather than short-term gains.” Image: Alicia Scott/RNZ

    Ngāti Toa invested in water infrastructure and environmental projects, with a drive to replenish the whenua and improve community health. Like many iwi, they also invest in enterprises that deliver essential services such as health, housing and education.

    “We focus on long-term benefits rather than short-term gains, ensuring that our investments contribute to the sustainable development of our community,” Modlik said.

    Between the covid-19 lockdown and 2023, the iwi grew their assets from $220 million to $850 million and increased their staff from 120 to over 600.

    Pou Ōhanga (chief economic development and investment officer) Boyd Scirkovich said they took a “people first” approach to decision making.

    “We focused on building local capacity and ensuring that our people had the resources and support they needed to navigate the challenges of the pandemic.”

    The kinds of jobs Māori are working are also changing.

    Māori workers now hold more high-skilled jobs than low-skilled jobs with 46 percent in high-skilled jobs, 14 percent in skilled jobs, and 40 percent in low-skilled jobs.

    That is compared to 2018 when 37 percent of Māori were in high-skilled jobs and 51 percent in low-skilled jobs.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – NRRP and other EU instruments supporting the construction of student halls of residence – E-000161/2025(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    The Portuguese Recovery and Resilience Plan (RRP) envisages the investment of EUR 516million[1] in loans for the construction or renovation of existing residences for higher education students, notably in areas where housing pressure is most acute.

    It plans to make available 18 000 new and renovated higher education students’ accommodation places at affordable prices (11 699 new beds and 6 444 renovated existing beds) by 2026 in the frame of the national plan for housing in higher education 2022-2026 (PNAES)[2]. The PNAES website provides detailed information of the financed projects.

    Currently, there are around 15 000 students’ beds in public residences. According to the 2022-2026 PNAES, it is expected that the 11 699 new beds will represent a 78% increase in capacity by 2026. The public network of students’ accommodations will then integrate the total of 26 772 beds available at affordable prices.

    As mentioned above, investments for student housing under the Portuguese RRP are provided through loan support to the Member State, and therefore no grants are earmarked for this purpose.

    • [1] After the revision of the Recovery and Resilience Plan, in September 2023 (incorporating additional loan support), budget has been increased to EUR 516 million from 447 million.
    • [2] https://pnaes.pt/
    Last updated: 14 March 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Impacts of quartz mining in north-east Segovia and its alignment with EU strategic policies – E-002938/2024(ASW)

    Source: European Parliament

    According to the available information[1], the project is currently undergoing the assessment procedure pursuant to the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive[2] and has not yet received development consent.

    During this procedure, the competent authorities would need to assess any potential impact on the environment, independently of the origin of the company leading the project, and to ensure that the project complies with applicable EU legislation such as the Mining Waste[3], Nature[4] and Water Framework[5] Directives.

    The Commission is not aware of CO2 storage permits in preparation in Spain that would need the application of Directive 2009/31/EC[6].

    Mining activities normally falls under the scope of Regulation (EC) 2018/842[7], setting limits to Member States on emissions of greenhouse gases and leaving them the freedom to choose the measures to achieve such targets .

    Member States are primarily responsible to ensure compliance with EU law. In line with its strategic approach on enforcement action[8], which focuses on cases of systemic non-compliance, the Commission considers that the means of redress available under national legislation are the most appropriate mechanism to address individual cases of possible non-compliance, such as the issue raised by the Honourable Members.

    Moreover, the competent national Courts could order the suspension of the project, where appropriate. In its role as guardian of the Treaties, the Commission will continue monitoring the situation and may decide to take appropriate action.

    • [1] https://energia.jcyl.es/web/jcyl/Energia/es/Plantilla100Detalle/1284766759323/Texto%20Generico/1285446129394/Texto
    • [2] Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment. OJ L 26, 28.1.2012, p. 1-21, as amended by Directive 2014/52/EU of 16 April 2014 — OJ L 124, 25.4.2014, p. 1-18.
    • [3] Directive 2006/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 on the management of waste from extractive industries and amending Directive 2004/35/EC. OJ L 102, 11.4.2006, p. 15-34.
    • [4] 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); Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds (Codified version), OJ L 20, 26.1.2010, p. 7-25
    • [5] 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
    • [6] Directive 2009/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the geological storage of carbon dioxide and amending Council Directive 85/337/EEC, European Parliament and Council Directives 2000/60/EC, 2001/80/EC, 2004/35/EC, 2006/12/EC, 2008/1/EC and Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006. OJ L 140, 5.6.2009, p. 114-135.
    • [7] Regulation (EU) 2018/842 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018 on binding annual greenhouse gas emission reductions by Member States from 2021 to 2030 contributing to climate action to meet commitments under the Paris Agreement and amending Regulation (EU) No 525/2013 (Text with EEA relevance). PE/3/2018/REV/2. OJ L 156, 19.6.2018, p. 26-42.
    • [8] As set out in the communication of 19 January 2017 (EU law: Better results through better application — C/2016/8600, OJ C 18, 19.1.2017, p. 10-20) and in the communication of 13 October 2022 COM(2022) 518 final — Enforcing EU law for a Europe that delivers.
    Last updated: 14 March 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Definition of homelessness – E-000890/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    Question for written answer  E-000890/2025
    to the Commission
    Rule 144
    Idoia Mendia (S&D), Alicia Homs Ginel (S&D)

    Tackling homelessness, which covers a range of experiences beyond simply not having a home, is of vital importance in working towards the EU’s first Anti-Poverty Strategy, as announced in the Commission’s 2024-2029 priorities.

    In order to eradicate homelessness by 2030, we must establish a common framework or definition as a jumping-off point.

    In view of the above:

    • 1.To what degree does the Commission intend to adopt a broad operational definition of homelessness based on the three domains of the home – the physical, i.e. sufficient space to live; the social, i.e. somewhere to form relationships and maintain a certain level of privacy; and the legal, i.e. guaranteeing legal protection?
    • 2.How will the Commission take ‘hidden’ homelessness into consideration as a form of housing exclusion and of insecure and inadequate housing?

    Submitted: 3.3.2025

    Last updated: 14 March 2025

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Global: Why was it so hard for the GOP to pass its spending bill?

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Charlie Hunt, Assistant Professor of Political Science, Boise State University

    U.S. Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania was one of 10 Democrats who voted to break the filibuster on the GOP funding bill. Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

    Facing a threat of imminent government shutdown, nine Democrats joined GOP Senate colleagues to defeat a filibuster, moving a six-month government funding bill to final passage in a late-day vote on March 14, 2025.

    Since January 2025, Republicans in Washington have enjoyed what’s commonly known as a governing “trifecta”: control over the executive branch via the president, combined with majorities for their party in both the House and the Senate.

    You might think that a trifecta, which is also referred to as “unified government” by political scientists, is a clear recipe for easy legislative success. In theory, when political parties have unified control over the House, the Senate and the presidency, there should be less conflict between them. Because these politicians are part of the same political party and have the same broad goals, it seems like they should be able to get their agenda approved, and the opposing minority party can do little to stop them.

    But not all trifectas are created equal, and not all are dominant. And several weaknesses in the Republicans’ trifecta made passing their six-month stopgap spending bill so difficult, and they help explain why the federal government came so close to shutting down completely.

    Research shows that political gridlock can still happen even under a unified government for reasons that have been on display ever since Republicans assumed leadership of Congress and the presidency in January.

    With a slim majority, will GOP House Speaker Mike Johnson, left, be able to pass Donald Trump’s priorities?
    Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

    Majority size matters

    A unified government clearly makes President Donald Trump’s ability to enact his agenda much easier than if, for example, Democrats controlled the U.S. House, as they did during the second half of his first term, from 2021-2022. But tight margins in both congressional chambers have meant that, even with a trifecta, it hasn’t been an easy.

    Trump was the sixth consecutive president with a trifecta on Day 1 of his second term. But history – and simple math – show that presidents with trifectas have an easier time passing partisan legislation with bigger majorities. Bigger majorities mean majority-party defections won’t easily sink controversial or partisan legislation. A bigger majority also means that individual members of Congress from either party have less leverage to water down the president’s policy requests.

    Trump also held a trifecta during the beginning of his first term in office; in particular, a big Republican majority in the House, which passed major legislation with relative ease and put pressure on Senate colleagues to comply. Trump signed a major tax reform package in 2017 that was the signature legislative achievement of his first term.

    But Trump has a much smaller advantage this time.

    Every president since Bill Clinton has entered office with a trifecta, but Trump’s seat advantage in the House on Day 1 of his second term was the smallest of all of them. This slim House margin meant that Republicans could afford to lose only a handful of their party’s votes on their spending bill in order for it to pass over unanimous Democratic opposition.

    And Trump’s relatively small advantage in the Senate meant that Republicans needed at least eight Democratic votes to break a filibuster. Nine Democrats ultimately voted to advance the bill to final passage.

    Majority party troubles

    In addition to opposition from Democrats in Congress, Trump and other Republican leaders have continued to confront internal divisions within their own party.

    In a closely divided House or Senate, there are plenty of tools that Democrats, even as the minority party, can use to stymie Trump’s agenda. This most notably includes the filibuster, which would have forced Republicans to garner 60 votes for their short-term spending bill. A small proportion of Democrats ultimately bailed out Senate Republicans in this case; but any major defections within the GOP would have required even more Democratic support, which Republicans were unlikely to get.**

    Even dominant legislative trifectas, again like the one former President Barack Obama enjoyed when he took office in 2009, can’t prevent divisions within political parties, as different politicians jockey for control of the party’s agenda.

    Despite entering office with a 17-vote advantage in the Senate, 11 more than Trump enjoys now, Obama’s signature legislative achievement – the Affordable Care Act, also sometimes known as Obamacare – had to be watered down significantly to win a simple majority after backlash from conservative Democrats.

    Obama’s trifecta was bigger in size; but in a polarized America, a large majority also means an ideologically diverse one.

    Just as Republican leaders did in the last Congress, Trump has faced similar pushback behind the scenes and in public from members of his own party in his second term. For the past two years, the Republican-led House has been repeatedly riven by leadership struggles and an often aimless legislative agenda, thanks to a lack of cooperation from the the party’s far-right flank.

    This group of ideologically driven lawmakers remains large enough to stall any party-line vote that Speaker Mike Johnson hopes to pass, and the spending bill very nearly fell victim to this kind of defection.

    Even though the GOP squeaked out a win on this spending bill, the potential for continued chaos is monumental, especially if Trump pursues more major reform to policy areas such as immigration.

    Competing pressures

    Despite Congress’ reputation as a polarized partisan body, members of Congress ultimately serve multiple masters. The lingering Republican divisions that made it so difficult to pass this resolution reflect the competing pressures of national party leaders in Washington and the local politics of each member’s district, which often cut against what party leaders want.

    For example, some Republicans represent heavily Republican districts and will be happy to go along with Trump’s agenda, regardless of how extreme it is. Others represent districts won by Kamala Harris in 2024 and might be more inclined to moderate their positions to keep their seats in 2026 and beyond. There admittedly aren’t many of this latter group; but likely enough to sink any party-line legislation Speaker Johnson has in mind.

    What’s next?

    Republicans managed to pass a hurried, stopgap spending bill on March 14, 2025 only by the skin of their teeth. Failing to do so would have driven the federal government into shutdown mode. Small margins, internal divisions and conflicting electoral pressures will continue to make legislating difficult over the next two years or more.

    Thanks to these complications, it may be that congressional Republicans will continue to rely on the executive branch, including Elon Musk and the efforts at the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, to do the policymaking for them, even if it means handing over their own legislative power to Trump.

    This is an updated version of a story first published on Nov. 19, 2024.

    Charlie Hunt does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    ref. Why was it so hard for the GOP to pass its spending bill? – https://theconversation.com/why-was-it-so-hard-for-the-gop-to-pass-its-spending-bill-252257

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI USA News: WEEK EIGHT WINS: A Testament to American Greatness Under President Trump

    Source: The White House

    The past week was marked by another series of triumphs that underscore the commitment of President Donald J. Trump and his administration to making America stronger, safer, and more prosperous than ever before.

    Here is a non-comprehensive list of wins in week eight:

    • President Trump’s economic agenda came into focus as Americans saw needed economic relief following years of Bidenflation.
      • Consumer inflation “eased more than expected” in February, with core inflation at its lowest level in nearly four years — driven by a decline in airfare prices as Americans prepare for Spring Break.
      • Wholesale inflation came in much lower than expected in February.
      • Mortgage rates dropped to their lowest levels since December, while home purchase applications are at their highest level since January.
      • The price of a dozen eggs is down 36.6% since President Trump’s inauguration.
      • The average price for regular gas has fallen below $3/gallon in 31 states — the third straight week of decline — with the price of oil down nearly 15% since President Trump took office.
    • President Trump and his administration continued their remarkable progress in securing the border following the news that illegal crossings have plummeted to the lowest levels ever recorded.
      • In President Trump’s first 50 days, ICE arrested 32,809 illegal immigrants — nearly 75% of whom were accused or convicted criminals — virtually the same number of arrests over the entirety of Biden’s final year in office.
      • Just 77 “gotaways” were recorded in the past three weeks — a 95% decrease from the average daily number of “gotaways” under Biden in 2023.
      • Migration to the U.S. through Panama’s Darien Gap has dropped by 99% as would-be illegal border crossers turn around.
    • President Trump’s Section 232 tariffs on imported steel and aluminum took effect as the Trump Administration levels the playing field for American workers.
      • Steel Manufacturers Association: “As the revised steel tariff goes into effect today, President Trump is boldly declaring that America will no longer be a dumping ground for cheap, subsidized foreign steel … By closing loopholes in the tariff that have been exploited for years, President Trump will again supercharge a steel industry that stands ready to rebuild America.”
      • Five major organizations representing the steel industry issued a statement lauding the tariffs.
    • President Trump’s tariffs continued driving manufacturing back to the U.S.
      • Cra-Z-Art — the biggest toymaker in the country — is expanding its domestic manufacturing by 50%.
        • “We are moving a large percentage of what we have in China to here, duplicating some machinery and investing in high speed automation equipment,” said Chairman Lawrence Rosen. “When Trump announced the higher tariffs on China, it’s been full steam ahead.”
      • GE Aerospace announced a $1 billion investment in its U.S.-based manufacturing operation, which will create 5,000 new jobs.
      • Asahi Group Holdings, one of the largest Japanese beverage makers, announced a $35 million investment to boost production at its Wisconsin plant.
      • Angel Aligner, a global orthodontic manufacturer, announced it will build its first U.S.-based production facility in Wisconsin.
      • Pegatron Corp., a Taiwan-based artificial intelligence server maker, announced it will build its first U.S.-based facility and increase its U.S. investment.
      • Merck opened its $1 billion North Carolina manufacturing facility as it plans to invest $8 billion in the U.S. over the next several years.
      • Saica Group, a Spain-based corrugated packaging maker, announced plans to build a $110 million new manufacturing facility in Anderson, Indiana.
      • Saint Gobain Ceramics announced a new $40 million NorPro manufacturing facility in Wheatfield, New York.
      • LGM Pharma announced a $6 million investment to expand its manufacturing facility in Rosenberg, Texas.
    • President Trump forced Ontario, Canada, Premier Doug Ford to back down from his threat to implement 25% electricity tariffs on American consumers.
    • The Department of Homeland Security unveiled the CBP Home App, which repurposes the Biden-era CBP One App to give illegal immigrants the option of self-deporting.
    • The Trump Administration stripped the first visa of a foreign student linked to Hamas-supporting “disruptions” on a college campus.
    • The Environmental Protection Agency launched the “biggest day of deregulation in American history,” which included ending the Biden-Harris electric vehicle mandate, stopping the Biden Administration’s assault on power plants, and eliminating costly emissions standards.
    • The EPA canceled more than 400 “diversity, equity, and inclusion” and “environmental justice” grants, totaling $1.7 billion.
    • The Department of Education opened investigations into 45 universities under Title VI for alleged impermissible use of race-exclusionary preferences, race-based scholarships, and/or race-based segregation.
    • The Trump Administration announced Ukraine accepted an offer to enter into immediate negotiations for a ceasefire and ultimate end to the brutal war.
    • The Trump Administration secured an agreement by Israel and Lebanon to engage in land border negotiations.
    • Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum officially fulfilled President Trump’s promise to rename the Anahuac National Wildlife Refuge in Texas as the Jocelyn Nungaray National Wildlife Refuge — honoring the memory of Jocelyn Nungaray, a young woman whose life was tragically cut short by an illegal immigrant.
    • The Department of the Interior announced the approval of a federal mining plan modification to extend the operational life of Montana’s Spring Creek Mine by 16 years — enabling the production of nearly 40 million tons of coal and supporting hundreds of full-time jobs.
    • The Department of Energy signed the third major liquefied natural gas export permit approval since President Trump reversed the Biden-era ban, allowing the Delfin LNG project — which was delayed by the Biden Administration — to move forward.
    • The Department of Justice’s new interagency task force arrested 214 criminals in its first two weeks, including violent MS-13 and Tren de Aragua gang members.
    • The Department of Veterans Affairs opened another new clinic — in addition to the three new clinics opened over the past several weeks — to serve thousands of additional veterans.
    • Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth ordered a department-wide review of the U.S. military’s physical and grooming guidelines to ensure the force is meeting the highest possible standard.
    • The Department of Defense terminated woke climate change programs and initiatives that were not in line with the department’s core warfighting mission.
    • Army Chief of Staff General George ordered a review of all general officer memorandums of reprimand that were issued to soldiers who refused to comply with the Biden Administration’s COVID vaccine mandate.
    • The Department of Transportation rescinded memos issued by the Biden administration that injected social justice, radical environmental agendas into infrastructure funding decisions.
    • The Department of the Treasury sanctioned Iran’s oil minister and shadow fleet operators and targeted Houthi terrorists involved in smuggling and procuring weapons.
    • The Department of Agriculture continued its push to root out fraud, waste, and abuse — including terminating a grant that supports “queer and trans farmers and urban consumers.”
    • The Department of Health and Human Services ended a loophole that allowed ingredient manufacturers to utilize chemicals with unknown safety data in food.
    • The Federal Communications Commission launched its sweeping “In Re: Delete, Delete, Delete” deregulation initiative to alleviate the unnecessary, burdensome regulatory assault on Americans.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Canada: Premier’s statement on carbon tax increase

    Premier David Eby has issued the following statement about the future of the carbon tax in British Columbia:

    “People in B.C. are doing everything they can to fight climate change. But we don’t want people to have to choose between affordability and climate action. That’s why we made the commitment last year to get rid of the consumer carbon tax at the first opportunity if the federal government removes the national carbon tax requirement.

    “With Prime Minister Mark Carney moving to eliminate the federal carbon tax on consumers, we are preparing legislation for this session to repeal the tax in B.C.

    “As the federal government removes the requirement that B.C. have a carbon tax in place, we will act quickly so the people of British Columbia don’t feel the pinch when filling their cars or heating their homes.

    “As that work is underway, B.C. is also readying legislation to eliminate the scheduled increase to the carbon tax that would otherwise have occurred on April 1, 2025.

    “While we eliminate the consumer carbon tax, we will continue to ensure big industrial polluters pay their fair share by maintaining an effective price on carbon for large emitters. Our goal is to incentivize industry to adopt lower-carbon technologies while maintaining their competitiveness.

    “The carbon tax has been an important tool in British Columbia. For over a decade and a half, a price on pollution has been an effective part of our efforts to tackle climate change. However, with cost-of-living pressures facing households and the imminent removal of federal carbon pricing, there is no longer support for the measure. We will continue our commitments to battle climate change by encouraging industry to innovate and ensuring British Columbians have affordable options to make sustainable choices.”

    MIL OSI Canada News

  • MIL-OSI Canada: More schools for Calgary and region | Un plus grand nombre d’écoles pour la région de Calgary

    [. Since 2020, student enrolment in Alberta has grown by almost 89,000 students, with much of this growth concentrated in the Calgary metro region. To ensure every student has the space to grow and thrive, Alberta’s government is making more investments in new and ongoing school projects across the province.

    Budget 2025, if passed, will kick-start 18 new school projects in the Calgary metro area, adding 14,400 new and updated student spaces. In total, there are now 49 school projects underway in and around Calgary.

    “Being able to meet the needs of our rapidly growing population is a top priority for Alberta’s government and that’s why we’re investing in 18 new school projects in the Calgary area. These investments will help ease the pressure on our K-12 system and ensure that every student receives the quality education they deserve, in a great school that will prepare them for success in the future.”

    Danielle Smith, Premier

    “We have heard from parents and school boards that the province needs more schools and student spaces to keep up with growing enrolment. I am proud to say that we have stepped up to the plate to meet these demands. Our plan to build schools will make sure every student has a space close to home.”

    Demetrios Nicolaides, Minister of Education

    Budget 2025, if passed, funds a total of 41 new school projects across the province, including more than 38,500 new and renovated student spaces. In total, there are now 132 active school projects across Alberta, all of which are being fast-tracked through the new and improved funding process designed and released by Alberta’s government in fall of 2024.

    “The strength of our communities comes from the strength of our people. When we ensure that students have access to well-built and well-maintained classrooms to foster positive education, we are setting up the next generation to succeed. I am proud to play a role in building the schools our province needs.”

    Martin Long, Minister of Infrastructure

    Last fall, Alberta’s government announced a generational investment of $8.6 billion to accelerate school construction and build new classroom spaces to address unprecedented enrolment growth. Over the next seven years, Alberta’s government will fund more than 100 new and renovated school projects in fast-growing communities around Alberta, adding more than 200,000 student spaces across the province.

    “We are grateful to the Government of Alberta for recognizing the urgent need for new learning spaces. Our hope is that through the School Construction Accelerator Program these schools will quickly move from design to shovels in the ground. It will be a great day when we can welcome students and staff into each of these 10 new schools.”

    Patricia Bolger, board chair, Calgary Board of Education

    “We thank the Government of Alberta for recognizing the need to invest in the Francophone education system. The modernization of École de la Rose sauvage will ensure FrancoSud can continue offering world-class education in a learning environment that meets the needs of our students, staff, and community. We’re looking forward to collaborating with Alberta Education and Alberta Infrastructure to complete this modernization project in a timely manner.”

    Hélène Emmell, chair, Conseil scolaire FrancoSud

    Budget 2025 is meeting the challenge faced by Alberta with continued investments in education and health, lower taxes for families and a focus on supporting the economy. 

    Quick facts

    • The 2025 Capital Plan allocates $75 million over the next three years for the planning and design of the 41 school capital projects approved in 2025 and $2.3 billion to building and updating previously announced school projects.
    • With Budget 2025, if passed, there are now 49 school projects underway in the metropolitan Calgary region:
      • 21 projects with construction approval
      • 15 projects with design approval
      • 11 projects with planning approval
      • 2 projects with preplanning approval

    Budget 2025 (if passed) new school projects in the Calgary region (15):

    Community

    School division

    Project type/name

    Design funding (11)

    Calgary

    Calgary Board of Education

    new 5 to 9 in Aspen Woods

    new 6 to 9 in Cityscape/Redstone

    new K to 5 in Cornerstone

    new 6 to 9 in Cornerstone

    new K to 6 in Livingston

    new 7 to 9 in Mahogany

    new K to 4 in Nolan Hill

    new K to 5 in Sage Hill

    new 6 to 9 in Sage Hill/Kincora

    new 5 to 9 in Sherwood/Nolan Hill

    Calgary Catholic School District

    new K to 9 in Cornerstone

    Planning funding (4)

    Airdrie

    Rocky View Schools

    new K to 8 in Lanark

    Calgary

    Calgary Catholic School District

    new K to 9 in Carrington

    new K to 9 in Walden

    Chestermere

    Rocky View Schools

    new 10 to 12 in Chelsea

    Budget 2025 (if passed) modernization school projects in the Calgary region (1):

    Community

    School division

    Project type/name

    Planning funding (1)

    Calgary

    Conseil scolaire FrancoSud

    modernization of École de la Rose sauvage

    Budget 2025 (if passed) public charter school projects in the Calgary region (2):

    Community

    Charter authority

    Project type/name

    Design funding (1)

    Calgary

    Foundations for the Future Charter Academy

    modernization of Quarry Park building (9 to 12) in SE Calgary

    Planning funding (1)

    Calgary

    Almadina Language Charter Academy

    new 10 to 12 in northeast Calgary

    Related information

    • Budget 2025 Capital Plan
    • Budget 2025 overview
    • School Construction Accelerator Program
    • Public charter schools

    Related news

    • Building schools in every corner of the province (March 7, 2025)

    Multimedia

    • Watch the news conference

    La région de Calgary aura bientôt dix-huit nouvelles écoles.

    De plus en plus de gens s’installent en Alberta, ce qui entraine une hausse du nombre d’élèves inscrits dans les écoles albertaines, accentuant ainsi les pressions dues aux inscriptions. Depuis 2020, le nombre d’élèves en Alberta a augmenté de près de 89 000, la majeure partie de cette croissance étant concentrée dans la région métropolitaine de Calgary. Afin que chaque élève ait l’espace nécessaire pour grandir et réussir, le gouvernement de l’Alberta investit davantage dans de nouveaux projets d’écoles et dans ceux déjà en cours dans l’ensemble de la province.

    Le budget 2025, s’il est adopté, fera démarrer 18 nouveaux projets d’écoles dans la région métropolitaine de Calgary, ce qui permettra de créer et de rénover 14 400 places pour les élèves. Au total, 49 projets d’écoles sont maintenant en cours de réalisation dans la région de Calgary.

    « La priorité absolue du gouvernement de l’Alberta est de pouvoir répondre aux besoins de notre population en croissance rapide. C’est pourquoi nous investissons dans 18 nouveaux projets d’écoles dans la région de Calgary. Ces investissements permettront d’alléger la pression qui pèse sur notre système d’éducation M à 12 et de faire en sorte que chaque élève reçoive l’éducation de qualité qu’il mérite, dans une bonne école qui le prépare à réussir dans l’avenir. »

    Danielle Smith, première ministre

    « Les parents et les autorités scolaires nous ont dit que la province avait besoin de plus d’écoles et de places pour les élèves afin de faire face à la croissance des inscriptions. Je suis fier de dire que nous avons pris les mesures nécessaires pour répondre à ces demandes. Notre plan de construction d’écoles permettra à chaque élève d’avoir une place près de chez lui. »

    Demetrios Nicolaides, ministre de l’Éducation

    Le budget 2025, s’il est adopté, finance un total de 41 nouveaux projets d’écoles dans l’ensemble de la province, ce qui permettra de créer et de rénover plus de 38 500 places pour les élèves. Au total, 132 projets d’écoles sont présentement actifs dans toute l’Alberta, tous accélérés grâce au nouveau processus de financement amélioré que le gouvernement de l’Alberta a créé et annoncé à l’automne 2024.

    « Nos collectivités puisent leur force dans notre population. Lorsque nous veillons à ce que les élèves aient accès à des salles de classe bien construites et entretenues pour favoriser une éducation positive, nous donnons à la prochaine génération les moyens de réussir. Je suis fier de jouer un rôle dans la construction des écoles dont notre province a besoin. »

    Martin Long, ministre de l’Infrastructure

    L’automne dernier, le gouvernement de l’Alberta a annoncé un investissement générationnel de 8,6 milliards de dollars pour accélérer la construction d’écoles et pour construire de nouvelles salles de classe afin de faire face aux pressions dues à la croissance sans précédent des inscriptions. Au cours des sept prochaines années, le gouvernement de l’Alberta financera plus de 100 projets de construction et de rénovation d’écoles dans des collectivités en forte croissance, un peu partout en Alberta, ce qui permettra d’ajouter plus de 200 000 places pour les élèves dans l’ensemble de la province.

    « Nous remercions sincèrement le gouvernement de l’Alberta de reconnaitre l’urgence de fournir de nouveaux espaces d’apprentissage. Nous espérons que, grâce au programme pour accélérer la construction d’écoles, ces établissements passeront rapidement de la phase de conception à la mise en chantier. Ce sera un moment mémorable lorsque nous pourrons accueillir les élèves et le personnel dans chacune de ces dix nouvelles écoles. »

    Patricia Bolger, présidente, Calgary Board of Education

    « Nous remercions le gouvernement de l’Alberta de reconnaitre la nécessité d’investir dans le système d’éducation francophone. La modernisation de l’École de la Rose sauvage garantira que FrancoSud puisse continuer à offrir une éducation de calibre mondiale dans un environnement d’apprentissage adapté aux besoins de nos élèves, de notre personnel et de notre communauté. Nous sommes impatients de collaborer avec Alberta Education et Alberta Infrastructure pour mener à bien ce projet de modernisation dans les meilleurs délais. »

    Hélène Emmell, présidente, Conseil scolaire FrancoSud

    Le budget 2025 relève les défis auxquels fait face l’Alberta en continuant d’investir dans l’éducation et la santé, en réduisant les impôts pour les familles et en soutenant l’économie. 

    En bref

    • Le plan d’immobilisations 2025 alloue 75 millions de dollars sur trois ans pour la planification et la conception des 41 projets d’immobilisations scolaires approuvés en 2025 et 2,3 milliards de dollars pour les projets de construction et de modernisation d’écoles déjà annoncés.
    • Si le budget 2025 est adopté, 49 projets d’écoles seront en cours de réalisation dans la région métropolitaine de Calgary :
      • 21 projets approuvés pour la construction;
      • 15 projets approuvés pour la conception;
      • 11 projets approuvés pour la planification;
      • 2 projets approuvés pour la planification préliminaire.

    Le budget 2025 (si adopté) financera ces projets de nouvelles écoles dans la région de Calgary (15) :

    Collectivité

    Autorité scolaire

    Type/nom de projet

    Financement pour la conception (11)

    Calgary

    Calgary Board of Education

    nouvelle école 5 à 9 dans Aspen Woods

    nouvelle école 6 à 9 dans Cityscape/Redstone

    nouvelle école M à 5 dans Cornerstone

    nouvelle école 6 à 9 dans Cornerstone

    nouvelle école M à 6 dans Livingston

    nouvelle école 7 à 9 dans Mahogany

    nouvelle école M à 4 dans Nolan Hill

    nouvelle école M à 5 dans Sage Hill

    nouvelle école 6 à 9 dans Sage Hill/Kincora

    nouvelle école 5 à 9 dans Sherwood/Nolan Hill

    Calgary Catholic School District

    nouvelle école M à 9 dans Cornerstone

    Financement pour la planification (4)

    Airdrie

    Rocky View Schools

    nouvelle école M à 8 dans Lanark

    Calgary

    Calgary Catholic School District

    nouvelle école M à 9 dans Carrington

    nouvelle école M à 9 dans Walden

    Chestermere

    Rocky View Schools

    nouvelle école 10 à 12 dans Chelsea

    Le budget 2025 (si adopté) financera ce projet de modernisation d’écoles dans la région de Calgary (1) :

    Collectivité

    Autorité scolaire

    Type/nom de projet

    Financement pour la planification (1)

    Calgary

    Conseil scolaire FrancoSud

    modernisation de l’École de la Rose sauvage

    Le budget 2025 (si adopté) financera ces projets d’écoles publiques à charte dans la région de Calgary (2) :

    Collectivité

    Autorité à charte

    Type/nom de projet

    Financement pour la conception (1)

    Calgary

    Foundations for the Future Charter Academy

    modernisation de l’édifice Quarry Park (9 à 12) dans le sud-est de Calgary

    Financement pour la planification (1)

    Calgary

    Almadina Language Charter Academy

    nouvelle école 10 à 12 dans le nord-est de Calgary

    Renseignements connexes

    • Budget 2025 : Plan d’immobilisations (en anglais seulement)
    • Aperçu du budget 2025 (en anglais seulement)
    • Programme pour accélérer la construction d’écoles
    • Écoles publiques à charte (en anglais seulement)

    Nouvelle connexe

    • Construire des écoles aux quatre coins de la province (7 mars 2025)

    Multimédia

    • Regarder la conférence de presse

    MIL OSI Canada News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Text adopted – Continuing the unwavering EU support for Ukraine, after three years of Russia’s war of aggression – P10_TA(2025)0033 – Wednesday, 12 March 2025 – Strasbourg

    Source: European Parliament

    The European Parliament,

    –  having regard to its previous resolutions on Ukraine and on Russia, in particular those adopted since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 and the annexation of the Crimean Peninsula on 19 February 2014,

    –  having regard to the Helsinki Final Act of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) of 1 August 1975, the Charter of Paris for a New Europe of the OSCE of 21 November 1990 and the UN Memorandum on Security Assurances in Connection with Ukraine’s Accession to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons of 5 December 1994 (the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances),

    –  having regard to the Association Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and Ukraine, of the other part(1), and to the accompanying Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area between the European Union and Ukraine, signed in 2014,

    –  having regard to the UN Charter, the Hague Conventions, the Geneva Conventions and the additional protocols thereto, and to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC),

    –  having regard to the European Council’s decision of 14 December 2023 to open accession negotiations with Ukraine, following the Commission’s positive recommendation of 8 November 2023 in this regard,

    –  having regard to Regulation (EU) 2024/792 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 February 2024 establishing the Ukraine Facility(2), and to other forms of EU support for Ukraine,

    –  having regard to the joint statement by the President of the European Council, the President of the European Commission and the President of the European Parliament of 24 February 2025 on the third anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine,

    –  having regard to UN General Assembly Resolution ES-11/7 adopted on 24 February 2025 entitled ‘Advancing a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in Ukraine’,

    –  having regard to the Conclusions of the extraordinary European Council of 6 March 2025,

    –  having regard to Rule 136(2) of its Rules of Procedure,

    A.  whereas Russia has been waging an illegal, unprovoked and unjustified full-scale war of aggression against Ukraine since 24 February 2022; whereas Russia’s war against Ukraine started in 2014 with the illegal occupation and annexation of the Crimean peninsula and the subsequent occupation of parts of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions; whereas this war of aggression constitutes a blatant and flagrant violation of the UN Charter and of the fundamental principles of international law and international humanitarian law, as established by the Geneva Conventions of 1949;

    B.  whereas Russia’s actions in Ukraine over the past three years continue to threaten peace and security in Europe and worldwide; whereas the Russian war of aggression is the largest military conflict on the European continent since the end of the Second World War and reflects the growing conflict between authoritarianism and democracy;

    C.  whereas Ukraine and its citizens have shown unwavering determination in resisting Russia’s war of aggression, successfully defending their country, despite the high cost in civilian and military casualties, along with the attacks on residential areas, destruction of civilian and public infrastructure – particularly that providing water and energy – and of the natural environment and cultural heritage, forced deportations, disappearances and illegal adoptions of deported children, illegal imprisonments, mass killings, executions of civilians, soldiers and prisoners of war, torture and the use of sexual violence and mass rape as weapons of war and altering the ethnic composition of the occupied territories of Ukraine, all of which constitute war crimes and crimes against humanity; whereas millions of Ukrainians remain displaced both inside and outside their country; whereas the United Nations has confirmed that more than 12 500 civilians, including hundreds of children, have been murdered since February 2022; whereas the Ukrainian authorities estimate that at least 20 000 Ukrainian children have been deported and forcibly displaced from their homes to Russia and Russian-occupied territories since the full-scale invasion began in February 2022; whereas the Russian Federation attempts to deny Ukraine and its people their ethnic, linguistic and historical identity by erasing signs of Ukrainian identity in occupied territories; whereas the brave people of Ukraine were awarded the 2022 Sakharov Prize as a tribute to their courage and resilience;

    D.  whereas the UN General Assembly, in its resolution of 2 March 2022, immediately qualified the Russian war against Ukraine as an act of aggression in violation of Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, and, in its resolution of 14 November 2022, recognised the need to hold the Russian Federation accountable for its war of aggression and legally and financially responsible for its internationally wrongful acts, including by making reparation for the injury and damage caused;

    E.  whereas on 2 March 2022, the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court opened an investigation into the situation in Ukraine, focusing on war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide committed on Ukrainian territory from 21 November 2013 onwards and on 17 March 2023 issued arrest warrants for Vladimir Putin, President of the Russian Federation, and Maria Lvova-Belova, so-called Commissioner for Children’s Rights in the Office of the President of the Russian Federation, for the war crime of unlawful deportation of Ukrainian children, arrest warrants for Sergei Kuzhugetovich Shoigu and Valery Vasilyevich Gerasimov for crimes against humanity including the war crime of directing attacks at civilian objects and the war crime of causing excessive incidental harm to civilians or damage to civilian objects; whereas the EU supports the establishment of a special tribunal for the crime of aggression;

    F.  whereas a number of third countries, notably Iran, North Korea and Belarus, have provided Russia with substantial deliveries of weapons and ammunition, and Belarus has allowed Russia to use its territory to attack Ukraine which amounts to an act of aggression under international law; whereas North Korean troops have been deployed on the battlefield and are fighting alongside the Russian army; whereas Russia and China signed a ‘no-limits partnership’ on 4 February 2022, and subsequently, China has become a key enabler of the Russian war effort through its massive support for Russia’s economy and its defence industrial base, and by supplying dual-use equipment;

    G.  whereas the latest Rapid Damage and Needs Assessment report estimates that, as of December 2024, the total cost of reconstruction and recovery in Ukraine will be at least EUR 506 billion over the next decade, which is 2.8 times the estimated nominal gross domestic product of Ukraine for 2024; whereas a total financing gap of EUR 9,62 billion for recovery and reconstruction needs remains for 2025;

    H.  whereas the EU has recently adopted its 16th sanctions package against Russia to weaken its economic base, deprive it of critical technologies and limit its ability to wage war; whereas the new sanctions target additional individuals and entities, including military firms, sanctions evaders, non-EU country supporters, Kremlin propagandists, shadow fleet networks, and individuals involved in the deportation of Ukrainian children; whereas the EU sanctions now apply to over 2 400 individuals and entities, subjecting them to asset freezes, funding bans and travel restrictions;

    I.  whereas the EU and its Member States have provided the most substantial cumulative support for Ukraine in all areas since the start of the full-scale invasion, and have provided financial support amounting to close to EUR 140 billion, including over EUR 67 billion of support to Ukraine in the form of humanitarian and emergency assistance, budget support and macro-financial assistance and over EUR 48 billion of military aid; whereas approximately EUR 300 billion of Russian sovereign assets were frozen in different jurisdictions; whereas in May 2024, the EU Member States approved the use of financial proceeds generated by immobilised Russian sovereign assets held within the EU, estimated at around EUR 210 billion, to support Ukraine, with the aim of providing up to EUR 3 billion per year in support of Ukraine’s reconstruction and resilience efforts;

    J.  whereas many EU Member States continue to purchase fossil fuels from Russia, including liquefied natural gas, imports of which are rising, as well as uranium, contributing to the Russian economy and bolstering its war chest; whereas sales of Russian fossil fuels to the EU since the outbreak of the full-scale war of aggression against Ukraine have exceeded EUR 200 billion;

    K.  whereas the EU has welcomed more than four million refugees from Ukraine and has expressed its support for the people of Ukraine and their leadership by launching negotiations on Ukraine’s accession to the EU;

    L.  whereas the European Council decided to open accession negotiations with Ukraine following the positive recommendation of the Commission; whereas the first intergovernmental conference took place on 25 June 2024, launching the negotiation process and adopting the negotiating framework;

    M.  whereas, under the administration of US President Donald Trump, the United States has significantly changed its stance on Russia’s war against Ukraine; whereas President Trump is making demands towards Ukraine but has not expressed any demands towards the Russian side, moreover he has downplayed Moscow’s responsibility for starting the war and possibly envisages granting Russia sanctions relief in the short term; whereas between the time of the meeting between President Trump and President Zelenskyy on 28 February 2025 and 9 March 2025 alone, Russia carried out over 2 100 aerial assaults, including 1 200 guided bomb strikes and nearly 870 drone attacks;

    N.  whereas recent US-Russia talks in Riyadh excluded Ukraine and the EU, and the United States did not consult its European allies before ending its part in the effort to isolate Russia; whereas the new US administration, alongside Russia and its allies, voted against a UN General Assembly resolution of 24 February 2025 condemning Russia’s aggression; whereas the American U-turn on the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine threatens Ukraine’s capacity to withstand Russia’s aggression, makes clear that Washington’s commitment to hold Russia accountable is no longer dependable and undermines international efforts to address the crisis;

    O.  whereas on 3 March 2025 the United States suspended its military assistance to Ukraine, including that approved by the previous US administration, as well as intelligence sharing with Ukraine; whereas it then cut off Ukraine’s access to commercial satellite imagery collected by the US government system on 7 March 2025;

    P.  whereas, according to widely recognised democratic principles and Ukraine’s constitution, elections cannot be held during wartime and under martial law, especially when millions of Ukrainians have been displaced; whereas martial law was declared and continues to be in effect in Ukraine solely because of Russia’s war of aggression; whereas the EU continues to recognise President Zelenskyy as the legitimate leader of Ukraine until democratic elections can be held;

    Q.  whereas President Donald Trump ordered a sweeping freeze on US foreign aid, halting hundreds of critical projects in Ukraine, including demining activities, military veteran rehabilitation, humanitarian aid, independent media and anti-corruption initiatives, investigations into Russian war crimes, but also those bolstering Ukraine’s telecommunications networks against Russian cyberattacks;

    R.  whereas Russia’s war of aggression shows its imperialistic attitude towards its neighbours; whereas as long as Russia remains a state pursuing revisionist policies, it remains a threat to security on the European continent; whereas the Russian war of aggression is part of a broader set of objectives against the West and its interests and values, the international rules-based order, democracy and security, as openly declared by Vladimir Putin in the weeks preceding the full-scale invasion; whereas numerous international actors have recognised Russia as a state sponsor of terrorism and a state that uses means of terrorism;

    S.  whereas Ukraine’s defeat would be widely viewed as a strategic defeat for Europe, the United States and the entire NATO alliance and as a reward for Russia as the aggressor, with far-reaching security consequences, the extent of which cannot be overstated; whereas depending on the outcome of the war in Ukraine, it will likely have a ripple effects in other parts of the world, notably the Indo-Pacific, and could encourage other revisionist powers to pursue their own hegemonic ambitions;

    T.  whereas a Special European Council took place on 6 March 2025 dedicated to the situation in Ukraine and the need to strengthen European defence; whereas the European Council endorsed the defence package put forward by the Commission on strengthening European Defence through the ‘ReArm Europe’ plan, which could potentially mobilise as much as EUR 800 billion, and reiterated its support for Ukraine, highlighting in particular that there can be no negotiations on Ukraine without Ukraine and that there can be no negotiations that affect European security without Europe’s involvement, and furthermore that Ukraine’s security and European, transatlantic and global security are intertwined;

    U.  whereas since the outbreak of the war, undersea cables in the Baltic Sea and key infrastructure have been targeted, presumably by Russian and Chinese-linked actors;

    1.  Pays tribute, on the third anniversary of Russia’s full-scale aggression against Ukraine, to the thousands who have sacrificed their lives for a free and democratic Ukraine; reiterates its unwavering solidarity with the people of Ukraine and its support for the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine, within its internationally recognised borders; strongly underlines Ukraine’s inherent right to self-defence in line with Article 51 of the UN Charter;

    2.  Reiterates its condemnation, in the strongest possible terms, of Russia’s illegal, unprovoked and unjustifiable war of aggression against Ukraine, as well as of the involvement of Belarus, North Korea and Iran; demands that Russia and its proxy forces immediately completely and unconditionally cease all attacks against residential areas and civilian infrastructure, terminate all military action in Ukraine and withdraw all military forces, proxies and military equipment from the entire internationally recognised territory of Ukraine; reiterates its policy of non-recognition of temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine by Russia, including but not limited to Crimea; demands that the Russian Federation permanently cease violating or threatening the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of Ukraine; condemns the atrocities committed against the Ukrainian population by the Russian invading force and the indiscriminate destruction of Ukraine’s infrastructure; demands the end of forced deportations of Ukrainian civilians, and the release and return of all detained Ukrainians, especially children;

    3.  Reiterates its condemnation of Russia’s full-scale aggression against Ukraine as an existential threat to European security and stability; emphasises that the crime of aggression against Ukraine is a grave violation of international law and the UN Charter; underlines that the Russian war of aggression has fundamentally changed the geopolitical situation in Europe and beyond, and threatens its security architecture, and that in response this calls for bold, brave and comprehensive political, security and financial decisions by the EU; believes that a Ukraine that is capable of defending itself effectively is an integral part of a stable and predictable European security landscape;

    4.  Believes that the outcome of the war and the stance taken by the international community will play a crucial role in influencing future action by other authoritarian regimes, which are closely observing the course of the war and assessing how much space there is for them to exert aggressive foreign policies, including by military means;

    5.  Expresses deep concern over the apparent shift in the United States’ stance on Russia’s war of aggression, which has included openly blaming Ukraine for the ongoing war, suspending US military aid, and attempting to coerce Ukraine into relinquishing its legitimate right to self-defence and into making territorial concessions; stresses that, in light of this change, the EU and its Member States are now Ukraine’s primary strategic allies and must maintain their role as the largest donor to Ukraine and significantly increase the much-needed assistance they provide to uphold Ukraine’s right to self-defence and step in, as far as possible, to replace suspended USAID funding, while ensuring long-term aid for reconstruction and recovery;

    6.  Reiterates its call on the Member States to substantially increase and accelerate their military support, in particular the provision of weapons and ammunition, as well as training, in response to pressing needs (inter alia long range weapons systems, air defence systems, artillery systems, electronic warfare systems, anti-drone capabilities and engineering equipment); urges Member States and their defence industries to invest in and partner with the Ukrainian defence industry in order to maximise the full potential of its production capabilities to produce critical equipment in the most efficient manner following the Danish and Dutch examples; reiterates its position that all EU Member States and NATO allies should collectively and individually commit to supporting Ukraine militarily, with no less than 0,25 % of their GDP annually; calls on the EU and its Member States to utilise their satellite imagery infrastructure for Ukraine; recalls that the military support to Ukraine must be sufficient to ultimately stop Russia’s war of aggression and allow Ukraine to liberate all its people, re-establish full control over its entire territory within its internationally recognised borders and deter any further aggression by Russia; notes in this context that a number of EU Member States are non-aligned and urges them to increase their support for Ukraine in line with their constitutions;

    7.  Reaffirms its commitment to supporting Ukraine’s desire for a just and lasting peace and to the Peace Formula and the Victory Plan presented by Ukraine’s President, Volodymyr Zelenskyy; believes that it is a comprehensive plan to restore Ukraine’s territorial integrity and includes the building blocks of a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in Ukraine based on the principles of the UN Charter and international law, which requires the full restoration of Ukraine’s territorial integrity, accountability for war crimes and the crime of aggression, Russian reparations for the massive damage caused in Ukraine, full accountability for those responsible, and exclusion of any future aggressions by Russia; urges the EU and its Member States to work with like-minded partners to ensure that peace negotiations take place in a way that respects the above mentioned principles;

    8.  Underlines that any genuine peace negotiations must be conducted in good faith and include Ukraine; recalls that any settlement that excludes Ukraine or undermines its legitimate aspirations, such as its right to choose its own security arrangements, or which lacks credible security guarantees for Ukraine that contribute to deterring future Russian aggression, will be neither just nor viable;

    9.  Insists that the EU must contribute to robust security guarantees for Ukraine in order to deter further Russian aggression; underlines that Ukraine must be empowered to resist and prevent further Russian attacks and reject hasty deals that weaken its security in the mid to long term and risk subjecting Ukraine and other European countries to renewed Russian aggression; underlines that Russia’s war economy is not sustainable and coupling orchestrated economic pressure with accelerated military support to Ukraine would enable Ukrainian forces to improve their positions while simultaneously harming Russia’s economy to ensure Ukraine has a stronger negotiating position for Ukraine when it agrees to engage in peace talks;

    10.  Strongly deplores any attempts at blackmailing Ukraine’s leadership into surrender to the Russian aggressor for the sole purpose of announcing a so-called ‘peace deal’; considers that the current attempts by the US administration to negotiate a ceasefire and peace agreement with Russia over the heads of Ukraine and other European states, in which the latter are confronted with the outcome without their meaningful participation, as counterproductive and dangerous, as it leads to empowering the belligerent state, thus showing that an aggressive policy is not punished but rewarded; concludes that, taking into account the history of Russia’s violations of previous agreements and fundamental principles of international law, such a peace can only be reached through strength, including effective security guarantees;

    11.  Highlights that the financial support provided by the EU and its Member States to Ukraine exceeds that of any other country, reflecting the Union’s unparalleled commitment to Ukraine and consequently to the security of Europe; underscores that the EU’s role in any negotiations impacting the security of Europe must be commensurate with its political and economic weight; reaffirms that there can be no negotiations touching on European security without the European Union at the table; welcomes efforts by France’s President Macron and the UK’s Prime Minister Starmer to host European emergency summits in Paris and London; welcomes the launch of a ‘coalition of the willing’ to enable a European-led enforcement of an eventual peace agreement;

    12.  Expresses dismay concerning the policy of the US administration of appeasing Russia and targeting its allies; warns that this policy undermines the trust of traditional US allies around the world and can have devastating consequences for the transatlantic bond, peace and stability in Europe and beyond;

    13.  Calls for the EU and its Member States to take the latest developments in the US-Ukraine relations as the final wakeup call for them to step in as Ukraine’s leading partner and actively work towards maintaining the broadest possible international support for Ukraine, including through building a ‘coalition of the able and willing’ with like-minded partners globally to support Ukraine and increase pressure on Russia;

    14.  Welcomes the joint statement by Ukraine and the United States following their meeting in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia on 11 March 2025, including the resumption of US military assistance and intelligence sharing as well as a proposal for a 30-day ceasefire agreement; recalls that a ceasefire can be an effective tool for suspension of hostilities, only if the aggressor fully adheres to it; expects therefore Russia to agree to it and follow it by ceasing all attacks on Ukraine, its military positions, civilian population, infrastructure and territory;

    15.  Expresses concern about the increased tensions in the Baltic Sea with actions of hybrid warfare against critical infrastructure and considers closer cooperation between the Nordic states, Baltic states, Poland and Germany crucial;

    16.  Welcomes the conclusions of the Special European Council of 6 March 2025 and its support for a rapid strengthening of European defence through the ‘ReArm Europe’ plan and reiterating its support for Ukraine following the ‘peace through strength’ approach, highlighting in particular that Ukraine’s security and European, transatlantic and global security are intertwined;

    17.  Reiterates that Russia’s deliberate attacks on the civilian population of Ukraine, destruction of civilian infrastructure, use of sexual violence and rape as a weapon of war, deportation of thousands of Ukrainian citizens to the territory of the Russian Federation, forced transfer and adoption of Ukrainian children, and other serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law all constitute war crimes for which all perpetrators must be held accountable;

    18.  Emphasises that all those responsible for war crimes perpetrated in Ukraine must be held accountable and stresses that no peace will be sustainable without justice; reiterates its call on the Commission, the VP/HR and the Member States to work together with Ukraine and the international community on setting up a special tribunal to investigate and prosecute the crime of aggression committed against Ukraine by Russia and its allies and underlines the need for the jurisdiction of this tribunal to cover the entire leadership of Russia and Belarus responsible for the aggression against Ukraine; welcomes the establishment of the International Centre for the Prosecution of the Crime of Aggression in Ukraine in The Hague;

    19.  Emphasises its full support for the ongoing investigation by the Prosecutor of the ICC into the situation in Ukraine based on alleged war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide; welcomes Ukraine’s ratification of the Rome Statute of the ICC, which allowed it to become a state party to it as of January 2025; in this context, expresses its utmost concern about the US sanctions against the ICC, its prosecutors, judges and staff, which constitute a serious attack on the international justice system; calls on the Commission to urgently activate the Blocking Statute and on the Member States to urgently increase their diplomatic efforts in order to protect and safeguard the ICC as an indispensable cornerstone of the international justice system;

    20.  Welcomes the European Council’s decision to open accession negotiations with Ukraine once the Commission’s recommendations are met; reaffirms that Ukraine’s future lies in the EU; welcomes progress on accession-related reforms despite wartime conditions; calls for the acceleration of accession talks, recognising Ukraine’s EU integration as a strategic priority; underscores the importance of continued EU financial assistance, linked to concrete reform, as a key instrument to sustain and accelerate Ukraine’s transformation in line with European standards; underlines that the Copenhagen criteria and the required reforms, in particular concerning the rule of law, democracy, fundamental freedoms and human rights, are fundamental to the merit-based process of accession; believes that Ukraine’s membership of the EU represents a geostrategic investment in a united and strong Europe and that it equates to showing leadership, resolve and vision;

    21.  Recalls NATO’s commitments to admit Ukraine to the Alliance; notes in this regard NATO’s consistent open door policy, in accordance with which NATO remains open to all European democracies that share the values of the Alliance, and in accordance with which decisions on membership have to be taken only by NATO allies, with no third party having a say in this process;

    22.  Calls on the Ukrainian authorities to strengthen internal political unity in Ukraine, uphold parliamentary pluralism and engage in constructive cooperation with the political parties in the Verkhovna Rada; calls on Ukrainian political stakeholders to continue strengthening political unity and parliamentary pluralism and to engage in constructive cooperation within the Verkhovna Rada; calls for due regard to be given to the powers and rights of local self-governing bodies; calls for media pluralism to be guaranteed in line with the democratic principles and values that Ukrainians are so resolutely and bravely defending; suggests in light of the EU accession process to end all limitations of foreign travel of members of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine;

    23.  Commends Ukrainian, European and international civil society organisations for supporting families of abducted Ukrainian children, prisoners of war, and illegally detained civilians; calls for the EU, its Member States and the international community to assist their efforts and intensify pressure on Russia to return all abducted and detained Ukrainians;

    24.  Points to the estimate of the latest Rapid Damage and Needs Assessment that at least EUR 506 billion will be required over the next decade for Ukraine’s recovery and reconstruction; welcomes the EU’s Ukraine Facility, which has a budget of almost EUR 50 billion, and the EU’s Ukraine Loan Cooperation Mechanism, which, in cooperation with the G7, offers loans to Ukraine of up to EUR 45 billion; nevertheless, urges the EU to prepare for Ukraine’s reconstruction by dedicating and securing new resources; calls for the EU, the Member States and like-minded partners to provide comprehensive and coordinated political, economic, technical and humanitarian assistance to support the sustainable and inclusive post-war reconstruction and recovery of Ukraine; reaffirms the EU’s commitment to sustainable and long-term financial and economic support to Ukraine, including macro-financial assistance, support for reconstruction and economic and social recovery and measures to ensure the resilience of Ukraine’s economy and critical infrastructure; reiterates its firm conviction that Russia must pay for the massive damage caused in Ukraine and therefore calls for the Russian sovereign assets immobilised under EU sanctions to be confiscated for the purpose of supporting Ukraine’s defence and reconstruction;

    25.  Calls on the Council, the Commission and the Member States to increase the effectiveness and impact of sanctions on Russia in order to definitively undermine Russia’s ability to continue waging its brutal war of aggression against Ukraine and threatening the security of other European countries; calls for a ban or targeted tariffs on Russian imports to the EU with the aim of fully closing the flow of grain, potash and fertilisers as well as raw materials including steel, uranium, titanium, nickel, wood and wood products, and all types of oil and gas; calls on the Council to maintain, mirror where possible and extend its sanctions policy against Russia, and all the enabling states, such as Belarus, Iran, North Korea, and to sanction Chinese entities suppling dual-use goods and military items, while monitoring, reviewing and enhancing the policy’s effectiveness and impact; calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure the swift implementation and strict enforcement of all packages of sanctions and to strengthen cooperation among Member States; asks the Commission for an impact assessment of the effectiveness of sanctions in hindering the Russian war effort and on the effectiveness of measures to prevent the circumvention of sanctions; calls on the Council to systematically tackle the issue of sanctions circumvention by EU-based companies, third parties and non-EU countries, and to adopt and strictly implement restrictive measures against all entities facilitating the circumvention of sanctions and providing the Russian military complex with military and dual-use technologies and equipment;

    26.  Calls for further sanctions against sectors of special importance for the Russian economy, in particular banking, the metallurgy, nuclear, chemical and agriculture sectors, raw materials such as aluminium, steel, uranium, titanium and nickel, as well as for anti-circumvention measures against all countries and entities that provide Russia with military and dual-use goods and technologies; calls for further actions against the Russian ‘shadow fleet’, in the light of sanctions circumvention, sabotage of critical infrastructure and environmental risks; calls on the Commission to jointly engage with flag and port states outside of the EU and take action against owners, operators and insurance operators in third countries that enable Russia’s shadow fleet; urges the Member States to further coordinate operational cooperation between coast guard agencies in order to increase the overall capacity for maritime surveillance; highlights that Russia is increasing its reliance on gas-derived fertilisers, which provide a growing source of revenue, while simultaneously compromising EU economies and threatening food security; expects the EU to keep its sanctions against Russia in place as long as needed to secure a just and lasting peace and until accountability is achieved;

    27.  Calls for the next EU sanctions package to sanction all known shadow fleet tankers and their owners, while also introducing sanctions on any oil tanker breaching the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships and enforcing strict implementation by all Member States of the measures prohibiting vessels, irrespective of flag, from sailing in European waters or into any EU Member State port if they have not followed the international rules regarding ship-to-ship transfers (STS) at sea or have illegally turned off their automatic identification system; urges the Commission and the Member States to ban ship-to-ship transfers of Russian oil in EU waters;

    28.  Calls on the Commission and the Member States to develop broader sanctions on Russian and Belarusian wood, including specifically prohibiting the import or purchase of wood products processed in non-EU countries that incorporate wood, particularly birch plywood, originating in Russia or Belarus, to support the enforcement of current sanctions;

    29.  Strongly condemns the Hungarian Government for threatening to block the renewal of the EU’s sanctions framework as well as to limit an appropriate EU response commensurate with the gravity of the situation; calls on the Member States to use all available tools to prevent the Hungarian Government from further blocking;

    30.  Calls for further limitations on Russian and Belarusian citizens entering the EU, especially through more stringent security screenings, including the submission of military service records during the Schengen visa application process, notwithstanding the need to issue humanitarian visas;

    31.  Strongly condemns the execution of Ukrainian prisoners of war by Russian forces; calls for the EU, its Member States and international partners to increase pressure on Russia to comply with its international obligations, particularly the Geneva Convention, and allow international organisations access to prisoners;

    32.  Condemns the devastating impact of Russia’s war on children; calls for increased EU support for children’s education, healthcare, mental health services, and for child protection, including trauma recovery and safe learning environments; urges the EU and Ukraine to prioritise children’s needs in aid and reconstruction efforts, in clearing landmines, and in integrating child welfare into the EU accession process;

    33.  Reiterates its concern about the situation at the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, which is illegally controlled by Russia; supports efforts to maintain a continued International Atomic Energy Agency presence at the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant; reiterates its deep concern about the broader long-term environmental impact of the war;

    34.  Calls for the EU and its Member States to strengthen EU strategic communication, particularly to publicly set the record straight about the EU’s leading support to Ukraine – especially in light of claims that seek to diminish its contribution – to counter hybrid threats and grey zone activities, and to prevent Russian interference in political, electoral, and other democratic processes in Ukraine and Europe; urges proactive communication on EU enlargement benefits to enhance public understanding and support for Ukraine’s accession in both Ukraine and the Member States; underlines that Ukraine’s EU integration is an opportunity for the development of both bordering regions and the Member States; calls strongly for the EU and the Member States to combat Russian disinformation about the war, by strengthening digital literacy, promoting fact-based narratives and holding social media platforms accountable for spreading harmful content by strictly enforcing the Digital Services Act(3);

    35.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, the President, Government and Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine and the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

    (1) OJ L 161, 29.5.2014, p. 3, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/agree_internation/2014/295/oj.
    (2) OJ L, 2024/792, 29.2.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/792/oj.
    (3) Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 October 2022 on a Single Market For Digital Services and amending Directive 2000/31/EC (Digital Services Act) (OJ L 277, 27.10.2022, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2022/2065/oj).

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Text adopted – European Semester for economic policy coordination: employment and social priorities for 2025 – P10_TA(2025)0032 – Wednesday, 12 March 2025 – Strasbourg

    Source: European Parliament

    The European Parliament,

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

    –  having regard to Articles 9, 121, 148 and 149 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),

    –  having regard to the European Pillar of Social Rights (EPSR) proclaimed and signed by the Council, Parliament and the Commission on 17 November 2017,

    –  having regard to the Commission communication of 4 March 2021 entitled ‘The European Pillar of Social Rights Action Plan’ (COM(2021)0102) and its proposed 2030 headline targets on employment, skills and poverty reduction,

    –  having regard to the Commission communication of 17 December 2024 entitled ‘2025 European Semester – Autumn package’ (COM(2024)0700),

    –  having regard to the Commission communication of 26 November 2024 entitled ‘2025 European Semester: bringing the new economic governance framework to life’ (COM(2024)0705),

    –  having regard to the Commission proposal of 17 December 2024 for a joint employment report from the Commission and the Council (COM(2024)0701),

    –  having regard to the Commission recommendation of 17 December 2024 for a Council recommendation on the economic policy of the euro area (COM(2024)0704),

    –  having regard to the Commission report of 17 December 2024 entitled ‘Alert Mechanism Report 2025’ (COM(2024)0702),

    –  having regard to the Commission staff working document of 26 November 2024 entitled ‘Fiscal statistical tables providing relevant background data for the assessment of the 2025 draft budgetary plans’ (SWD(2024)0950),

    –  having regard to the Commission staff working document of 17 December 2024 on the changes in the scoreboard the Macroeconomic Imbalance Procedure Scoreboard in the context of the regular review process (SWD(2024)0702),

    –  having regard to its resolution of 22 October 2024 on the Council position on Draft amending budget No 4/2024 of the European Union for the financial year 2024 – update of revenue (own resources) and adjustments to some decentralised agencies(1),

    –  having regard to Mario Draghi’s report of 9 September 2024 entitled ‘The future of European competitiveness’,

    –  having regard to Enrico Letta’s report of April 2024 on the future of the single market(2),

    –  having regard to the La Hulpe Declaration on the Future of the European Pillar of Social Rights signed by Parliament, the Commission, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Council on 16 April 2024,

    –  having regard to the Regulation (EU) 2023/955 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 May 2023 establishing a Social Climate Fund and amending Regulation (EU) 2021/1060(3),

    –  having regard to the Regulation (EU) 2024/1263 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2024 on the effective coordination of economic policies and on multilateral budgetary surveillance and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1466/97(4), and in particular to Articles 3, 4, 13 and 27 thereof,

    –  having regard to the Commission communication of 17 January 2023 entitled ‘Harnessing talent in Europe’s regions’ (COM(2023)0032),

    –  having regard to the Commission communication of 20 March 2023 entitled ‘Labour and skills shortages in the EU: an action plan’ (COM(2024)0131),

    –  having regard to the 2020 European Skills Agenda,

    –  having regard to the Commission communication of 7 September 2022 on the European care strategy (COM(2022)0440),

    –  having regard to the Council Recommendation on access to affordable, high-quality long-term care(5),

    –  having regard to the EU Social Scoreboard and its headline and secondary indicators,

    –  having regard to the Commission communication of 3 March 2021 entitled ‘Union of Equality: Strategy for the Rights of Persons with Disabilities 2021-2030’ (COM(2021)0101),

    –  having regard to the Commission report of 19 September 2024 entitled ‘Employment and Social Developments in Europe (ESDE): upward social convergence in the EU and the role of social investment’,

    –  having regard to the Council Decision on Employment Guidelines, adopted by the Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer Affairs Council on 2 December 2024, which establishes employment and social priorities aligned with the principles of the EPSR,

    –  having regard to the Tripartite Declaration for a thriving European Social Dialogue and to the forthcoming pact on social dialogue,

    –  having regard to Directive (EU) 2022/2041 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 October 2022 on adequate minimum wages in the European Union(6) (Minimum Wage Directive),

    –  having regard to the European Social Charter, referred to in the preamble of the EPSR,

    –  having regard to the EU Roma strategic framework for equality, inclusion and participation for 2020-2030,

    –  having regard to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs),

    –  having regard to the Gender Equality Strategy 2020-2025,

    –  having regard to the EU Anti-Racism Action Plan 2020-2025,

    –  having regard to the LGBTIQ Equality Strategy 2020-2025,

    –  having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

    –  having regard to the report of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs (A10-0023/2025),

    A.  whereas progress has been made towards achieving the EU’s employment targets, namely that at least 78 % of people aged 20 to 64 should be in employment by 2030, despite the uncertainty created by Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine and the impact of high inflation; whereas, according to the Commission’s 2025 autumn economic forecast, EU employment has reached a rate of 75,3 %; whereas growth in employment in the EU remained robust in 2023; whereas in two thirds of the Member States, employment growth in 2023 was on track to reach the national 2030 target; whereas significant challenges nevertheless persist, such as high unemployment rates in some Member States, particularly among young people and persons with disabilities, as do significant inequalities between sectors and regions, which can negatively affect social cohesion and the well-being of European citizens in the long term;

    B.  whereas the European Semester combines various different instruments in an integrated framework for multilateral coordination and surveillance of economic, employment and social policies within the EU and it must become a key tool for fostering upward social convergence; whereas the Social Convergence Framework is a key tool for assessing social challenges and upward convergence within the European Semester and for monitoring social disparities across Member States, while addressing the challenges identified in the Joint Employment Report (JER);

    C.  whereas the Union has adopted the 2030 target of reducing the number of people at risk of poverty and social exclusion by at least 15 million compared to 2019, including at least 5 million children; whereas in nearly half of the Member States the trend is heading in the opposite direction; whereas one child in four in the European Union is still at risk of poverty and social exclusion; and whereas the current trend will not make it possible to meet the 2030 target; whereas public spending on children and youth should not be seen only as social expenditure but as an investment in the future; whereas the promotion of strong, sustainable and inclusive economic growth can succeed only if the next generation can develop their full educational potential in order to be prepared for the changing labour market, whereas to meet the 2030 Barcelona targets for early childhood education and care, the EU should invest an additional EUR 11 billion per year(7);

    D.  whereas despite a minimal reduction in the number of people at risk of poverty or social exclusion in the EU in 2023, approximately one in five still faces this challenge, with notable disparities for children, young and older people, persons with disabilities, LGTBI, non-EU born individuals, and Roma communities;

    E.  whereas significant disparities are observed among children from ethnic or migrant backgrounds and children with disabilities; whereas 83 % of Roma children live in households at risk of poverty; whereas the EU and national resources currently deployed are in no way sufficient for addressing the challenge of child poverty in the EU and, therefore, a dedicated funding instrument for the European Child Guarantee as well as synergies with other European and national funds are of the utmost importance;

    F.  whereas the EPSR must be the compass guiding EU social and economic policies, whereas the Commission should monitor progress on the implementation of the EPSR using the Social Scoreboard and the Social Convergence Framework;

    G.  whereas poor quality jobs among the self-employed are disproportionately widespread while the rate of self-employment is declining, including among young people;

    H.  whereas there are still 1,4 million people residing in institutions in the EU; whereas residents of institutions are isolated from the broader community and do not have sufficient control over their lives and the decisions that affect them; whereas despite the fact that the European Union has long been committed to the process of deinstitutionalisation, efforts are still needed at both European and national level to enable vulnerable groups to live independently in a community environment;

    I.  whereas demographic challenges, including an ageing population, low birth rates and rural depopulation, with young people in particular moving to urban areas, profoundly affect the economic vitality and attractiveness of EU regions, the labour markets, and consequently, the sustainability of welfare systems, and further aggravate the regional disparities in the EU, and hence represent a structural challenge for the EU economy; and whereas, as underlined in the Draghi report, sustainable growth and competitiveness in Europe depend to a large extent on adapting education and training systems to evolving skills needs, prioritising adult learning and vocational education and training, and the inclusion of the active population in the labour market and on a robust welfare system;

    J.  whereas 70 % of workers in Europe are in good-quality jobs, 30 % are in high-strain jobs where demands are more numerous than resources available to balance them leading to overall poor job quality; whereas in many occupations suffering from persistent labour shortages the share of low-quality jobs is higher than 30 %;

    K.  whereas the Letta report states that there is a decline in the birth rate, noting the importance of creating a framework to support all families as part of a strategy of inclusive growth in line with the EPSR; whereas the report notes that the free movement of people remains the least developed of the four freedoms and argues for reducing barriers to intra-EU occupational mobility while addressing the social, economic and political challenges facing the sending Member States and their most disadvantaged regions, as well as safeguarding the right to stay; whereas there is a need to promote family-friendly and work-life balance policies, ensuring accessible and professional care systems as well as public quality education, family-related leave and flexible working arrangements in line with the European Care Strategy;

    L.  whereas inflation has increased the economic burden on households, having a particularly negative impact on groups in vulnerable situations, such as single parents, large families, older people or persons with disabilities, whereas housing costs and energy poverty remain major problems; whereas housing is becoming unaffordable for those who live in households where housing costs account for 40 % of total disposable income; whereas investment in social services, housing supply – including social housing – and policies that facilitate the accessibility and affordability of housing play a key role in reducing poverty among vulnerable households;

    M.  whereas the EU’s micro, small and medium-sized enterprises face particular challenges such as staying competitive against third-country players, maintaining production levels despite rising energy costs and finding the necessary skills for the green and digital transitions; whereas they need financial and technical support to comply with regulatory requirements and take advantage of the opportunities offered by the twin transitions;

    N.  whereas labour and skills shortages remain a problem at all levels, and are reported by companies of all sizes and sectors; whereas these shortages are exacerbated by a lack of candidates to fill critical positions in key sectors such as education, healthcare, transport, science, technology, engineering and construction, especially in areas affected by depopulation; whereas these shortages can result from a number of factors, such as difficult working conditions, unattractive salaries, demand for new skill sets and a shortage of relevant training, the lack of public services, barriers of access to medium and higher education and lack of recognition of skills and education;

    O.  whereas the Union has adopted the target that at least 60 % of adults should participate in training every year by 2030; whereas the Member States have committed themselves to national targets in order to achieve this headline goal and whereas the majority of Member States lost ground in the pursuit of these national targets; whereas further efforts are needed to ensure the provision of, and access to, quality training policies that promote lifelong learning; whereas upskilling, reskilling and training programmes must be available for all workers, including those with disabilities, and should also be adapted to workers’ needs and capabilities;

    P.  whereas in 2022, the average Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) score across the OECD on the measures of basic skills (reading, mathematics and science) of 15-year-olds dropped by 10 points compared to the last wave in 2018; whereas underachievement is prevalent among disadvantaged learners, demonstrating a widening of educational inequalities; whereas this worrying deterioration calls for reforms and investments in education and training;

    Q.  whereas the EU’s capacity to deal with future shocks, crises and ‘polycrises’ while navigating the demographic, digital and green transitions, will depend greatly on the conditions under which critical workers will be able to perform their work; whereas addressing the shortages and retaining all types of talent requires decent working conditions, access to social protection systems, and opportunities for skills development tailored to the needs; and whereas addressing skills shortages is crucial to achieving the digital and green transitions, ensuring inclusive and sustainable growth and boosting the EU’s competitiveness;

    R.  whereas it is essential to promote mobility within the EU and consider attracting skilled workers from third countries, while ensuring respect for and enforcement of labour and social rights and channelling third-country nationals entering the EU through legal migration pathways towards occupations experiencing shortages, supported by an effective integration policy, in full complementarity with harnessing talents from within the Union;

    S.  whereas gender pay gaps remain considerable in most EU Member States and whereas care responsibilities are an important factor that continue to constrain women into part-time employment or lead to their exclusion from the labour market, resulting in a wider gender employment gap;

    T.  whereas the JER highlights the right to disconnect, in particular in the context of telework, acknowledging the critical role of this right in ensuring a work-life balance in a context of increasing digitalisation and remote working;

    U.  whereas challenges to several sectors, such as automotive manufacturing and energy intensive industries, became evident in 2024 and a number of companies announced large-scale restructuring;

    V.  whereas there are disparities in the coverage of social services, including long-term care, child protection, domestic violence support, and homelessness aid, that need to be addressed through the European Semester;

    W.  whereas there is currently no regular EU-wide collection of data on social services investment and coverage; whereas collecting such data is key for an evidence-based analysis of national social policies in the European Semester analysis; whereas this should be addressed through jointly agreed criteria and data collection standards for social services investment and coverage in the Member States; whereas the European Social Network’s Social Services Index is an example of how such data collection can contribute to the European Semester analysis;

    X.  whereas the crisis in generational renewal, demographic changes, and lack of sufficient investment in public services have led to an increased risk of poverty and social exclusion, particularly affecting children and older people, single-parent households and large families, the working poor, persons with disabilities, and people from marginalised backgrounds; whereas an ambitious EU anti-poverty strategy will be essential to reverse this trend and provide responses to the multidimensional phenomenon of poverty;

    Y.  whereas Eurofound research shows that suicide rates have been creeping up since 2021, after decreasing for decades; whereas more needs to be done to address causes of mental health problems in working and living conditions (importantly social inclusion), and access to support for people with poor mental health remains a problem;

    Z.  whereas there were still over 3 300 fatal accidents and almost 3 million nonfatal accidents in the EU-27 in 2021; whereas over 200 000 workers die each year from work-related illnesses; whereas these data do not include all accidents caused by undeclared work, making it plausible to assume that the true numbers greatly exceed the official statistics; whereas in 2017, according to Eurofound, 20 % of jobs in Europe were of ‘poor quality’ and put workers at increased risk regarding their physical or mental health; whereas 14 % of workers have been exposed to a high level of psychosocial risks; whereas 23 % of European workers believe that their safety or their health is at risk because of their work;

    AA.  whereas the results of the April 2024 Eurobarometer survey on social Europe highlight that 88 % of European citizens consider social Europe to be important to them personally; whereas this was confirmed by the EU Post-Electoral Survey 2024, where European citizens cited rising prices and the cost of living (42 %) and the economic situation (41 %) as the main topics that motivated them to vote in the 2024 European elections;

    AB.  whereas according to Article 3 TEU, social progress in the EU is one of the aims of a highly competitive social market economy, together with full employment, a high level of protection and improvement of the quality of the environment; whereas Article 3 TEU also states that the EU ‘shall combat social exclusion and discrimination, and shall promote social justice and protection, equality between women and men, solidarity between generations and protection of the rights of the child’;

    AC.  whereas the new EU economic governance framework entered into force in April 2024 and aims to promote sustainable and inclusive growth and to give more space for social investment and achievement of the objectives of the EPSR; whereas, for the first time, the revision includes a social convergence framework as an integrated part of the European Semester;

    AD.  whereas under the new EU economic governance framework, all Member States have to include reforms and investments in their medium-term plans addressing common EU priorities and challenges identified in country-specific recommendations in the context of the European Semester; whereas the common EU priorities include social and economic resilience, including the EPSR;

    AE.  whereas public investment is expected to increase in 2025 in almost all Member States, with a significant contribution from NextGenerationEU’s Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) and EU funds and will contribute to social spending, amounting to around 25 % of the total estimated expenditure under the RRF, securing growth and economic resilience(8); whereas social investments and reforms in key areas can boost employment, social inclusion, competitiveness and economic growth(9); whereas social partners are essential for designing and implementing policies that promote sustainable and inclusive growth, decent and quality work, and fair transitions and must be involved at all levels of governance in accordance with the TFEU;

    AF.  whereas according to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), on average across OECD countries, occupations at highest risk of automation account for about 28 % of employment(10); whereas social dialogue and collective bargaining are crucial in this context to ensure a participatory approach to managing change driven by technological developments, addressing potential concerns, while fostering workers’ adaptation (including via skills provision); whereas digitalisation, robotisation, automation and artificial intelligence (AI) must benefit workers and society by improving working conditions and quality of life, ensuring a good work-life balance, creating better employment opportunities, and contributing to socio-economic convergence; whereas workers and their trade unions will play a critical role in anticipating and tackling risks emerging from those challenges;

    AG.  whereas social dialogue and collective bargaining are essential for the EU’s competitiveness, labour productivity and social cohesion;

    1.  Considers that the Commission and the Council should strengthen their efforts to implement the EPSR, in line with the action plan of March 2021 and the La Hulpe Declaration, to achieve the 2030 headline targets; calls on the Commission to ensure that the JER 2026 analyses the implementation of all the principles of the EPSR in line with Regulation (EU) 2024/1263 and includes an analysis of the social dimension of the national medium-term fiscal structural plans related to social resilience, including the EPSR; welcomes, in this regard, the announcement of a new Action Plan on the implementation of the EPSR(11) for 2025 to give a new impetus to social progress; welcomes the fact that almost all Member States are expected to increase public investment in 2025, which is necessary to ensure access to quality public services and achieve the aims of the EPSR; recalls that the Member States can mobilise the RRF within the scope defined by the Regulation (EU) 2021/241(12) until 31 December 2026 on policies for sustainable and inclusive growth and the next generation;

    2.  Stresses the importance of using the Social Scoreboard and the Social Convergence Framework to identify risks to, and to track progress in, reducing inequalities, strengthening social protection systems and promoting decent working conditions and supportive measures for workers to manage the transitions; stresses that in this regard, it is necessary to ensure a sustainable, fair and inclusive Europe where social rights are fully protected and safeguarded at the same level as economic freedoms; recalls that EU citizens identify social Europe as one of their priorities;

    3.  Regrets the lack of data on and analysis of wealth inequality and wealth concentration in the EU as this is one of the main determinants of poverty; points out that according to Distributional Wealth Accounts, a dataset developed by the European System of Central Banks, the share of wealth held by the top 10 % stood at 56 % in the fourth quarter of 2023, while the bottom half held just 5 %;

    4.  Welcomes the inclusion of analysis on the positive contribution of the SDGs and the European equality strategies in the JER 2025 and calls on the Commission to ensure that the JER 2026 includes both a section analysing the progress towards the SDGs related to employment and social policy, and another on progress towards eliminating social and labour discrimination in line with the Gender Equality Strategy 2020-2025, the EU Anti-Racism Action Plan 2020-2025, the EU Roma strategic framework for equality, inclusion and participation 2020-2030, the LGBTIQ Equality Strategy 2020-2025, and the Strategy for the rights of persons with disabilities 2021-2030;

    5.  Calls on the Member States to implement the updated employment guidelines, with an emphasis on education and training for all, new technologies such as AI, and recent policy initiatives on platform work, affordable and decent housing and tackling labour and skills shortages, with a view to strengthening democratic decision-making;

    6.  Reiterates the importance of investing in workforce skills development and occupational training and of ensuring quality employment, with an emphasis on the individual right to training and lifelong learning; urges the Member States to develop upskilling and reskilling measures in collaboration with local stakeholders, including educational and training bodies and the social partners, in order to reinforce the link between the education and training systems and the labour market and to anticipate labour market needs; welcomes the fact that employment outcomes for recent graduates from vocational education and training (VET) continue to improve across the EU; is concerned about young people’s declining educational performance, particularly in basic skills; welcomes, in this regard, the announcement of an Action Plan on Basic Skills and a STEM Education Strategic Plan; calls on the Member States to invest in programmes to equip learners with the basic, digital and transversal skills needed for the world of work and its digitisation as well as to help them to contribute meaningfully to society; recalls the important role that the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund for displaced workers can play in supporting and reskilling workers who were made redundant as a result of major restructuring events;

    7.  Welcomes the announcement of a quality jobs roadmap to ensure a just transition for all; calls on the Commission to include in this roadmap considerations for measures linked to the use of AI and algorithmic management in the world of work so that new technologies are harnessed to improve working conditions and productivity while respecting workers’ rights and work-life balance as recognised in the JER(13);

    8.  Stresses that the response to labour shortages in the European Union also involves improving and facilitating labour mobility within the Union; calls on the Member States to strengthen and facilitate the recognition of skills and qualifications in the Union, including those of third-country nationals; calls on the Commission to analyse the effectiveness of the European Employment Services (EURES) platform with a view to a potential revision of its operation;

    9.  Notes that the number of early leavers from education and training, people with lower levels of education, young people not in education, employment or training (NEETs) and among them vulnerable groups, including Roma, women, older people, low- and medium-qualified people, persons with disabilities and people with a migrant or minority background, depending on the country-specific context, remains high in several Member States, despite a downward trend in the European Union; calls on the Member States to reinforce the Youth Guarantee as stated in Principle 4 of the EPSR; in order to support young people in need throughout their personal and professional development; reiterates the pivotal role that VET plays in providing the knowledge, skills and competencies necessary for young people entering the labour market; emphasises the need to invest in the quality and attractiveness of VET through the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+); recalls, therefore, the need to address this situation and develop solutions to keep young people in education, training or employment and the importance of ensuring their access to traineeships and apprenticeships, enabling them to gain their first work experience and facilitating their transition from education to employment as well as to create working conditions that enable an ageing workforce to remain in the labour market;

    10.  Considers that, although there has been an improvement, persons with disabilities, especially women with disabilities, still face significant obstacles in the labour market, and that there is therefore a need for vocational and digital training, while promoting the inclusion of persons with disabilities, targeting the inactive labour force and groups with low participation in the labour market, including women, young people, older workers and persons with chronic diseases; calls on the Commission to update the EU Disability Strategy with new flagship initiatives and actions from 2025 onwards, such as a European Disability Employment and Skills Guarantee and the sharing of best practices such as the disability card, in particular to address social inclusion and independent living for people with disabilities, also ensuring their access to quality education, training and employment through guidance on retaining disability allowances;

    11.  Expresses concern that Roma continue to face significant barriers to employment, with persistent biases limiting their prospects; notes that the EU Roma strategic framework for equality, inclusion, and participation highlights a lack of progress in employment access and a growing share of Roma youth not in employment, education, or training; emphasises the framework’s goal of halving the employment gap between Roma and the general population and ensuring that at least 60 % of Roma are in paid work by 2030; urges the Member States to adopt an integrated, equality-focused approach and to ensure that public policies and services effectively reach all Roma, including those in remote rural areas;

    12.  Stresses the need to pay attention to the social and environmental aspects of competitiveness, emphasising the need for investments in education and training for all to ensure universal access to high-quality public education and professional training programmes, as well as sustainable practices to foster inclusive growth; underlines that social partners should play a key role in identifying and addressing skills needs across the EU;

    13.  Calls on the Commission and the Member States to include specific recommendations on housing affordability in the European Semester and to promote housing investment; urges the Member States to ensure that housing investments support long-term quality housing solutions that are actually affordable for low-income and middle-income households, highlighting that investments in social and affordable housing are crucial in order to ensure and improve the quality of life for all; stresses the need for a better use of EU funding, such as through European Investment Bank financial instruments, in particular to support investments to increase the energy efficiency of buildings; calls on the Commission and the Member States to take decisive action to provide an assessment of Union policies, funds and bottlenecks that should facilitate the construction, conversion and renovation of accessible, affordable and energy-efficient housing, including social housing, that meets the needs of young people, people with reduced mobility, low- and middle-income groups, families at risk and people in more vulnerable situations, while protecting homeowners and those seeking access to home ownership from a further reduction in supply;

    14.  Welcomes the announced European Affordable Housing Plan to support Member States in addressing the housing crisis and soaring rents; calls on the Commission to assess and publish which potential barriers on State aid rules affect housing accessibility; recalls that the Social Climate Fund aims to provide financial aid to Member States from 2026 to support vulnerable households, in particular with measures and investments intended to increase the energy efficiency of buildings, decarbonisation of heating and cooling of buildings and the integration in buildings of renewable energy generation and storage;

    15.  Considers that homelessness is a dramatic social problem in the EU; calls for a single definition of homelessness in the EU, which would enable the systematic comparison and assessment of the extent of homelessness across different EU Member States; calls on the Commission to develop a strategy and work towards ending homelessness in the EU by 2030 by promoting access to affordable and decent housing as well as access to quality social services; urges the Member States to better use the available EU instruments, including the ESF+, in this matter(14);

    16.  Calls on the Member States to design national homelessness strategies; welcomes the intention to deliver a Council recommendation on homelessness(15); urges the Commission to further increase the ambition of the European Platform on Combating Homelessness;

    17.  Considers that EU action is urgently needed to address the persistently high levels of poverty and social exclusion in the EU, particularly among children, young and older people, persons with disabilities, non-EU born individuals, LGTBI and Roma communities; highlights that access to quality social services should be prioritised and should ensure energy security for vulnerable households; calls on the Commission to adopt the first-ever EU Anti-Poverty Strategy;

    18.  Recalls the Union objective of transitioning from institutional to community or family-based care; calls on the Commission to put forward an action plan on deinstitutionalisation; stresses that this action plan should cover all groups still living in institutions, including children, persons with disabilities, people with mental health issues, people affected by homelessness and older people; calls on the Member States to make full use of the ESF+ funds as well as other relevant European and national funds in order to finalise the deinstitutionalisation process so as to ensure that every EU citizen can live in a family or community environment;

    19.  Calls on the Commission to deliver a European action plan for mental health, in line with its recent recommendations(16); calls on the Member States to strengthen access to mental health services and emotional support programmes for all, particularly children, young people and older people; requests a better use of the Social Scoreboard indicators to address the impact of precarious living conditions and uncertainty on mental health;

    20.  Calls on the Commission to address loneliness by promoting a holistic EU strategy on loneliness and access to professional care; calls also for this EU strategy to address the socio-economic impact of loneliness on productivity and well-being by tackling issues such as rural isolation; urges the Member States to continue implementing the Council recommendation on access to affordable, quality long-term care with a view to ensuring access to quality care while ensuring decent working conditions for workers in the care sector, as well as for informal carers;

    21.  Recognises that 44 million Europeans are frequent informal long-term caregivers, the majority of whom are women(17);

    22.  Recognises the unique role of carers in society, and while the definition of care workers is not harmonised across the EU, the long-term care sector employs 6.4 million people across the EU;

    23.  Is concerned that, in 2023, 94,6 million people in the EU were still at risk of poverty or social exclusion; stresses that without a paradigm shift in the approach to combating poverty, the European Union and its Member States will not achieve their poverty reduction objectives; believes that the announcement of the first-ever EU Anti-Poverty Strategy is a step in the right direction towards reversing the trend, but must provide a comprehensive approach to tackling the multidimensional aspects of poverty and social exclusion with concrete actions, strong implementation and monitoring; calls for this Strategy to encompass everybody experiencing poverty and social exclusion, first and foremost the most disadvantaged, but also specific measures for different groups such as persons experiencing in-work poverty, homeless people, people with disabilities, single-parent families and, above all, children in order to sustainably break the cycle of poverty; stresses that the transposition of the Minimum Wage Directive will be key to preventing and fighting poverty risks among workers, while reinforcing incentives to work, and welcomes the fact that several Member States have amended or plan to amend their minimum wage frameworks; is concerned about the rise of non-standard forms of employment where workers are more likely to face in-work poverty and find themselves without adequate legal protections;

    24.  Reiterates its call on the Commission to carefully monitor implementation of the Child Guarantee in all Member States as part of the European Semester and country-specific recommendations; reiterates its call for an increase in the funding of the European Child Guarantee with a dedicated budget of at least EUR 20 billion and for all Member States to allocate at least 5 % of their allocated ESF+ funds to fighting child poverty and promoting children’s well-being; considers that the country-specific recommendations should reflect Member States’ budgetary compliance with the minimum required allocation for tackling child poverty set out in the ESF+ Regulation(18); calls on the Commission to provide an ambitious budget for the Child Guarantee in the next MFF in order to respond to the growing challenge of child poverty and social exclusion;

    25.  Is concerned about national policies that create gaps in health coverage, increasing inequalities both within and between Member States; warns that this also undermines the implementation of principle 16 of the EPSR and of SDG 3.8 on universal health coverage, as well as the EPSR’s overall objective of promoting upward social convergence in the EU, leaving no one behind; believes that the indicators used in the Social Scoreboard do not provide a comprehensive understanding of healthcare affordability;

    26.  Underlines that employers need to foster intergenerational links within companies and intergenerational learning between younger and older workers, and vice versa; underlines that an ageing workforce can help a business develop new products and services to adapt to the needs of an ageing society in a more creative and productive way; calls, furthermore, for the creation of incentives to encourage volunteering and mentoring to induce the transfer of knowledge between generations;

    27.  Warns that, according to European Central Bank reports, real wages are still below their pre-pandemic level, while productivity was roughly the same; agrees that this creates some room for a non-inflationary recovery in real wages and warns that if real wages do not recover, this would increase the risk of protracted economic weakness, which could cause scarring effects and would further dent productivity in the euro area relative to other parts of the world; believes that better enforcement of minimum wages and strengthening collective bargaining coverage can have a beneficial effect on levels of wage inequality, especially by helping more vulnerable workers at the bottom of the wage distribution who are increasingly left out;

    28.  Calls for the Member States to ensure decent working conditions, comprising among other things decent wages, access to social protection, lifelong learning opportunities, occupational health and safety, a good work-life balance and the right to disconnect, reasonable working time, workers’ representation, democracy at work and collective agreements; urges the Member States to foster democracy at work, social dialogue and collective bargaining and to protect workers’ rights, particularly in the context of the green and digital transitions, and to ensure equal pay for equal work by men and women, enhance pay transparency and address gender-based inequality to close the gender pay gap in the EU;

    29.  Recalls the importance of improving access to social protection for the self-employed and calls on the Commission to monitor the Member States’ national plans for the implementation of the Council Recommendation of 8 November 2019 on access to social protection for workers and the self-employed(19) as part of the country-specific recommendations; recalls, in this regard, as the rate of self-employed professionals in the cultural and creative sectors is more than double that in the general population, the 13 initiatives laid down in the Commission’s 21 February 2024 response to the European Parliament resolution of 21 November 2023 on an EU framework for the social and professional situation of artists and workers in the cultural and creative sectors(20) and calls on the Commission to start implementing them in cooperation with the Member States;

    30.  Calls for the implementation of policies that promote work-life balance and the right to disconnect, with the aim of improving the quality of life for all families and workers, for ensuring the implementation of the Work-Life Balance Directive(21) and of the European Care Strategy; calls on the Commission to put forward a proposal to address teleworking and the right to disconnect; as well as a proposal for the creation of a European card for all types of large families and a European action plan for single parents, offering educational and social advantages; calls, ultimately, for initiatives to combat workforce exclusion as a consequence of longer periods of sick leave, to adapt the workplace and to promote flexible working conditions and to develop strategies to support workers’ return after longer periods of absence;

    31.  Calls for demographic challenges to be prioritised in the EU’s cohesion policy and for concrete action at EU and national levels; calls on the Commission to declare a ‘European Year of Demography’ and to prioritise the development of the Commission communication on harnessing talent in Europe’s regions and the ‘Talent Booster Mechanism’ in order to promote social cohesion and to step up funding for rural and outermost areas and regions with a high rate of depopulation, supporting quality job creation, public services, local development projects and basic infrastructure that favour the population’s ‘right to stay’, especially in the case of young people; highlights the importance of introducing specific measures to address regional inequalities in education and training, ensuring equal access to high-quality and affordable education for all;

    32.  Is concerned that, despite improvements, several population groups are still significantly under-represented in the EU labour market, including women, older people, low- and medium-qualified people, persons with disabilities and people with a migrant or minority background; warns that  educational inequalities have deepened, further exacerbating the vulnerabilities of students from disadvantaged and migrant backgrounds; points out that, according to the JER, people with migrant or minority backgrounds can significantly benefit from targeted measures in order to address skills mismatches, improve language proficiency and combat discrimination; stresses the importance of strengthening efforts in the implementation of the 2021-27 Action Plan on Integration and Inclusion, which provides a common policy framework to support the Member States in developing national migrant integration policies;

    33.  Calls on the Commission and the Council to prioritise reducing administrative burdens with the aim of simplification while respecting labour and social standards; believes that better support for SMEs and actual and potential entrepreneurs will improve the EU’s competitiveness and long-term sustainability, boost innovation and create quality jobs; notes that SMEs and self-employed professionals in all sectors are essential for the EU’s economic growth and thus the financing of social policies; urges the implementation of specific recommendations to improve the single market; takes note of the Commission’s publication of the ‘Competitiveness Compass’ on 29 January 2025(22);

    34.  Calls on the Commission to conduct competitiveness checks on every new legislative proposal, taking into account the overall impact of EU legislation on companies, as well as on other EU policies and programmes;

    35.  Considers that the social economy is an essential component of the EU’s social market economy and a driver for the implementation of the EPSR and its targets, often providing employment to vulnerable and excluded groups; calls on the Commission and the Member States to strengthen their support for all social economy enterprises but especially non-profit ones, as highlighted in the Social Economy Action Plan 2021 and the Liège Roadmap for the Social Economy, in order to promote quality, decent, inclusive work and the circular economy, to encourage the Member States to facilitate access to funding and to enhance the visibility of social economy actors; calls for the Commission to explore innovative funding mechanisms to support the development of the social economy in Europe(23) and to foster a dynamic and inclusive business environment;

    36.  Believes that, in this year of transition, with the implementation of the revised economic governance rules, the Member States should align fiscal responsibility with sustainable and inclusive growth and employment, notes that the involvement of social partners, including in the development of medium-term fiscal structural plans, should be enhanced to contribute to the goals of the new economic governance framework;

    37.  Welcomes the fact that the national medium-term fiscal structural plans, under the new economic governance framework, have to include the reforms and investments responding to the main challenges identified in the context of the European Semester and also to ensure debt sustainability while investing strategically in the principles of the EPSR with the aim of fostering upward social convergence;

    38.  Is concerned that compliance with the country-specific recommendations (CSRs) remains low; reiterates its call, therefore, for an effective implementation of CSRs by the Member States so as to promote healthcare and sustainable pension systems, in line with principles 15 and 16 of the EPSR, and long-term prosperity for all citizens, taking into account the vulnerability of those workers whose careers are segmented, intermittent and subject to labour transitions; insists that the Commission should reinforce its dialogues with the Member States on the implementation of existing recommendations and of the Employment Guidelines as well as on current or future policy action to address identified challenges;

    39.  Welcomes the establishment of a framework to identify risks to social convergence within the European Semester, for which Parliament called strongly; recalls that under this framework, the Commission assesses risks to upward social convergence in Member States and monitors progress on the implementation of the EPSR on the basis of the Social Scoreboard and of the principles of the Social Convergence Framework; welcomes the fact that the 2025 JER delivers country-specific analysis based on the principles of the Social Convergence Framework; calls on the Commission to further develop innovative quantitative and qualitative analysis tools under this new Framework in order to make optimal use of it in the future cycles of the European Semester;

    40.  Welcomes the fact that the first analysis based on the principles of the Social Convergence Framework points to upward convergence in the labour market in 2023(24); notes with concern that employment outcomes of under-represented groups still need to improve and that risks to upward convergence persist at European level in relation to skills development, ranging from early education to lifelong learning, and the social outcomes of at-risk-of-poverty and social exclusion rates; calls on the Commission to further analyse these risks to upward social convergence in the second stage of the analysis and to discuss with the Member States concerned the measures undertaken or envisaged to address these risks;

    41.  Recognises the cost of living crisis, which has increased the burden on households, and the rising cost of housing, which, in conjunction with high energy costs, is contributing to high levels of energy poverty across the EU; calls, therefore, on the Commission and Member States to comprehensively address the root causes of this crisis by prioritising policies that promote economic resilience, social cohesion, and sustainable development;

    42.  Warns of the social risks stemming from the crisis in the automotive sector, which is facing unprecedented pressure from both external and internal factors; calls on the Commission to pay attention to this sector and enhance social dialogue and the participation of workers in transition processes; stresses the urgent need for a coordinated EU response via an emergency task force of trade unions and employers to respond to the current crisis;

    43.  Calls on the Commission to monitor data on restructuring and its impact on employment, such as by using the European Restructuring Monitor, to facilitate measures in support of restructuring and labour market transitions, and to consider highlighting national measures supporting a socially responsible way of restructuring in the European Semester;

    44.  Is concerned about the Commission’s revision of the Macroeconomic Imbalance Procedure (MIP) Scoreboard, particularly the reduction in employment and social indicators, which are crucial for assessing the social and labour market situation in the Member States; regrets the fact that youth unemployment is no longer considered as a headline indicator, despite its relevance in identifying and addressing specific labour market challenges and in adopting adequate public policies; stresses that social standards indicators should be given greater consideration in the decision-making process; regrets the fact that the Commission did not duly consult Parliament and reminds the Commission of its obligation to closely cooperate with Parliament, the Council and social partners before drawing up the MIP scoreboard and the set of macroeconomic and macro-financial indicators for Member States; stresses that the implementation of the principles of the EPSR must be part of the MIP scoreboard;

    45.  Considers that territorial and social cohesion are essential components of the competitiveness agenda, and legislation such as the European Instrument for Temporary Support to Mitigate Unemployment Risks in an Emergency (SURE) remain a positive example to inspire future EU initiatives;

    46.  Considers that the Commission and the Member States should ensure that fiscal policies under the European Semester support investments aligned with the EPSR, particularly in areas such as decent and affordable housing, quality healthcare, education, and social protection systems, as these are critical for social cohesion and long-term economic sustainability and to address the challenges identified through social indicators;

    47.  Stresses the need to address key challenges identified in the Social Scoreboard as ‘critical’ and ‘to watch’, including children at risk of poverty or social exclusion, the gender employment gap, housing cost overburden, childcare, and long-term care the disability employment gap, the impact of social transfers on reducing poverty, and basic digital skills(25);

    48.  Stresses the negative impacts that the cost of living crisis has had on persons with disabilities;

    49.  Urges the Member States to consider robust policies that ensure fair wages and improve working conditions, particularly for low-income and precarious workers;

    50.  Stresses the need for timely and harmonised data on social policies to improve evidence-based policymaking and targeted social investments; calls for improvements to be made to the Social Scoreboard in order to cover the 20 EPSR principles with the introduction of relevant indicators reflecting trends and causes of inequality, such as quality employment, wealth distribution, access to public services, adequate pensions, the homelessness rate, mental health and unemployment; recalls that the at-risk-of-poverty-or-social-exclusion (AROPE) indicator fails to reveal the causes of complex inequality; calls on the Commission and the Member States to develop a European data collection framework on social services to monitor the investment in and coverage of social services;

    51.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission.

    (1) OJ C, C/2025/491, 29.1.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/491/oj.
    (2) Letta, E., Much more than a market – Speed, security, solidarity – Empowering the Single Market to deliver a sustainable future and prosperity for all EU Citizens, April 2024.
    (3) OJ L 130, 16.5.2023, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/955/oj.
    (4) OJ L, 2024/1263, 30.4.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1263/oj.
    (5) OJ C 476, 15.12.2022, p. 1.
    (6) OJ L 275, 25.10.2022, p. 33, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2022/2041/oj.
    (7) European Commission, ‘Employment and Social Developments in Europe (ESDE) 2024’, September 2024.
    (8) 2025 European Semester: Commission proposal of 17 December 2024 for a joint employment report from the Commission and the Council (COM(2024)0701).
    (9) European Commission, ‘Employment and Social Developments in Europe (ESDE) 2024’, September 2024.
    (10) OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers No. 282.
    (11) von der Leyen, U., ‘Europe’s Choice, Political Guidelines for the Next European Commission 2024-2029’, 18 July 2024.
    (12) Regulation (EU) 2021/241 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 February 2021 establishing the Recovery and Resilience Facility (OJ L 57, 18.2.2021, p. 17, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/241/oj).
    (13) Commission proposal of 17 December 2024 for a joint employment report from the Commission and the Council (COM(2024)0701).
    (14) Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 13 December 2023 on For an EU framework for national homeless strategies based on the principle of ‘Housing First’ (OJ C, C/2024/1567, 5.3.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/1567/oj).
    (15) Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 13 December 2023 on For an EU framework for national homeless strategies based on the principle of ‘Housing First’.
    (16) Commission communication of 7 June 2023 on a comprehensive approach to mental health (COM(2023)0298).
    (17) European Commission: Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion, Long-term care report – Trends, challenges and opportunities in an ageing society. Volume I, Publications Office, 2021, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2767/677726.
    (18) Article 7(3) of Regulation (EU) 2021/1057 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2021 establishing the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+) (OJ L 231, 30.6.2021, p. 21, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/1057/oj).
    (19) OJ C 387, 15.11.2019, p. 1.
    (20) European Parliament resolution of 21 November 2023 with recommendations to the Commission on an EU framework for the social and professional situation of artists and workers in the cultural and creative sectors (OJ C, C/2024/4208, 24.7.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/4208/oj).
    (21) Directive (EU) 2019/1158 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on work-life balance for parents and carers and repealing Council Directive 2010/18/EU (OJ L 188, 12.7.2019, p. 79, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2019/1158/oj).
    (22) Commission communication of 29 January 2025 entitled ‘A Competitiveness Compass for the EU’ (COM(2025)0030).
    (23) Resolution of 6 July 2022 on the EU action plan for the social economy (OJ C 47, 7.2.2023, p. 171).
    (24) Commission proposal of 17 December 2024 for a joint employment report from the Commission and the Council (COM(2024)0701).
    (25) Commission proposal of 17 December 2024 for a joint employment report from the Commission and the Council (COM(2024)0701).

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Text adopted – European Semester for economic policy coordination 2025 – P10_TA(2025)0031 – Wednesday, 12 March 2025 – Strasbourg

    Source: European Parliament

    The European Parliament,

    –  having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), in particular Articles 121, 126 and 136 thereof,

    –  having regard to Protocol No 1 to the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and the TFEU on the role of national parliaments in the European Union,

    –  having regard to Protocol No 2 to the TEU and the TFEU on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality,

    –  having regard to Protocol No 12 to the TEU and the TFEU on the excessive debt procedure,

    –  having regard to the Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance in the Economic and Monetary Union,

    –  having regard to Regulation (EU) 2024/1263 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2024 on the effective coordination of economic policies and on multilateral budgetary surveillance and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1466/97(1),

    –  having regard to Council Regulation (EU) 2024/1264 of 29 April 2024 amending Regulation (EC) No 1467/97 on speeding up and clarifying the implementation of the excessive deficit procedure(2),

    –  having regard to Council Directive (EU) 2024/1265 of 29 April 2024 amending Directive 2011/85/EU on requirements for budgetary frameworks of the Member States(3),

    –  having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1173/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2011 on the effective enforcement of budgetary surveillance in the euro area(4),

    –  having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1174/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2011 on enforcement measures to correct excessive macroeconomic imbalances in the euro area(5),

    –  having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2011 on the prevention and correction of macroeconomic imbalances(6),

    –  having regard to Regulation (EU) No 472/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2013 on the strengthening of economic and budgetary surveillance of Member States in the euro area experiencing or threatened with serious difficulties with respect to their financial stability(7),

    –  having regard to Regulation (EU) No 473/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2013 on common provisions for monitoring and assessing draft budgetary plans and ensuring the correction of excessive deficit of the Member States in the euro area(8),

    –  having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2020 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget(9) (the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation),

    –  having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/241 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 February 2021 establishing the Recovery and Resilience Facility(10) (the RRF Regulation),

    –  having regard to the Commission’s Spring 2024 Economic Forecast of 15 May 2024,

    –  having regard to the Commission’s Autumn 2024 Economic Forecast of 15 November 2024,

    –  having regard to the Commission’s Debt Sustainability Monitor 2023 of 22 March 2024,

    –  having regard to the Commission communication of 17 December 2024 entitled ‘Alert Mechanism Report 2025’ (COM(2024)0702) and to the Commission recommendation of 17 December 2024 for a Council recommendation on the economic policy of the euro area (COM(2024)0704),

    –  having regard to the Commission proposal of 17 December 2024 for a joint employment report from the Commission and the Council (COM(2024)0701),

    –  having regard to the Commission communication of 8 March 2023 entitled ‘Fiscal policy guidance for 2024’ (COM(2023)0141),

    –  having regard to the Commission report of 19 June 2024 prepared in accordance with Article 126(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (COM(2024)0598),

    –  having regard to the Council Recommendation of 12 April 2024 on the economic policy of the euro area(11),

    –  having regard to the European Fiscal Board assessment of 3 July 2024 on the fiscal stance appropriate for the euro area in 2025,

    –  having regard to the Eurogroup statement of 15 July 2024 on the fiscal stance for the euro area in 2025,

    –  having regard to the European Fiscal Board’s 2024 annual report, published on 2 October 2024,

    –  having regard to the Commission communication of 19 June 2024 entitled ‘2024 European Semester – Spring Package’ (COM(2024)0600),

    –  having regard to the Commission communication of 17 December 2024 entitled ‘2025 European Semester – Autumn package’ (COM(2024)0700),

    –  having regard to the Commission communication of 11 December 2019 entitled ‘The European Green Deal’ (COM(2019)0640), to the Paris Agreement adopted on 12 December 2025 in the context of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and to the UN Sustainable Development Goals,

    –  having regard to the Eighth Environment Action Programme to 2030,

    –  having regard to the Interinstitutional Proclamation of 17 November 2017 on the European Pillar of Social Rights(12) and to the Commission communication of 4 March 2021 entitled ‘The European Pillar of Social Rights Action Plan’ (COM(2021)0102),

    –  having regard to its resolution of 21 January 2021 on access to decent and affordable housing for all(13),

    –  having regard to the document by Ursula von der Leyen, candidate for President of the European Commission, of 18 July 2024 entitled ‘Europe’s choice – Political guidelines for the next European Commission 2024-2029’, and to the statement made by Valdis Dombrovskis, Commissioner for Economy and Productivity, Implementation and Simplification, at his confirmation hearing on 7 November 2024,

    –  having regard to International Monetary Fund working paper 24/181 of August 2024 entitled ‘Taming Public Debt in Europe: Outlook, Challenges, and Policy Response’,

    –  having regard to the International Monetary Fund’s Fiscal Monitor entitled ‘Putting a Lid on Public Debt’ of October 2024,

    –  having regard to Special Report 13/2024 of the European Court of Auditors entitled ‘Absorption of funds from the Recovery and Resilience Facility – Progressing with delays and risks remain regarding the completion of measures and therefore the achievement of RRF objectives’,

    –  having regard to the in-depth analysis entitled ‘The new economic governance framework: implications for monetary policy’, published by its Directorate-General for Internal Policies on 20 November 2024(14),

    –  having regard to the in-depth analysis entitled ‘Economic Dialogue with the European Commission on EU Fiscal Surveillance’, published by its Directorate-General for Internal Policies on 1 December 2024(15),

    –  having regard to Mario Draghi’s report of 9 September 2024 entitled ‘The future of European Competitiveness’ (the Draghi report),

    –  having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

    –  having regard to the report of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (A10-0022/2025),

    A.  whereas the European Semester plays an essential role in coordinating economic and budgetary policies in the Member States, and thus preserves the macroeconomic stability of the economic and monetary union;

    B.  whereas the European Semester aims to promote sustainable, inclusive and competitive growth, employment, macroeconomic stability and sound public finances throughout the entire EU, with a view to ensuring the sustained upward convergence of the economic, social and environmental performance of the Member States;

    C.  whereas the 2024 European Semester marked the first implementation cycle of the new economic governance framework, which came into force on 30 April 2024, guiding the EU and its Member States through a transitional phase;

    D.  whereas the 2024 Council Recommendation on the economic policy of the euro area calls on the Member States to take action, both individually and collectively, to strengthen competitiveness, boost economic and social resilience, preserve macro-financial stability and sustain a high level of public investment to support the green and digital transitions; whereas fiscal stability is a basis for both sustainable high social standards in the EU and the competitiveness of the EU;

    E.  whereas the main objectives of the new economic governance framework are to strengthen debt sustainability and sustainable and inclusive growth in all Member States, as well as enabling all Member States to undertake the necessary reforms and investments in the EU’s common priorities, which include (i) a fair green and digital transition, (ii) social and economic resilience including the European pillar of social rights, (iii) energy security, and (iv) the build-up of defence capabilities; whereas disparities in fiscal capacity among Member States hinder equitable investment in strategic priorities and weaken cohesion within the single market;

    F.  whereas reference values of up to 3 % of government deficit to GDP and 60 % of public debt to GDP are defined by the TFEU; whereas the EU’s headline deficit and government debt-to-GDP ratio remain above the reference values; whereas both the headline deficit and government debt-to-GDP ratio vary across the EU, with significantly divergent situations in different Member States;

    G.  whereas excessive deficit procedures were opened, or kept open, for eight Member States in 2024; whereas some Member States were not subject to an excessive deficit procedure, despite having a deficit above 3 % of GDP in 2023, as decided by the Council and the Commission after a balanced assessment of all the relevant factors;

    H.  whereas no procedure concerning macroeconomic imbalances has been opened by the Council since the establishment of this procedure in 2011; whereas, in accordance with its Alert Mechanism Report, the Commission will conduct an in-depth review of 10 countries identified as experiencing macroeconomic imbalances or excessive imbalances in 2025;

    I.  whereas the success of a framework relies heavily on its proper, transparent and effective implementation from the outset, while taking into account the Member States’ starting points and the individual challenges they face;

    J.  whereas the timely submission of the national medium-term fiscal-structural and draft budgetary plans is a precondition for the effective implementation and credibility of the new rules; whereas the first national fiscal and budgetary plans have already been assessed by the Council; whereas the equal treatment of the Member States and compliance with the requirements outlined in Regulation (EU) 2024/1263 as regards the fiscal plans are necessary for the effective implementation of the framework;

    K.  whereas the economic outlook for the EU remains highly uncertain and there is a growing risk of future events or situations that will negatively affect the economy; whereas Russia’s aggression in Ukraine and the conflicts in the Middle East are aggravating geopolitical risks and highlighting Europe’s energy vulnerability; whereas a rise in protectionist measures by trading partners may affect world trade, with negative repercussions for the EU economy; whereas current geopolitical tensions have demonstrated the need for the EU to further strengthen its open strategic autonomy and remain competitive in the global market, while ensuring that no one is left behind;

    L.  whereas the implementation of the revised economic governance framework is expected to lead to a restrictive fiscal stance for the euro area, as a whole, of 0,5 % of GDP in 2024 and 0,25 % of GDP in 2025; whereas political discussion is needed to ensure appropriate public investment levels following the expiry of the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) in 2026;

    M.  whereas the Draghi report points out that the gap between the EU and the United States in the level of GDP at 2015 prices has gradually widened, from slightly more than 15 % in 2002 to 30 % in 2023, and estimates the necessary additional annual investment by the EU at EUR 800 billion, including EUR 450 billion for the energy transition;

    N.  whereas the new Commission has set the goal of being an ‘investment Commission’; whereas discussions on addressing the significant investment gap and reducing borrowing costs are needed in the EU; whereas the framework, where appropriate, should be strengthened by EU-level investment instruments and tools designed to minimise the cost for EU taxpayers and maximise efficiency in the provision of European public goods;

    O.  whereas the Member States need to have the necessary control and audit mechanisms to ensure respect for the rule of law and to protect the EU’s financial interests, in particular to prevent fraud, corruption and conflicts of interest and to ensure transparency;

    P.  whereas it is important to increase the share of ‘fully implemented’ country-specific recommendations (CSRs) and to link them more closely to the respective country reports in order to contribute to more effective economic governance;

    1.  Notes that in the last few years, the EU has demonstrated a high degree of resilience and unity in the face of major shocks, thanks, among other things, to a coordinated policy response involving all the EU institutions, including a flexible approach to the use of new and existing instruments; further recalls that promoting long-term sustainable growth means promoting a balance between responsible fiscal policies, structural reforms and investments that together increase efficiency, productivity, employment and prosperity, and also entails boosting competitiveness, fostering the single market, developing economic growth policies and revising the regulatory framework to attract investments; stresses the fundamental need for sustainable, inclusive and competitive economic growth;

    2.  Notes that economic policy coordination is fundamentally necessary for a successful economic and monetary union; recalls that the European Semester is the well-established framework for coordinating fiscal, economic, employment and social policies across the EU, in line with the Treaties, while respecting the defined national competences;

    3.  Notes the Commission’s commitment to ensure that the European Semester drives policy coordination for competitiveness, sustainability and social fairness, as well as the integration of the UN Sustainable Development Goals and the European pillar of social rights; notes that the European Green Deal remains a core deliverable for the Commission;

    4.  Highlights the fact that an integrated, coordinated, targeted and horizontal industrial policy is vital to increase investments in the EU’s innovation capacity, while bolstering competitiveness and the integrity of the single market;

    5.  Highlights that public and private investments are crucial for the EU’s ability to cope with existing challenges, including developing the EU’s innovation capacity and implementing the just green and digital transitions, and that they will increase the EU’s resilience, long-term competitiveness and open strategic autonomy; calls attention to the need for strategic investments in energy interconnections, low-carbon energies (such as renewables) and energy efficiency to, among other things, (i) make the EU independent from imported fossil fuels and prevent the possible inflationary effects of dependence on these, (ii) modernise production systems and (iii) promote social cohesion; recalls that the materialisation of climate-change-related physical risks can greatly affect public finances, as demonstrated by the floods in Valencia in October 2024 and the cyclone in Mayotte in December 2024; calls on the Member States to make the necessary investments to improve climate change mitigation and adaptation and enhance the resilience of the EU economy;

    6.  Calls on the Commission to come up with initiatives, on the basis of the Budapest Declaration; to make the EU more competitive, productive, innovative and sustainable, by building on economic, social and territorial cohesion and ensuring convergence and a level playing field both within the EU and globally; notes the development of a new competitiveness coordination tool; expects the Commission to clarify how this tool will interact with the European Semester; stresses the importance of supporting micro, small and medium-sized enterprises as key drivers of economic growth and employment within the EU;

    7.  Stresses the need to foster a dynamic entrepreneurial ecosystem that supports innovators, recognising their critical role in driving global competitiveness, economic resilience, job creation and open strategic autonomy;

    8.  Welcomes the Commission’s recommendations regarding the economic policy of the euro area, urging the Member States to enhance competitiveness and foster productivity through improved access to funding for businesses, reduced administrative burdens, and public and private investment in areas of EU common priorities, which include (i) a fair green and digital transition, (ii) social and economic resilience including the European pillar of social rights, (iii) energy security, and (iv) the build-up of defence capabilities;

    9.  Welcomes the Commission’s recommendation that, when defining fiscal strategies, euro area Member States should aim to improve the quality and efficiency of public expenditure and public revenue, which are essential for ensuring the sustainability of public finances, while minimising detrimental and distortive impacts on economic growth; stresses that this could be achieved by, among other things, increasing European coordination and reducing tax avoidance and tax evasion; welcomes the Draghi report’s conclusion that a coordinated reduction of labour income taxation for low- to middle-income workers is needed to promote EU competitiveness; recalls the Member States’ competence in tax policy; invites the Member States to redirect the tax burden from income to less distortive tax bases;

    10.  Highlights the need to create fiscal buffers to address fiscal sustainability challenges, ensuring sufficient resources for investment and for dealing with potential future shocks and crises; stresses the importance of promoting competitive, sustainable and inclusive growth in supporting long-term fiscal stability and resilience;

    Economic prospects for the EU

    11.  Expresses concern that, according to the Commission’s autumn 2024 economic forecast, EU GDP is expected to grow by 0,9 % (0,8 % in the euro area) in 2024, by 1,5 % (1,3 % in the euro area) in 2025 and by 1,8% (1,6% in the euro area) in 2026; recalls that these figures reflect a gradual recovery, but also limited economic expansion compared to previous economic cycles; notes that the economic outlook for the EU remains highly uncertain, with risks more likely to negatively affect economic growth;

    12.  Notes that the public debt ratio is projected to increase to 83,0 % in the EU and 89,6 % in the euro area in 2025 and to 83,4 % in the EU and 90 % in the euro area in 2026, when the output gap will be virtually closed both in the EU and in the euro area, and that this is higher than the levels in 2024 (82,4 % for the EU and 89,1 % for the euro area);

    13.  Recalls that developments in public debt ratios vary from country to country; points out that policy uncertainty and geopolitical risks can contribute significantly to increasing the cost of borrowing on the financial markets for the Member States; notes that unsustainable debt levels could undermine economic stability and decrease the Member States’ economic resilience and capacity to respond to crises; highlights that in 2024 and 2025, 11 euro area Member States are expected to have debt ratios above the Treaty reference value of 60 %, with 5 remaining above 100 %;

    14.  Notes that according to the Commission’s 2024 autumn economic forecast, the general government deficit in the EU and the euro area is expected to decline to 3,1 % and 3 % of GDP, respectively, in 2024, and to decrease further to 3 % and 2,9 % of GDP in 2025 and 2,9 % and 2,8 % of GDP in 2026; stresses that 10 EU Member States are expected to post a deficit above the Treaty reference value of 3 % of GDP in 2024; points out that this number will remain stable in 2025, and that in 2026, most Member States are forecast to have weaker budgetary positions than before the pandemic (2019), with 9 of them still posting deficits of above 3 %;

    15.  Notes that eight Member States have excessive deficits; recalls that the Council has taken remedial action and calls on the Member States concerned to take steps to reduce excessive deficits while minimising the socio-economic impact; recalls the importance of consistency in applying the excessive deficit procedure to the Member States;

    16.  Notes that according to the Commission’s autumn 2024 economic forecast, inflation is projected to fall from 2,6 % in 2024 to 2,4 % in 2025 and 2 % in 2026 in the EU, and from 2,4 % in 2024 to 2,1 % in 2025 and 1,9 % in 2026 in the euro area; recalls that although this reduction is a positive development, core inflation remains relatively high, which points to persistent inflationary pressures; notes that fiscal policy, while safeguarding fiscal sustainability, can support monetary policy in reducing inflation, and should provide sufficient space for additional investments and support long-term growth;

    17.  Notes that the Commission has not been able to present the Annual Sustainable Growth Survey, the Alert Mechanism Report, the draft euro area recommendation and the draft joint employment report at the same time;

    18.  Observes that according to the Commission’s 2025 Alert Mechanism Report, in-depth reviews will be prepared in 2025 for the nine countries that were identified as experiencing imbalances or excessive imbalances in 2024, while another in-depth review should be undertaken for another Member State, as it presents particular risks of newly emerging imbalances;

    19.  Underlines that housing is directly interconnected with the macroeconomic imbalances in the euro area, with damaging implications for economic resilience, dynamism and social progress and for regional and intra-EU mobility; is concerned that in some Member States, house prices are likely to increase and may become hard to curb in the absence of a holistic strategy;

    Revised EU economic governance framework and its effective implementation

    20.  Recalls that the reform aims to make the framework simpler, more transparent and more effective, with greater national ownership and better enforcement, while differentiating between Member States on the basis of their individual starting points, representing a step forward in ending the ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach in view of the country-specific fiscal sustainability considerations embodied in the net expenditure path; recalls, furthermore, that the reform aims to strengthen fiscal sustainability through gradual and tailor-made adjustments complemented by reforms and investments and to promote countercyclical fiscal policies;

    21.  Acknowledges that the new fiscal rules provide greater flexibility and incentives linked to the investments and national reforms required to address the economic, social and geopolitical challenges facing the EU; acknowledges that financial resources and contributions from national budgets differ from one Member State to another; welcomes the fact that the net expenditure indicator excludes all national co-financing in EU-funded programmes, providing increased fiscal space for Member States to invest in the EU’s common priorities, as laid down in Regulation (EU) 2024/1263, thus helping to strengthen synergies between the EU and national budgets, thereby reducing fragmentation and increasing the overall efficiency of public spending in some areas, such as defence;

    22.  Highlights that the debt sustainability analysis (DSA) plays a key role in the reformed EU fiscal rules; is of the opinion that the discretionary role of the Commission in the DSA requires the relevant assessments to be fully transparent, predictable, replicable and stable; calls on the Commission to address possible methodological improvements, such as assessing spillover effects between Member States, and to duly inform Parliament in this regard;

    23.  Notes the Commission’s inconsistent application of the fiscal rules framework in the past, and the Member States’ uneven compliance with the rules; stresses that it is essential for the new framework to ensure the equal treatment of the Member States; affirms that a successful framework relies heavily on proper, transparent and effective implementation from the outset, while taking into account the Member States’ starting points and the individual challenges they face; takes note of the changes introduced in the new framework to improve the credibility of the financial sanctions regime;

    24.  Encourages the Member States to align the technical definition of their national operational indicator to the European primary net expenditure indicator;

    25.  Emphasises the role of Parliament and of independent fiscal authorities in the EU’s economic governance framework; underlines the discretionary power of the Commission in developing the medium-term fiscal-structural plans; emphasises the need for increased scrutiny of the Commission by Parliament and by the European Fiscal Board, as envisioned in Regulation (EU) 2024/1263, and for an increase in the flow of information towards Parliament to enable its effective oversight;

    National medium-term fiscal-structural and budgetary plans

    26.  Notes that not all Member States were able to submit their national medium-term fiscal-structural and draft budgetary plans on time; notes that, as a result of general elections and the formation of new governments, five Member States have not yet submitted their national medium-term fiscal-structural plans and two Member States have not yet submitted their draft budgetary plans, while one Member State has not submitted its draft budgetary plan for other unspecified reasons; calls on these Member States to submit the relevant plans as soon as possible; underlines that the timely submission of these plans is a precondition for the effective implementation and credibility of the new rules; reaffirms the importance of the timely submission of draft budgetary plans to translate commitments outlined in fiscal plans into concrete policies following approval of the national medium-term fiscal-structural plans;

    27.  Recalls that the reforms and investments outlined in the national medium-term fiscal-structural plans should align with the EU’s common priorities as laid down in Regulation (EU) 2024/1263; emphasises that, under the new framework, the Commission should pay particular attention to these priorities when assessing the national medium-term fiscal-structural plans;

    28.  Acknowledges that 21 of the 22 national medium-term fiscal-structural plans that have been reviewed so far received a positive evaluation; notes that the new framework allows Member States to use assumptions that differ from the Commission’s DSA if these differences are explained and duly justified in a transparent manner and are based on sound economic arguments in the technical dialogue with the Member States; observes, however, that in the plans submitted by five Member States, the Commission found insufficiently justified inconsistencies and deviations from the DSA framework in macroeconomic assumptions related to potential GDP and/or the GDP deflator; stresses that such deviations and risks of backloading could potentially threaten future fiscal sustainability; notes that in the plans submitted by three Member States, the Commission acknowledges a concentration of the fiscal adjustment towards the end of the period; calls on the Commission to ensure that any such concentration of the adjustment meets the requirements set out in the regulation and calls on it to prevent procyclical policies;

    29.  Takes note of the fact that only seven Member States have sought an opinion from their relevant independent fiscal institution, which provides an important additional scrutiny dimension; notes with caution that some independent fiscal institutions gave a negative opinion on their Member State’s national fiscal plan; stresses that nine Member States did not meet their obligation to conduct political consultations with civil society, social partners, regional authorities and other relevant stakeholders prior to submitting their national plans; further regrets the fact that several Member States have not involved their national parliaments in the approval process for the plans and have not reported whether the required consultations with national parliaments took place as laid down in the new framework;

    30.  Observes that five Member States have requested an extension of the adjustment period; emphasises that any such extension should be based on a set of investment and reform commitments that, taken all together, improve the potential growth and resilience of the economy, support fiscal sustainability, address the EU’s common priorities and the relevant CSRs and have been assessed as meeting the conditions outlined in the regulation for such an extension; notes that the reforms and investments used to justify this extension rely considerably on reforms already approved under the RRF; highlights the importance of and need for reforms and investments that contribute positively to the potential GDP growth of the Member States; calls on the Commission to effectively evaluate ex post the impact of agreed investments and reforms in terms of supporting fiscal sustainability, enhancing the growth potential of the economy, addressing the EU’s common priorities and the CSRs and ensuring the required level of nationally financed public investment;

    31.  Notes the Commission’s assessment that only 8 of the 17 draft budgetary plans presented are in line with fiscal recommendations stemming from the national medium-term fiscal-structural plan; regrets the fact that 7 plans were assessed as not being fully in line with the recommendations, 1 as non-compliant and 1 as at risk of not being in line with the recommendations; is concerned that six Member States have presented draft budgetary plans with annual or cumulative expenditure growth above their prescribed ceilings;

    Fiscal stance and the role of fiscal policy in the provision of European public goods

    32.  Notes the Commission’s projection that the implementation of the revised governance framework is expected to lead to a reduction of the primary structural balance for the euro area as a whole of 0,5 % of GDP in 2024 and 0,25 % of GDP in 2025; notes the Commission’s assessment that this is in line with the process of enhancing fiscal sustainability and support the ongoing disinflationary process as economic uncertainty remains high; notes that GDP growth will continue to support fiscal consolidation throughout the EU; calls for fiscal policies that restore stability while promoting innovation, industrial competitiveness and long-term economic growth; stresses the need to create additional fiscal space to tackle future challenges and potential crises while preserving a sufficient level of investment to support and foster sustainable and inclusive growth, industrialisation and prosperity for all;

    33.  Considers that the effective implementation of the fiscal rules, although necessary, is not in itself sufficient to achieve the optimal fiscal stance at all times and ensure a high standard of living for all Europeans; notes that the fiscal stance is still projected to differ greatly from one Member State to another in 2025; calls on the Commission to explore ideas for a mechanism that helps ensure that the cyclical position of the EU as a whole is appropriate for the macroeconomic outlook at all times;

    34.  Recalls that, according to the Commission, the fiscal drag in 2025 will be partly offset by a slight expansion in investment, financed both by national budgets and by RRF grants and other EU funds; emphasises the RRF’s role in addressing EU investment needs, noting that it will expire by the end of 2026, which might lead to a decrease in public investment in common European priorities;

    35.  Calls on the Commission to initiate discussions on addressing the significant investment gap in the EU and to reduce borrowing costs, strengthen financial stability and enable strategic investments in line with the EU’s objectives and for the provision of European public goods, such as defence capabilities to match needs in a context of growing threats and security challenges; calls for full use to be made of the efficiency gains that may stem from the provision of European public goods at EU scale through the effective coordination of investment priorities among Member States; believes that this framework, where appropriate, should be strengthened by EU-level investment instruments and tools designed to minimise the cost for EU taxpayers and maximise efficiency in the provision of European public goods;

    36.  Recalls that any EU funding must be accompanied by robust controls ensuring transparency, accountability and the efficient use of funds, so as to avoid unjustified increases in public spending;

    37.  Encourages the Member States to promote investment spending that produces a positive rate of return; acknowledges the Draghi report’s assessment that around four fifths of productive investments will be undertaken by the private sector in the EU, while public investment will also play a catalysing role; welcomes the Commission initiative to propose a competitiveness fund under the new multiannual financial framework and calls on it to make full use of financial guarantees to leverage private investment; stresses that the Member States must step up their efforts, in particular budgetary efforts, to accelerate innovation, digitalisation, education, training and decarbonisation, to strengthen European competitiveness and to reduce dependencies;

    Country-specific recommendations

    38.  Notes that the share of ‘fully implemented’ CSRs has dropped from 18,1 % (in the period 2011-2018) to 13,9 % (in the period 2019-2023); recalls that implementing CSRs, including with regard to the efficiency of public spending, is a key part of ensuring fiscal sustainability and addressing macroeconomic imbalances; advocates a more efficient implementation of the CSRs and the relevant reforms; calls for ways of increasing the share of ‘fully implemented’ CSRs to be explored; calls on the Commission to link the CSRs more closely to the respective country reports; calls for the impact of reforms and the progress towards reducing identified investment gaps to be evaluated; calls for greater transparency in the preparation of CSRs;

    39.  Reiterates, in this regard, that CSRs should be enhanced by focusing on a limited set of challenges, in particular specific Member States’ structural challenges and the EU’s common priorities, with a view to promoting sound and inclusive economic growth, enhancing competitiveness and macroeconomic stability, promoting the green and digital transitions and ensuring social and intergenerational fairness;

    40.  Recalls the Member States’ commitment to address, in their national fiscal plans, the relevant CSRs in both their economic and social dimensions, as expressed under the European Semester; notes that the Commission has found unaddressed CSRs in the national fiscal plans;

    41.  Highlights the importance of the CSRs in tackling the longer-term drivers of fiscal sustainability, including the sustainability and proper provision of public pension systems, the healthcare and long-term care systems in the face of demographic challenges such as ageing populations, and preparedness for adverse developments, including climate-change-related physical risks; stresses the relevance of CSRs in addressing the stability of the housing market in order to contribute to the economic resilience of the EU;

    o
    o   o

    42.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission.

    (1) OJ L, 2024/1263, 30.4.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1263/oj.
    (2) OJ L, 2024/1264, 30.4.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1264/oj.
    (3) OJ L, 2024/1265, 30.4.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1265/oj.
    (4) OJ L 306, 23.11.2011, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2011/1173/oj.
    (5) OJ L 306, 23.11.2011, p. 8, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2011/1174/oj.
    (6) OJ L 306, 23.11.2011, p. 25, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2011/1176/oj.
    (7) OJ L 140, 27.5.2013, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2013/472/oj.
    (8) OJ L 140, 27.5.2013, p. 11, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2013/473/oj.
    (9) OJ L 433I, 22.12.2020, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2020/2092/oj.
    (10) OJ L 57, 18.2.2021, p. 17, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/241/oj.
    (11) OJ C, C/2024/2807, 23.4.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/2807/oj.
    (12) OJ C 428, 13.12.2017, p. 10.
    (13) OJ C 456, 10.11.2021, p. 145.
    (14) Monetary Dialogue paper – ‘The new economic governance framework: implications for monetary policy’, Darvas, Z. et al. for the European Parliament, Directorate-General for Internal Policies, Economic Governance and EMU Scrutiny Unit, 20 November 2024.
    (15) In-depth analysis – ‘Economic Dialogue with the European Commission on EU Fiscal Surveillance’, European Parliament, Directorate-General for Internal Policies, Economic Governance and EMU Scrutiny Unit, 1 December 2024.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Debates – Thursday, 13 March 2025 – Strasbourg – Revised edition

    Source: European Parliament

    Verbatim report of proceedings
     428k  792k
    Thursday, 13 March 2025 – Strasbourg
    1. Opening of the sitting
      2. A Vision for Agriculture and Food (debate)
      3. Action Plan for Affordable Energy (debate)
      4. Resumption of the sitting
      5. Announcement by the President
      6. Request for an urgent decision (Rule 170)
      7. Voting time
        7.1. European Defence Industry Programme and a framework of measures to ensure the timely availability and supply of defence products (EDIP) (vote)
        7.2. Democracy and human rights in Thailand, notably the lese-majesty law and the deportation of Uyghur refugees (RC-B10-0174/2025, B10-0174/2025, B10-0176/2025, B10-0191/2025, B10-0192/2025, B10-0193/2025, B10-0194/2025) (vote)
        7.3. Severe political, humanitarian and human rights crisis in Sudan, in particular the sexual violence and child rape (RC-B10-0175/2025, B10-0175/2025, B10-0185/2025, B10-0186/2025, B10-0187/2025, B10-0188/2025, B10-0189/2025, B10-0190/2025) (vote)
        7.4. Unlawful detention and sham trials of Armenian hostages, including high-ranking political representatives from Nagorno-Karabakh, by Azerbaijan (RC-B10-0177/2025, B10-0177/2025, B10-0178/2025, B10-0179/2025, B10-0180/2025, B10-0181/2025, B10-0182/2025, B10-0183/2025, B10-0184/2025) (vote)
        7.5. Social and employment aspects of restructuring processes: the need to protect jobs and workers’ rights (B10-0143/2025, B10-0152/2025) (vote)
      8. Resumption of the sitting
      9. Approval of the minutes of the previous sitting
      10. European Schools Alliance: potential to achieve the European education area by driving innovation, enhancing mobility and championing inclusivity (debate)
      11. Explanations of votes
        11.1. Social and employment aspects of restructuring processes: the need to protect jobs and workers’ rights (B10-0143/2025)
      12. Approval of the minutes of the sitting and forwarding of texts adopted
      13. Calendar of part-sessions
      14. Closure of the sitting
      15. Adjournment of the session

       

    PREDSEDÁ: MARTIN HOJSÍK
    Podpredseda

     
    1. Opening of the sitting

       

    (Rokovanie sa začalo o 9:00 h.)

     

    2. A Vision for Agriculture and Food (debate)


     

      Christophe Hansen, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, dear colleagues, the first 100 days of our mandate were dedicated to delivering on what we promised and doing this in close cooperation with those who are most concerned: the farming and the food sector.

    Since I became Commissioner, my ‘boots on the ground’ promise has taken me already to eight Member States, and when I speak to farmers, I hear a strong call for stability and predictability, and also for the recognition of the crucial role that farming and rural areas play in Europe’s economy, security and strategic autonomy. Many of you recognise those calls as well.

    In these changing and challenging times, we need a clear perspective and a coherent policy response for everyone involved in guaranteeing our food security and food sovereignty. They need to see that their future will be prosperous.

    The vision for agriculture and food recently adopted by the Commission aims to provide the direction and response to these needs. It is the Commission’s policy roadmap to engage and take action with you and all stakeholders of the agri-food system on the future of food and farming in Europe.

    Our messages, dear colleagues, are very clear: farming, fishing and food are strategic sectors and a critical asset for Europe. They must be preserved across the continent, and the vision identifies European food sovereignty as an integral part of the EU security agenda. Our policies will continue supporting farmers and the agri-food sector in producing safe foods, protecting rural landscapes, traditions and livelihoods. In Europe, farming is highly diverse and so our policies must be tailored to the local needs.

    While facing many challenges, farmers, fishers and the food industry are part of the solution for achieving a future-proof agri-food sector. We will design the solutions pragmatically and in consultation with them. Consultation and dialogue, dear colleagues, are not just words. The vision is the result of close engagement and consultation with many different stakeholders from the agri-food sector and all relevant institutions, including the European Parliament.

    The work does not stop here. The vision is only the beginning of further cooperation and dialogue to develop the initiatives together. This College is committed to overcoming the polarisation that we have lived too much in the past, and that is why I am very glad to be with you today to present the vision and hear your ideas for the way forward.

    We started from a very simple and guiding question: how to build and support and agri-food system that is attractive for current and future generations – today, tomorrow and in 2040. We want a new agriculture and food sector to be – and I quote from the vision itself – ‘attractive, competitive, future-proof and fair’ and built on dialogue and partnership between the players of the food chain and powered by innovation, knowledge and research.

    The vision contains four priority areas to provide direction and stability. For each one, it identifies specific policy responses that focus on all three dimensions of sustainability.

    First, an attractive and predictable agri-food sector that ensures a fair standard of living and leverages new income opportunities. For this, we must help the sector draw on all sources of income. We will help farmers to get a better return from the market by addressing the principle that they should not be forced to systematically sell their products below the production cost. The coming UTP review will be instrumental for achieving this.

    Secondly, public support from the Common Agricultural Policy remains essential to support farmers’ income. The Commission will make future CAP support simpler and more targeted towards those farmers who need it most, creating better incentives for ecosystem services and giving further responsibility and accountability to Member States.

    We will also help the sector to leverage new income opportunities, such as from the bio-economy or carbon-farming, agri-tourism can also provide farmers with a complementary income.

    Furthermore, in 2025, I will present a strategy for generational renewal. As you know, currently only 12 % of the EU farmers are below the age of 40. This is a huge challenge and we need to address it if we are serious about food security and food sovereignty. Therefore, we will have to bundle not only our European efforts, but as well the national efforts to get there.

    Secondly, a competitive and resilient agri-food sector in the face of global challenges. Our farmers insist on fair global competition, and the vision clearly states that we will push for a fairer, global level playing field by better aligning – and in line with international rules – our domestic production standards with those applied to imports, notably for pesticides and animal welfare.

    To advance in this area, we will start work on implementing the principle that hazardous pesticides banned in the EU should not be allowed back into the EU via imports. I always say, ‘if a product is a threat to human health or pollinators in the EU, it is as well outside’. If we still import those products, neither the consumers nor the farmers understand this. Therefore, I believe it is very important that our standards also need to be better controlled because it is good to have high standards, but without checks this is of course inefficient.

    Then, the agri-food sector is strongly affected by different crises. I think that is not a secret and we will develop a more comprehensive approach to risk and crisis management. We enforce incentives for farmers to boost farm-level adaptation and improve access to affordable insurance and de-risking tools for primary producers.

    Lastly, I want to present two simplification packages in 2025 to reduce the administrative burden for farmers and the entire agri-food value chain. The first focus will be on the CAP, while the second will look at the broader EU legislation package.

    Another important initiative will be the work that we will carry out for the livestock sector. As the vision says clearly, livestock remains an essential element of EU agriculture and we will work on making it more competitive, resilient and sustainable.

    Thirdly, we need a future-proof agri-food sector that works hand in hand with nature. To guarantee the sector’s long-term resilience and competitiveness, we need to preserve healthy soils, clean water and air, and the EU’s biodiversity. To support this, we must continue to implement and enforce the legislation that we already have.

    In the future, we must also create better incentives for farmers and agri-food actors who are delivering ecosystem services, and make sure that climate and biodiversity action go hand in hand with competitiveness. For this, there will be some key drivers, such as a more advanced toolbox under the Common Agricultural Policy, a voluntary on-farm sustainability compass, certified carbon farming, as well as measures to accelerate the access to biopesticides to the EU market.

    The fourth priority area is about strengthening the link between food and consumers and promoting fair living and working conditions in vibrant and well-connected coastal and rural areas. Addressing the gap in the availability and affordability of services for citizens in rural and coastal areas, including in the outermost regions, is key to address the need for an effective right to stay for all European citizens.

    To boost the vitality of these areas and to tackle these issues, we will strengthen synergies between EU funds and present and updated EU rural action plan and rural pact. At the same time, annual food dialogues with everyone involved in the food system will help to reconnect people with the food they eat and address many of the most pressing issues, including food reformulation and affordability.

    And finally, we will bring knowledge and innovation, research, skills and digital solutions closer to the farmers. They will play a key role in supporting the agri-food sector to carry out this initiative. And I know that many of you have as well good ideas, this is, of course, the beginning of a path towards a more sustainable agri-food system – more sustainable economically, socially and as well as environmentally – and I’m looking forward to having a good discussion with you on the different workstreams that we have identified in this vision.

     
       

     

      Herbert Dorfmann, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, sehr geschätzter Herr Kommissar, Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Bäuerinnen und Bauern sind Essensbringer, das sind die, die uns tagtäglich ernähren. Das ist eigentlich logisch – nur vergessen haben wir das vielleicht etwas in den Jahrzehnten des Überflusses. Ziel einer vernünftigen Agrarpolitik muss es doch sein, dass Bäuerinnen und Bauern tagtäglich gemeinsam mit unserer Nahrungsmittelindustrie versuchen, nachhaltig hochwertige Lebensmittel für uns, für diese 450 Millionen Europäerinnen und Europäer, zu erzeugen.

    Ich bin Ihnen, Herr Kommissar, dankbar, dass Sie dieses Thema wieder einmal ganz klar in den Mittelpunkt Ihrer Vision gestellt haben. Wir verwalten in diesem Haus jährlich rund 60 Milliarden Euro, die an die europäische Landwirtschaft gehen. Das ist viel Geld, und ich denke, wenn wir diese 60 Milliarden Euro, die an 9 Millionen Betriebe in Europa gehen, vernünftig einsetzen, dann können sie wirklich ein Treiber für eine zukunftsorientierte, produzierende, nachhaltige Landwirtschaft sein.

    Die können es sein: indem wir Betrieben – Sie haben es gesagt, Herr Kommissar – in jenen Gebieten weiterhelfen, wo es schwieriger ist zu produzieren. Wenn man die nämlich nicht berücksichtigt, dann steigen sie aus der Produktion aus, und wir verlieren diese Gebiete, wie es leider in vielen Regionen Europas, vor allem auch in den Bergen, passiert ist.

    Indem wir Bäuerinnen und Bauern weiter helfen, ihre Ideen zu verwirklichen. Wir haben viele innovative Menschen in der Landwirtschaft, aber unsere Agrarpolitik hilft manchmal nicht unbedingt weiter, diese innovativen Ideen wirklich auf den Grund zu bringen.

    Indem wir Bäuerinnen und Bauern helfen, die auf Nachhaltigkeit setzen. Auch hier haben wir viele Menschen in der Landwirtschaft, die sehr gute Ideen haben, die Nachhaltigkeit in ihrem Betrieb umsetzen. Ich glaube, wir sollten ihnen helfen, und natürlich auch jenen jungen Menschen, die in der Landwirtschaft anfangen wollen, und auch jenen Betrieben, die sich gegen den Klimawandel stemmen, indem sie aktiv oder passiv versuchen, mit dem Klimawandel umzugehen.

    Ich glaube, Herr Kommissar, das ist nun eine Vision; diese Vision müssen wir nun umsetzen. Meine Fraktion ist dazu bereit. Dazu brauchen wir Geld, und das, glaube ich, ist die größte Herausforderung, die uns in den nächsten Jahren erwartet, dass wir hier alle gemeinsam dafür einstehen, einen ordentlichen, vernünftigen Agrarhaushalt für die nächsten Jahre zu bekommen.

     
       

     

      Dario Nardella, a nome del gruppo S&D. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghe e colleghi, in questi vent’anni abbiamo perso il 37% degli agricoltori e il 12% dei profitti.

    Signor Commissario, il lavoro della visione è un ottimo punto di partenza. Ci sono, però, molti nodi che dobbiamo affrontare, a cominciare dalle risorse: senza risorse adeguate non avremo una visione e non avremo neanche una politica agricola comune. Per questo diciamo “no” a qualunque taglio alle risorse per l’agricoltura. Diciamo “no” a qualunque accentramento dei fondi o a forme di decentramento agli Stati nazionali.

    Vogliamo, invece, risorse sufficienti per aumentare produttività e reddito, senza creare disparità di trattamento, promuovendo filiere alimentari sostenibili, di qualità e innovative.

    I nostri agricoltori hanno bisogno di regole chiare e semplici. Non vogliamo deregulation, ma una buona semplificazione, perché la legge del più forte non è la legge giusta. Ma i nostri agricoltori subiscono il peso di una burocrazia spesso asfissiante.

    Per questo vogliamo un’agricoltura più sostenibile, con i giovani e le donne protagoniste e con i lavoratori che siano il vero motore, perché senza coinvolgere agricoltori e lavoratori non avremo un’agricoltura nel futuro dell’Europa forte, unita e sostenibile.

     
       


     

      Veronika Vrecionová, za skupinu ECR. – Pane předsedající, Evropa dnes čelí zásadním výzvám. Válka, hrozící celní spory a nejistá ekonomika mění pravidla hry. To všechno se promítá i do zemědělství. Je čas říci si otevřeně – našimi prioritami musí být bezpečnost a konkurenceschopnost Evropy, a to i potravinová bezpečnost a konkurenceschopnost zemědělství. V zemědělství musíme maximálně zefektivnit využití stávajících prostředků. Chci, aby společná zemědělská politika byla jednoduchá, předvídatelná a zaměřená na výsledky. Méně byrokracie, více stability. Farmáři potřebují jasná pravidla a ne další papírování. Podporu musíme směřovat tam, kde má největší smysl – k zemědělcům, kteří pečují o půdu a krajinu a především zajišťují kvalitní potraviny.

    Proto budu podporovat zastropování a degresivitu přímých plateb. Nemůžeme dále dotovat velké agroholdingy na úkor malých a středních farem, které drží venkov při životě.

     
       

     

      Valérie Hayer, au nom du groupe Renew. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, nos agriculteurs en avaient besoin. Alors, merci, Monsieur le Commissaire, pour la vision que vous nous proposez ce matin sur l’agriculture et l’alimentation. Je vous le dis d’emblée: je vais pleinement la saluer. Les défis du monde agricole sont immenses: gestion du dérèglement climatique, instabilité géopolitique, renouvellement des générations et, ce que nous réclament nos agriculteurs depuis longtemps, des prix justes et des règles claires et faciles à appliquer.

    L’agriculture est l’un des plus grands enjeux stratégiques de notre Europe. On attendait donc de vous une ambition en matière de souveraineté alimentaire; elle y est. On attendait une volonté de développer la résilience de nos fermes; elle est là. On attendait la prise en compte du défi démographique; il y est. On attendait l’enjeu de réciprocité; c’est le cas. On attendait que la rémunération des agriculteurs figure en bonne place; je lis «attractivité», je lis «innovation», je lis «accès au foncier», et je ne peux que le saluer.

    Ce travail, nous le savons tous, n’est que le coup d’envoi d’un chantier aussi colossal qu’indispensable. Il demande maintenant qu’ensemble, en responsabilité, on se relève les manches. J’y veillerai avec mes collègues, dans mes priorités de présidente du groupe Renew. C’est un enjeu que notre groupe porte haut pour avancer concrètement, en commençant notamment par renforcer le poids des agriculteurs dans la chaîne de valeur, y compris en renforçant la directive sur les pratiques commerciales déloyales. Le plus dur reste à faire: mettre tout cela en musique, le décliner dans nos textes de loi et veiller à la cohérence de nos politiques et de nos choix, sans oublier, bien sûr, d’y consacrer les moyens de nos ambitions; le nerf de la guerre, c’est l’argent.

     
       

     

      Thomas Waitz, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, Commissioner, you expect us farmers to produce cheap for the global markets. You expect us farmers to produce affordable food for our citizens. You expect us farmers to produce extra cheap raw material for the food processing industry and for the retailers in the European Union. That’s why farmers need income support from taxpayers’ pockets.

    This income support should be based on the amount of jobs farmers are offering: you have winemakers with direct marketing who can supply two full-time jobs with five hectares, while sometimes crop farmers with 50 or 80 hectares are not even able to supply one full-time job. So I definitely welcome the slight indications in your vision that we need to allocate some of the basic income support budget based on the amount of jobs a farm is actually supplying.

    But before we can actually supply income support, we need to have a budget. And you all know here in the room that the CAP budget is not secured. It’s clearly not secured, even if farmers have the potential to help us with climate mitigation, with climate adaptation. They help us with biodiversity, with rural areas, with animal welfare – a lot of important roles in society.

    So let’s build this partnership between farming, environment, climate and rural areas. Because if you ask me, this will be the only way that we can secure a reasonable budget for our farmers.

     
       


     

      Arno Bausemer, im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! Rund 300 Milliarden Euro erhalten die Landwirte in der Europäischen Union in der laufenden Förderperiode – das klingt zunächst nach viel Geld. Allerdings kam in den vergangenen Jahren immer weniger Geld bei den Landwirten an, und gleichzeitig wird der Frust der Empfänger aufgrund neuer widersinniger Vorschriften immer größer und führt bei vielen Betrieben irgendwann zur Aufgabe. Dort, wo jahrelang Raps geblüht hat, da wächst heute noch maximal Unkraut. Dort, wo früher Gänse schnatternd über die Weide gelaufen sind, da ist jetzt kein Tier mehr zu sehen. Und dort, wo früher Milchkühe in den Ställen standen, da herrscht jetzt gespenstische Stille.

    In meinem Heimatbundesland Sachsen-Anhalt in Deutschland gab es im Jahr 2013 noch 560 Milchviehbetriebe – mittlerweile sind mehr als die Hälfte der Betriebe verschwunden. Seien Sie sich eines gewiss: Kein Landwirt trennt sich gerne von seinen Tieren, von seinem Hof und von seinem Betrieb – ganz im Gegenteil. Die Zahl der Betriebsschließungen wäre noch deutlich größer, wenn in den klein- und mittelständischen Familienbetrieben nicht bis zur Selbstausbeutung jeder Euro dreimal umgedreht werden würde, um den Betrieb am Leben zu halten. Und glauben Sie mir, ich weiß da auch gut, wovon ich spreche.

    Die harte Arbeit in der Landwirtschaft darf aber nicht dazu führen, dass es körperliche, seelische und auch finanzielle Selbstausbeutung gibt. Diese harte Arbeit muss sich für die Beteiligten endlich wieder lohnen. Und deshalb sollten wir uns auf die gemeinsamen Ziele besinnen, die 1962 die Grundlage der Gemeinsamen Agrarpolitik definiert haben, nämlich die Steigerung der Produktivität, die Sicherstellung eines angemessenen Lebensstandards für Landwirte und die Sicherstellung der Versorgung.

    Lassen Sie uns den Landwirten Respekt entgegenbringen, lassen Sie uns die Zukunft der Landwirtschaft sichern!

     
       


     

      Norbert Lins (PPE). – Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissar, meine lieben Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Endlich wurde begriffen, dass unsere europäischen Landwirte eine zentrale Säule in der EU darstellen und wir daher mit ihnen und nicht gegen sie arbeiten müssen. Der Vorschlag der Kommission mit dieser Vision sendet ein wichtiges Signal an die Landwirtschaft und an die ländlichen Räume in Europa, dass die Nachricht in Brüssel wirklich angekommen ist und wir nun die Möglichkeit haben, an den wichtigen akuten Aspekten zu arbeiten.

    Die Vision bekennt sich klar zur Lebensmittelproduktion und insbesondere zur Tierhaltung in Europa. Es ist gut, dass wir weggehen von der Konditionalität und dass wir zu mehr Anreizen in der Landwirtschaft kommen. Zu Recht hebt die Kommission hervor, dass die Anpassung an den Klimawandel einen hohen Stellenwert hat und Zukunftsthemen wie die Bioökonomie eine entscheidende Rolle spielen.

    Ich begrüße außerordentlich, dass es ein weiteres GAP‑Vereinfachungspaket gibt. Ich glaube aber, dass wir mehr Tempo brauchen bei den sektorübergreifenden Rechtsvorschriften – es ist gut, dass dort ein Omnibus geplant ist. Vereinfachung der Düngevorschriften und beim Pflanzenschutz ist dringend notwendig; da brauchen wir mehr Tempo, je schneller, desto besser.

    Die Landwirtschaft ist das Rückgrat unserer Gesellschaft und insbesondere der ländlichen Räume. Die offene Frage ist: Bekommen wir (Ton aus). Das ist die entscheidende Frage in den nächsten Monaten. Dafür lassen Sie uns gemeinsam kämpfen!

     
       

     

      Cristina Maestre (S&D). – Señor presidente, señor comisario, la visión que aquí presenta es buena: recoge el sentir del campo, sus necesidades y sus demandas. ¿La podríamos suscribir? Si, por supuesto. La podemos suscribir. Pero le falta lo más importante. Le falta el cómo y le falta el cuánto. Ya lo estamos diciendo aquí todos esta mañana.

    Por lo tanto, la pregunta es: ¿vamos a tener una PAC con fondos suficientes para hacer esto o va a haber recortes como ya deja intuir la Comisión Europea? Con recortes en la PAC esto sería un quiero y no puedo. Y si me dice que los Estados miembros aporten más, en este caso estaríamos hablando de un my treat, your bill: yo invito pero tú pagas.

    Y también nos tiene que aclarar si van en serio con eso de ir al modelo de sobre único para cada Estado miembro.

    Mire, señor comisario, eso de dejar al albur de cada país el uso de los fondos de la PAC es una bomba en la línea de flotación de la política agrícola y del mercado único. Por favor, quítenle de la cabeza eso a la señora Von der Leyen porque usted ha hecho un buen trabajo y corre el riesgo de quedarse en papel mojado. Que no sea esto una quimera.

     
       

     

      Mireia Borrás Pabón (PfE). – Señor presidente, señor comisario, gracias por su presentación, pero he de decirle que hoy nos presentan aquí otro informe lleno de buenas intenciones pero vacío de soluciones.

    Se cambia el envoltorio, pero el veneno sigue dentro. Permanecen las mismas políticas y objetivos del Pacto Verde y de la política agrícola común. Nos hablan en su informe de hacer el sector atractivo, pero continúan con la asfixia regulatoria. Nos hablan de una preocupación por la competencia desleal, cuando son ustedes los primeros que la promueven pretendiendo inundar Europa con importaciones del Mercosur en unas condiciones tan desiguales y tan injustas que la palabra traición se me queda corta. Nos hablan de soberanía alimentaria mientras ustedes no paran de pisotearla con acuerdos que entregan nuestro mercado a terceros países. En España, pero también en Francia, en Italia, los agricultores ven cómo los precios de sus productos caen y los supermercados se llenan de frutas y verduras marroquíes, porque ustedes nos hacen depender cada vez más de países extranjeros.

    Señor comisario, ¿quiere de verdad soluciones reales o solo otra fantasía legislativa para los agricultores? Porque si quiere soluciones reales lo que hay que hacer es derogar el Pacto Verde Europeo y su burocracia asfixiante y acabar de una vez por todas con acuerdos comerciales injustos. Mismas normas, mismas reglas, o fuera de nuestro mercado.

     
       

     

      Sergio Berlato (ECR). – Signor Presidente, signor Commissario, troppe persone, anche in questo Parlamento, ritengono che le risorse finanziarie di cui è dotata la PAC siano eccessive se rapportate al numero dei potenziali beneficiari. Probabilmente coloro che hanno questa errata opinione non sanno che ai nostri imprenditori agricoli è affidato il compito di garantire la sicurezza alimentare per tutti i consumatori ma anche la tutela e la manutenzione dei 3/4 del territorio europeo.

    La Commissione europea dichiara di voler rendere l’agricoltura più attraente, più resiliente e più sostenibile. Attualmente l’agricoltura non risulta attraente perché sempre un maggior numero di imprese agricole chiudono le loro attività.

    L’agricoltura non può risultare competitiva e resiliente se l’Unione europea e continua a sottoscrivere accordi di libero scambio che costringono i nostri imprenditori agricoli a subire la concorrenza sleale da parte di altri produttori extraeuropei che possono portare i loro prodotti sui nostri mercati senza dover rispettare le stesse costose regole imposte agli imprenditori agricoli europei.

    A forza di parlare di agricoltura sostenibile, avete costretto i nostri imprenditori agricoli ad abbandonare le loro campagne e le loro attività, esasperati dall’imposizione delle vostre ideologie animal-ambientaliste.

    Vedremo se coloro che sono pervasi di ideologia animal-ambientalista saranno in grado di sostituire i nostri imprenditori agricoli nella manutenzione del territorio.

    (L’oratore accetta di rispondere a una domanda “cartellino blu”)

     
       

     

      Christophe Clergeau (S&D), question «carton bleu». – Cher collègue, j’ai une question très simple à vous poser. Vous avez dit, à juste titre, qu’il y avait besoin d’un budget important pour la politique agricole commune. Je voulais donc vous demander si vous souhaitiez, vous et votre groupe, un budget plus important pour l’Union européenne et des ressources propres pour ce budget, qui permettraient à la fois de continuer et de renforcer la politique agricole commune, de maintenir la politique de cohésion et de financer les autres priorités. Plus d’argent pour la PAC, d’accord; moi aussi, je suis pour un budget plus important et des ressources propres; mais vous, comment faites-vous pour garder une part importante du budget pour la PAC?

     
       



     

      Cristina Guarda (Verts/ALE). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, è davvero un grande “wow”, perché torna al centro la competitività in agricoltura. Temo, però, che in questa sua visione, Commissario, la competitività dipenda, per lo più, dal peso dell’agricoltura nel commercio globale che dalla capacità di garantire cibo sano per gli europei.

    Quindi, cari colleghi, noi insieme dobbiamo guidare l’agricoltura europea a ritrovare la propria autonomia, a non essere più ostaggio degli oligopoli delle multinazionali che controllano i mercati, la genetica dei nostri semi, la chimica e ora anche la transizione verso il biologico e l’agroecologia, volendoli sempre più controllare e snaturare.

    Ad esempio, in questa sua visione, Commissario, i centrali servizi ecosistemici, generati dagli agricoltori che lavorano in simbiosi con l’agricoltura, li vuole consegnare in mano al mercato senza tutele. Così, anche questa volta, invece di essere un’opportunità di reddito per gli agricoltori, il controllo lo avrà il mercato. Lo stesso mercato che oggi lascia nelle tasche degli agricoltori solo il 7% del prezzo pagato dai consumatori.

    Commissario, lavorare per un salario giusto è un diritto anche per noi agricoltori. Ci restituisca il controllo di tutto questo.

     
       


     

      Carmen Crespo Díaz (PPE). – Señor presidente, señor comisario, señorías, es el momento de la defensa europea y, por tanto, lo primero que tenemos que hacer es reivindicar el papel de la alimentación como arma de defensa europea fundamental para los intereses de la alimentación y la soberanía alimentaria. Para ello, blindar los fondos de la PAC en el nuevo marco financiero plurianual es fundamental: sin mezcla de fondos, donde saldríamos perdiendo. Los acuerdos comerciales tienen que venir con reciprocidad y siempre respetando a nuestros agricultores y también a nuestros consumidores.

    Nos gusta la propuesta de la oficina de control de importaciones en Mercosur, es el camino de ayudar a los agricultores con esos acuerdos. Y apostar por la ciencia: las nuevas prácticas genómicas hay que desbloquearlas en el Consejo. Bajar la huella hídrica. Apostar por la economía circular, nuevo nicho de negocio en las zonas rurales. Desde luego, simplificar la vida de los agricultores —hombres y mujeres— y buscar una fórmula, además, que permita la integración de los mayores, que no los penalice y que no salgan perdiendo. Y que los jóvenes tengan una oportunidad real.

    No demonicemos la ganadería, intentemos que los aranceles en este momento, no involucren al sector agroalimentario, ni al bourbon estadounidense ni al vino europeo. Tenemos que dejarlos fuera porque es un sector muy vulnerable que durante todo este tiempo ha sufrido los altos costes y las dificultades y este es el momento de ampararlo.

    Enhorabuena por la visión, querido comisario.

     
       

     

      André Rodrigues (S&D). – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Comissário, a necessidade de garantir um rendimento justo e estável aos agricultores de hoje e construir um setor que seja suficientemente apelativo para atrair os agricultores de amanhã são prioridades com as quais, estou certo, estamos todos de acordo.

    Contudo, só serão concretizáveis com um orçamento robusto, capaz de enfrentar os complexos desafios que o setor enfrenta. Neste contexto, é fundamental manter a coerência e a interligação entre os fundos ligados à agricultura, assim como defender e reforçar o papel das parcerias com as autoridades regionais e locais na sua implementação.

    Registo, por isso, com satisfação o reconhecimento, na Visão para a Agricultura e Alimentação, das especificidades das regiões ultraperiféricas e da importância do regime POSEI. Contudo, Senhor Comissário, este programa precisa de ser atualizado — o que não acontece há mais de uma década —, para que possa ter verbas que verdadeiramente correspondam às reais necessidades do setor agrícola nestas regiões, fazendo assim justiça a quem nele trabalha.

    (O orador aceita responder a uma pergunta «cartão azul»)

     
       


     

      André Rodrigues (S&D), Resposta segundo o procedimento «cartão azul». – Caro colega, muito obrigado pelas suas perguntas, à primeira das quais devo dizer que nós temos vindo a defender já há muito tempo a necessidade de termos um equilíbrio verdadeiro na fileira da cadeia alimentar, de forma que os produtores não sejam, de facto, o parente pobre desta mesma fileira, garantindo, assim, maior igualdade na distribuição do rendimento.

    Quanto à questão que coloca acerca das quotas (que, como sabe, já tem muitos anos), a verdade é que nós não podemos ter uma posição que vá contra aquilo que é uma inevitabilidade. E, como todos sabemos, na altura, o regime das quotas terminou. Era uma inevitabilidade. Apesar de todos os constrangimentos que possa ter criado, a verdade é que o setor soube ultrapassar de forma positiva este mesmo constrangimento.

     
       

     

      Valérie Deloge (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, une fois de plus, la Commission européenne présente une vision d’avenir pour l’agriculture qui ne répond pas aux attentes des agriculteurs européens. Les agriculteurs veulent vivre de leur travail, grâce à un revenu décent; mais l’essentiel de vos propositions se concentrent sur les aides et la diversification des activités, sans leur offrir la moindre garantie. Les agriculteurs veulent moins de bureaucratie; vous préférez multiplier les normes environnementales et les obligations administratives. Les agriculteurs veulent un secteur fort et souverain; on constate que vous restez soumis au dogme du libre-échange et de la mondialisation, pourtant néfaste à notre agriculture.

    Quant à votre réponse au besoin d’attirer les jeunes et les femmes, elle se résume à la mise en place de plans, de plateformes et d’observatoires, bref, à une usine à gaz. Ce n’est pas avec des documents de trente pages que l’on remplit les assiettes. Quand allez-vous sortir des promesses creuses et proposer du concret? Monsieur le Commissaire, l’avenir de l’agriculture dans les prochaines années me paraît bien sombre.

     
       

     

      Waldemar Buda (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Panie Komisarzu! Miesiąc temu przewodnicząca Ursula von der Leyen oświadczyła, że wspólna polityka rolna będzie zlikwidowana. Będzie połączona z innymi programami. Podpisała porozumienie, negocjacje z Mercosurem i mamy wyraźną tendencję do ograniczenia środków na rolnictwo. I ja bym oczekiwał, żeby komisarz, który się zajmuje rolnictwem, powinien wyjść dzisiaj i powiedzieć o tych trzech sprawach. Powiedzieć jestem przeciwko Mercosurowi, jestem za utrzymaniem wspólnej polityki rolnej i jestem za utrzymaniem albo zwiększeniem środków. Czy usłyszeliśmy jakiekolwiek słowo i zapewnienie w tych trzech podstawowych sprawach?

    Czy Pan chce być grabarzem rolnictwa? Czy Pan chce być zapamiętany jako ktoś, kto rozwijał rolnictwo? Poprzedni komisarz walczył o rolnictwo, był atakowany z każdej strony. Timmermans go atakował, Dombrowskis go atakował, a on mówił swoje: będę bronił rolnictwa. Chcielibyśmy podobnej postawy wobec Pana, żeby Pan był dobrze zapamiętany w historii polskiego, ale i europejskiego rolnictwa również. Nie ma żadnego zapewnienia w tej sprawie. Ja się obawiam, że najbliższa perspektywa finansowa to będzie degradacja europejskiego rolnictwa. Co nam się w Unii Europejskiej udało? Przemysł pogrzebany, konkurencyjność pogrzebana, tylko rolnictwo. I jesteśmy na dobrej drodze, żeby rolnictwo również zlikwidować.

     
       



     

      Arash Saeidi (The Left). – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, je suis heureux d’entendre votre volonté, que je crois sincère, d’assurer des prix de vente supérieurs aux coûts de production, d’empêcher l’importation de produits élaborés avec des pesticides interdits dans l’Union européenne et, surtout, d’instaurer des contrôles effectifs pour assurer l’application de nos règles. Vous nous trouverez toujours en soutien pour aller dans cette direction.

    Cependant, est-ce bien la volonté de tout le collège des commissaires? Je vois a minima une contradiction flagrante entre vos propos et la signature d’un accord avec le Mercosur, alors que – et ce n’est malheureusement qu’un exemple – les études démontrent la très grande difficulté du Brésil à rendre effectifs les contrôles sur ses productions agricoles. Vous voulez protéger les agriculteurs contre une concurrence déloyale, mais la Commission ouvre les portes de l’Union européenne à un dumping chimique et social.

    Ma question est donc simple: comment allez-vous répondre à cette contradiction, Monsieur le Commissaire?

     
       

     

      Krzysztof Hetman (PPE). – Panie Przewodniczący! Panie Komisarzu! Szanowni Państwo! W debacie o wizji przyszłości rolnictwa powinien wybrzmieć głos rolników. Wczoraj wieczorem jednego z nich zapytałem o to, jaka ta przyszłość rolnictwa powinna być, i wymienił mi to w 5 punktach. 1. Skrócenie łańcuchów dostaw i wzmocnienie pozycji producenta. 2. Rolnicy muszą mieć łatwe i proste przepisy do przetwarzania swojej produkcji. 3. Należy obniżyć koszty produkcji, między innymi poprzez rewizję Zielonego Ładu. 4. Chronić wewnętrzny rynek rolny przed takimi umowami, jak Mercosur, i nadmierną liberalizacją handlu z Ukrainą i przed kolejnymi tego typu umowami. 5. Uprościć i doregulować przepisy w obszarze prowadzenia działalności rolniczej, bo rolnicy powinni pracować w polu, a nie siedzieć za biurkiem i wypełniać stosy dokumentów. I ode mnie, Panie Komisarzu: uważam, że w tej wizji, którą Pan przedstawił, brakuje ewentualnego rozszerzenia Unii Europejskiej o inne państwa i wpływu tego rozszerzenia na rynek rolny, europejski, a także polski. Bez tego elementu ta wizja, moim zdaniem, będzie niepełna.

     
       

     

      Maria Grapini (S&D). – Domnule președinte, stimați colegi, dezbaterea de astăzi trebuie să fie urmată imediat de măsuri, domnule comisar. Asta așteaptă fermierii. Este nevoie să avem mai multă echitate economică și socială în piața internă dacă vrem să avem o agricultură durabilă, pentru că despre asta vorbim. Trebuie să avem reglementări care să combată inflația și să se stabilizeze prețurile. Inflația mănâncă din buget. Nu putem să lăsăm fermierii să-și vândă produsele sub prețul de cost. Aici avem nevoie de măsuri. Trebuie să intensificăm eforturile pentru combaterea practicilor comerciale neloiale. Știm bine că în fiecare stat membru avem practici neloiale. De ce? Pentru că intră în piața internă produse necontrolate.

    Fermierii și muncitorii agricoli au nevoie de o viață decentă, merită condiții de viață mai bune. Trebuie să încurajăm – dacă nu vom rezolva acest lucru, generația tânără nu va merge, generația despre care dumneavoastră vorbeați că trebuie să o avem pentru înlocuire. Politica agricolă comună? Politica agricolă comună trebuie reformată, dar subvențiile directe trebuie să rămână. Domnule comisar, ați vorbit de polarizare. Cum veți face să nu mai fie polarizare? Cum veți face ca subvențiile să fie etice și echitabile pentru toți fermierii? Și da, fermierii susțin o simplificare, fără să afecteze competența și competiția loială în piața internă.

     
       

     

      Csaba Dömötör (PfE). – Elnök Úr! Érdemes őszintén beszélnünk, a Vision nevű anyagban, a hangzatos célok mögött olyan tervek vonulnak, amelyeknek az európai gazdák nem fognak örülni. Alapos a gyanúnk arra, hogy lefaragnák az agrártámogatásokat, külső körülményekre való hivatkozással, mint például Ukrajna EU-tagsága, és ezt a szándékot tompa kifejezésekbe burkolják. Így amikor célzott támogatásokról beszélnek, az valójában azt jelenti, hogy nem kapna minden gazda támogatást, nem kapnának annyian, mint most. Amikor rászorultsági elvről beszélnek, akkor az megint azt jelenti, hogy nem mindenki kapna támogatást, aki most egyébként kap.

    Ráadásul, hogyha jól értjük a terveket, akkor más forrásokkal is összevonnák az agrárpénzeket, ami elfedné azt, hogy csökkenteni akarják a támogatási összegeket. Elgondolkodtatónak tartom, hogy az előterjesztésben szereplő terveket leginkább azok a civilnek mondott szervezetek üdvözlik, amelyeket az Európai Bizottság finanszíroz. A gazdák nagyon nem. Magyarországon közel 250 ezer ember állt ki aláírásával a területalapú támogatások mellett. Kérem, hallják meg az ő hangjukat is!

     
       


     

      Barry Cowen (Renew). – Mr President, Commissioner Hansen, thank you for your presentation earlier. As I mentioned when we met yesterday morning, I welcome much of what is contained in the vision, particularly the Commission’s intention to shift the future CAP from a system of conditions to that of incentives. That, of course, is a step in the right direction.

    However, the vision falls short in addressing one critical issue: the need for a strong CAP in the next multiannual financial framework. This vision is worryingly vague, and there are persistent rumours that the CAP budget could be merged into a broader funding pot. It says nothing concrete specifically about the budgetary needs of the next CAP, failing to acknowledge the need for new funds to pay for the transition towards sustainable food systems and productions.

    So, Commissioner Hansen, I’d like to ask you at this stage, have you identified the level of funding needed to sustain the CAP in the next MFF? And crucially, what steps are you taking within the College to secure this funding?

    (The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question)

     
       


     

      Barry Cowen (Renew), blue-card answer. – Thank you, MEP Flanagan. And you’re quite correct, of course. I’m well aware of the impact, and the fears and concerns that exist in many farmers, many landowners, whose soil is designated as peaty, and the worries that they would have for the implications of what’s contained.

    However, I’m convinced that the Commission, in its efforts to have this addressed, primarily is committed to nature restoration laws and rewetting programmes, which Ireland and the region has committed strongly to. It has been funded by this Commission to the tune of EUR 100 million – to Bord na Móna, for example, a state body that has responsibility in this regard, that will meet much of the demands that are contained within that.

    I think farmers will continue to be in a position to carry out farm practices in relation to ploughing, in relation to reseeding, in relation to maintenance of drains …

    (The President interrupted the speaker)

     
       

     

      Anna Strolenberg (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, Commissioner, the Netherlands is a country of food innovation and also a country of yoghurt‑lovers for breakfast. And I want to talk about both, because I visited a farm a while ago of two young farmers coming from a long line of dairy farmers, and they saw the inefficiency of giving soy to cows, and they radically changed their business model. By now, they are producing their own soy and creating their own yoghurt. Since recently, you can find their products in one of the biggest supermarkets in the Netherlands. This is the innovation that we need in Europe. This is a success story.

    Commissioner, in your vision, you highlight our dependency on importing proteins. If you want to change this, we have to stimulate the creation of alternative proteins. And I think we can do it. It can create more options for consumers, more new opportunities for income for farmers, and more climate resilience. If your proposed plan has concrete goals and concrete policy proposals, your plan can become a success story as well.

     
       

     

      Sebastian Everding (The Left). – Herr Präsident! „Was wir heute tun, entscheidet darüber, wie die Welt morgen aussieht“, sagte schon die österreichische Schriftstellerin Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach. Herr Kommissar, ich habe eine Vision, in der Lebensmittel nicht mehr in Verbindung mit Wettbewerbsfähigkeit gebracht werden. In dieser Vision haben Landwirte ein gesichertes Einkommen, und wir erleben eine Partnerschaft auf Augenhöhe; auf der anderen Seite Verbraucher, die bereit sind, regionale und saisonale Produkte zu kaufen, frei von Pestiziden und Gentechnik.

    In meiner Vision werden diese gesunden pflanzlichen Nahrungsmittel mit nur minimalsten Steuern belegt, während tierische Produkte mit den Steuern belastet werden, die der Umweltzerstörung, der Gefährdung menschlicher Gesundheit und dem unermesslichen Tierleid gerecht werden. Massentierhaltung und Tiertransporte kommen in meiner Vision zu einem Ende. Der Bürgerinitiative „End the Cage Age“ wird Rechnung getragen, und kein Tier wird mehr in Käfige gesperrt. Sowohl Landwirtschaft als auch Industrie sind dabei, sich vollständig auf pflanzliche Fleischalternativen und lab-grown meat umzustellen. Und ja, es wird auch niemand mehr Milch als ein gesundes Getränk bezeichnen.

    (Der Redner ist damit einverstanden, auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“ zu antworten.)

     
       



     

      Daniel Buda (PPE). – Domnule președinte, domnule comisar, vă felicit pentru documentul prezentat. Stimați colegi, astăzi trebuie să hrănim 450 de milioane de europeni, în timp ce la nivel mondial peste 700 de milioane de oameni suferă de foamete. Cifrele din sector sunt însă îngrijorătoare. Veniturile din agricultură sunt cu 40 % mai mici decât în orice alt sector, în timp ce doar 12 % dintre fermieri au sub 40 de ani. Fără măsuri ferme, Europa riscă să devină dependentă de importuri, pierzând controlul asupra propriei securități alimentare, iar dependența creează vulnerabilități, așa cum spunea, de altfel, Mario Draghi.

    Timpul nu mai este de partea noastră, iar mâine este deja prea târziu pentru fermieri. Domnule comisar, azi avem nevoie de politici care să protejeze producția europeană, de reducerea birocrației, dar mai ales – și subliniez, mai ales – de o finanțare adecvată. Banii pentru agricultură nu sunt banii fermierilor, ci reprezintă investițiile indispensabile pentru ca foametea să nu fie folosită ca armă de război. Dacă vrem o Europă puternică, trebuie să ne asigurăm că este și hrănită, iar acest lucru începe cu sprijinirea fermierilor noștri.

     
       

     

      Σάκης Αρναούτογλου (S&D). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, κύριε Επίτροπε, η γεωργία δε μπορεί να είναι ένας τομέας που απλώς επιβιώνει. Πρέπει να ευημερεί, να στηρίζει τις τοπικές κοινωνίες και να εγγυάται τη διατροφική ασφάλεια της Ευρώπης. Για να πετύχει αυτό όμως, δεν αρκούν τα μεγάλα λόγια τα οποία ακούμε τα τελευταία χρόνια. Χρειάζονται δίκαιες τιμές, αξιοπρεπείς αμοιβές και ένα πλαίσιο θεμιτού ανταγωνισμού. Σήμερα οι αγρότες μας —όλοι το ξέρουμε αυτό— αναγκάζονται να πουλούν κάτω του κόστους παραγωγής, ενώ οι μεγάλες αλυσίδες λιανικής και οι μεσάζοντες αποκομίζουν τα μεγαλύτερα κέρδη. Πώς είναι δυνατό να έχουμε μια βιώσιμη γεωργία, όταν ο παραγωγός είναι ο μόνος που δεν μπορεί να ζήσει από τη δουλειά του; Πότε θα εφαρμόσει η Επιτροπή μηχανισμούς που θα διασφαλίζουν ότι κανένας αγρότης δεν θα αναγκάζεται να πουλάει κάτω από την αξία του κόπου του; Μιλάμε συνεχώς για την ανάγκη ανανέωσης των γενεών στον αγροτικό τομέα, όμως ποιος νέος θα επιλέξει να γίνει αγρότης, όταν η πρόσβαση στη γη και στη χρηματοδότηση είναι όλο και πιο δύσκολη;

    Χρειάζεται, λοιπόν, ένα φιλόδοξο πρόγραμμα για τη γενιά αγροτών με σαφή χρηματοδότηση και πραγματικά κίνητρα. Αν η Ευρώπη θέλει γεωργία με μέλλον, πρέπει να επενδύσει σε αυτήν σήμερα. Oι αγρότες δεν ζουν με ευχολόγια· υποσχέσεις δεν γεμίζουν το σιλό, δεν ποτίζουν τα χωράφια, δεν κρατούν τους νέους στη γη.

     
       

     

      Gilles Pennelle (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, en hémicycle, tout le monde s’intéresse à l’agriculture. On a même vu, tout à l’heure, la présidente du groupe Renew nous parler d’agriculture, alors qu’elle n’a jamais mis les pieds, en tant que membre titulaire, dans la commission AGRI.

    Monsieur le Commissaire, vous avez rencontré énormément d’agriculteurs et d’acteurs au Salon de l’agriculture. Ils vous ont tous dit la même chose: ils vous ont dit qu’ils ne voulaient pas du Mercosur, qu’ils ne voulaient pas de l’adhésion de l’Ukraine, qui serait une catastrophe, et qu’ils ne voulaient pas du pacte vert. D’ailleurs, ce nom de «pacte vert» a disparu de votre vocabulaire et de votre feuille de route. Pourtant, il est toujours là, puisque vous affichez pour l’agriculture la neutralité climatique en 2050 avec ses conséquences: la baisse des rendements, la décroissance, la baisse de la production, l’écologie punitive totalement incompatible avec le maintien du revenu des agriculteurs.

    Vous êtes volontairement ambigu, Monsieur le Commissaire. Moi, je vous le dis très clairement: les agriculteurs dans toute l’Union européenne, dans la quasi-unanimité, vous demandent une chose: arrêtez ce pacte vert pour sauver l’agriculture européenne.

     
       


     

      Emma Wiesner (Renew). – Herr talman! Kära jordbrukskommissionär! Var är vinsten? Visionen för Europas jordbruk pratar om inkomst, inkomst och inkomst. Men vad Europas lantbrukare behöver är vinst, vinst, vinst. Jag är besviken över att vi lägger ribban så lågt, för om lantbruket är samhällets ryggrad är maten dess hjärta. I en tid när lantbrukare runtom i Europa larmar om att ekonomin inte går ihop, samtidigt som konsumenter lägger en historiskt låg andel av sin inkomst på mat, vågar vi inte säga som det är: Lantbrukare måste kunna göra vinst!

    Utan vinst, inga investeringar i omställning eller effektiviseringar. Utan vinst, ingen konkurrenskraft eller generationsskiften. Utan vinst, ingen trygghet för våra lantbrukare. Vi har en tydlig uppgift framför oss att öka lantbrukets intäkter och sänka dess kostnader för vi behöver både ryggrad och hjärta.

    Så stirra er inte blinda på inkomsterna, våga prata om vinsten och lönsamheten! För pengar kanske inte växer på träd, men kapital ska växa på varje gård, och det är min vision för Europas lantbruk.

     
       

     

      Martin Häusling (Verts/ALE). – Herr Präsident! Herr Kommissar, ich bin ehrlich: Ich hätte mir eigentlich mehr erwartet von der Vision; die Strategie-Kommission hat ja vorgelegt. Wir haben ja Ziele in der Strategie-Kommission benannt: Klimawandel bekämpfen, biologische Vielfalt stärken und nicht schwächen, Stärkung der Landwirte in der Kette. Wo ist eigentlich die Förderung der nachhaltigen Produktion geblieben? Wo sind die 25 % Öko-Landbau, die ja mal in der Farm to Fork benannt wurden? Das alles vermisse ich. Ich glaube, wir müssen auch klar über Pestizide reden, weil es steht komischerweise in der Strategie: Pestizide werden nur vom Markt genommen, wenn andere da sind. Was heißt das konkret? Wenden wir uns jetzt von der Wissenschaft ab?

    Leider ist mir die Vision viel zu wenig konkret. Farm to Fork wird nicht benannt, der Green Deal wird nicht benannt, und stattdessen wird auf Freiwilligkeit gesetzt, statt klare Ziele zu formulieren, und natürlich wieder der Fokus auf Export. Wir müssen die Stärkung der regionalen Lebensmittelketten in den Vordergrund stellen. Wir müssen auch nicht Gentechnik jetzt als Lösung für viele Probleme im Klimawandel verstehen.

    Gute Ansätze haben Sie ja, und da finde ich die Stärkung der Rechte der Landwirte in der Kette; da sind wir uns – glaube ich – völlig einig. Aber einen Punkt muss die Kommission noch erklären: Ihr Haushalt bedeutet ja am Ende, dass auch die zweite Säule der Entwicklung gefährdet ist.

     
       

     

      Paulo Do Nascimento Cabral (PPE). – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Comissário, esta visão colocou por escrito o que nós, no PSD, e os agricultores lá fora tanto têm defendido. Finalmente fomos ouvidos, e obrigado por isto, Senhor Comissário.

    É necessário reforçar a PAC, porque a agricultura é também coesão, segurança e defesa. De que vale termos territórios se não os desenvolvermos, ou exércitos se não os conseguirmos alimentar e dependermos de países terceiros?

    Saúdo a estratégia para a renovação geracional, e os números são impressionantes: a idade média de um agricultor na União Europeia é de 57 anos e em Portugal, de 64. Daqui a cinco ou dez anos, quem irá produzir o que nós comermos?

    É crucial preservar os dois pilares da PAC, reforçar a transparência na formação dos preços e uma repartição justa do valor na cadeia de abastecimento alimentar. O preço nas prateleiras dos supermercados está demasiado distante daquilo que os agricultores recebem.

    A resiliência hídrica, e Portugal com o plano de ação «Água que une», é um excelente exemplo: a simplificação, a substituição das obrigações por incentivos, a digitalização e a inovação, a promoção e a reciprocidade, e a saúde mental, entre outros, representam uma nova esperança para os agricultores.

    E termino reconhecendo a defesa que faz da agricultura das regiões ultraperiféricas e do POSEI, que precisa de ser reforçado e atualizado. As regiões ultraperiféricas enfrentam desafios únicos e contam com o seu apoio.

     
       


     

      Eric Sargiacomo (S&D). – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, la vision pour l’agriculture et l’alimentation est un panorama très complet des enjeux que nous devons affronter pour assurer la sécurité alimentaire des Européens. Pour cela, il faut refermer la parenthèse libérale ouverte en 1992. Sans régulation, pas de sécurité alimentaire ni de souveraineté. Notre monde change vite et nous devons y adapter notre politique.

    Nous devons répondre au moins à deux défis majeurs qui tiennent les deux bouts de la chaîne: assurer un revenu à nos agriculteurs et lutter contre la précarité alimentaire, qui touche 20 % des Européens et qui n’a fait qu’augmenter sous la pression de l’inflation alimentaire. Pour cela, il nous faut retrouver des instruments pour la régulation et la stabilisation des prix. Je pense en particulier aux stocks stratégiques et à la révision des prix d’intervention. L’Europe s’est créée sur une double promesse: celle de la paix et de la prospérité. Ne pas assurer la sécurité alimentaire, c’est trahir cette promesse. Monsieur le Commissaire, donnons-nous les moyens de cette vision, afin qu’elle ne soit pas un mirage, une simple illusion de plus.

     
       

     

      Gerald Hauser (PfE). – Herr Präsident! Herr Kommissar, glauben Sie wirklich, dass mit dieser Vision die Bauernproteste zurückgehen und dass Sie den Bauern mit Ihrer Vision die Zukunftsängste nehmen? Ich bin mir sicher: nicht, weil das Hauptproblem, das viele Bauern haben, ist schon einmal der Beitritt oder die Übernahme von Mercosur. Wir sollten und wir müssen Mercosur verhindern, weil Mercosur der Todesstoß für viele landwirtschaftliche Betriebe ist.

    Um Ihnen das zu beweisen, zitiere ich aus einer parlamentarischen Anfrage von mir an den ÖVP-Landwirtschaftsminister Totschnig – nicht von unserer Partei, ich bin Mitglied der Freiheitlichen Partei und der stärksten Partei in Österreich. Diese Anfragebeantwortung habe ich am 13. Februar 2024 Mercosur betreffend bekommen – ist im Netz abrufbar. Ich zitiere Ihnen daraus, was Ihr Kollege zu dem möglichen Beitritt zu Mercosur und den Auswirkungen für die Landwirte zu sagen hat: Das im Jahr 2019 ausverhandelte Mercosur-Abkommen ist jedoch kein Abkommen, das den Agrarsektor stärkt. Studien zeigen, dass es zu erheblichen Wettbewerbsnachteilen für die Agrarproduktion in sensiblen Sektoren kommt …

    (Der Präsident entzieht dem Redner das Wort.)

    (Der Redner ist damit einverstanden, auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“ zu antworten.)

     
       



     

      Francesco Ventola (ECR). – Signor Presidente, signor Commissario, onorevoli colleghi, l’agricoltura europea è di fronte ad una svolta fondamentale: è il momento di riconoscere il vero valore degli agricoltori non come inquinatori ma come custodi della terra, i difensori della natura e garanti della nostra sicurezza alimentare.

    Questa è la visione che dobbiamo abbracciare: un’agricoltura che produce cibo sano, rispettando l’ambiente. Gli agricoltori meritano una politica agricola comune che premi chi lavora la terra, garantendo un reddito giusto, scevro da forme di sfruttamento e di logiche speculative.

    I cittadini hanno diritto di alimentarsi di pietanze che fanno bene alla salute. Quindi anche i prodotti importati devono rispettare i nostri stessi standard qualitativi. Pretendiamo l’applicazione del concetto di reciprocità: in questo modo contribuiremo a determinare un mercato più equo.

    Dobbiamo incentivare tutte le forme di innovazione che la scienza ci mette a disposizione per migliorare la produttività dell’agricoltura europea. La nostra priorità deve essere l’autonomia strategica alimentare, che ne garantisce la sicurezza e l’indipendenza.

    Commissario Hansen, è questa la strada che proponiamo al fine di garantire un prospero futuro al comparto agricolo e soprattutto sana alimentazione.

     
       

     

      Céline Imart (PPE). – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, merci d’avoir évité l’écueil d’un «De la ferme à la table» bis. Le ton est volontariste, vous parlez de souveraineté alimentaire et vous remettez la production au cœur de la vision et la vache au milieu du champ. Toutefois, des intentions, il faut passer aux actes.

    Sur le terrain, les agriculteurs transpirent et il est temps que les administrations fassent transpirer dans les textes ce vrai changement de cap, qu’elles comprennent que nous avons changé de mandat et qu’elles-mêmes ont changé de commissaire, et non pas qu’elles fassent semblant d’être un peu sourdes pour ne pas abolir les textes dangereux issus du mandat antérieur: le règlement sur le transport des animaux, qui ne ferait qu’imposer aux éleveurs des contraintes insurmontables, sans aucun bénéfice économique, social ni environnemental; le cadre sur l’évaluation des forêts, qui propose une usine à gaz pour accabler nos forestiers, sans aucune garantie de résultat; le programme LIFE, qui doit cesser de financer des ONG écologistes extrémistes, qui s’acharnent à fragiliser notre agriculture sous couvert d’altruisme opaque et militant. Voilà une piste d’économie à reflécher vers les budgets agricoles.

    Monsieur le Commissaire, cette vision est la première pierre pour enrayer la machine infernale. Il faut maintenant remettre du bon sens au cœur des textes européens et au cœur des administrations de la Commission.

     
       

     

      Camilla Laureti (S&D). – Signor Presidente, signor Commissario, onorevoli colleghi, bene, la visione per quello che riguarda il reddito – ce lo ha detto anche lei il salario medio degli agricoltori e del 40% più basso rispetto ad altri settori – bene, le aree interne rurali che sono l’ossatura della nostra Europa, le filiere corte e i giovani e le donne.

    Mi raccomando attenzione anche alle donne giovani: sono gestite da donne solo il 3% del 12% delle aziende under 40. Mettiamo al centro, però, una politica agricola comune nuova e che arrivi davvero ovunque – in Italia, per esempio, 3/4 dei fondi PAC vanno alle aziende agricole più grandi – e che sia una PAC attenta alla sostenibilità – ha parlato anche lei della centralità dei nostri suoli – e che aiuti tutti gli agricoltori ad innovare. Oltre alla condizionalità ambientale, non dimentichiamo la condizionalità sociale.

    Abbiamo di fronte a noi anni cruciali per il mondo agricolo, in cui sarà essenziale il dialogo e il confronto tra posizioni che spesso sono diverse. Questo è quello che dobbiamo a chi, oggi, con fatica e cura, continua a dedicarsi all’agricoltura e al nostro cibo.

     
       



     

      Ton Diepeveen (PfE). – Voorzitter, commissaris, collega’s, na jarenlang regel op regel op te leggen — de ene strenger dan de andere — na jaren waarin de landbouwsector onder druk is gezet met groene doelstellingen, vaak gepusht door groene lobbygroepen, spreekt de Europese Commissie eindelijk over vereenvoudiging.

    Het gemeenschappelijk landbouwbeleid is compleet ontspoord en staat inmiddels ver van de realiteit van onze boeren af. Hoog tijd om terug te keren naar de kern, naar boeren die voedsel produceren en niet papieren produceren. Minder regels, minder bemoeienis vanuit Brussel is wat onze boeren echt nodig hebben.

    Investeren in technologische vooruitgang en slimme innovaties, daar zit de echte duurzaamheid. Maar het duurt allemaal veel te lang. De innovatie in landbouw en visserij loopt vast in procedures, regels, vergunningen. Nieuwe technieken blijven daardoor te lang op de plank liggen. Dit moet en kan anders. Brussel moet niet op de rem staan, maar juist op het gaspedaal drukken om onze boeren en vissers snelle toegang te geven tot innovatie. Alleen dan blijft onze landbouw- en visserijsector concurrerend. Alleen dan zijn we toekomstbestendig. En alleen dan kunnen we het hebben over handelsakkoorden waarin onze boeren een gelijk speelveld hebben.

     
       

     

      Gabriel Mato (PPE). – Señor presidente, señor comisario, la agricultura es un sector fundamental, no solo por su impacto económico, sino por su peso en la forma de vida de millones de europeos. Y, si esto es importante en la Europa continental, créanme que lo es mucho más en las regiones ultraperiféricas como Canarias. Al fin y al cabo, nosotros estamos muy lejos, aunque nos sintamos muy cerca. Por eso es fundamental que la agricultura prospere en las regiones ultraperiférica, usted lo ha mencionado, y que quienes se dedican a ello puedan seguir haciéndolo. Para ello es necesaria la ayuda de la Unión Europea.

    Hemos de entender que el valor añadido de la agricultura no viene solo de su aportación al PIB, sino también de su aportación a nuestra seguridad alimentaria, de su papel para mantener nuestras comunidades tradicionales y dar oportunidades de vida a la población en áreas rurales, permitiéndoles quedarse junto a los suyos. Por ello, es fundamental que, de cara a la revisión del programa de opciones específicas por la lejanía y la insularidad (POSEI), se actualice la ficha financiera ―que, le recuerdo, lleva estancada trece años― para poder responder a la inflación y a los aumentos de costes de producción.

    Si tenemos un sistema que está dando buenos resultados, apostemos por él y démosle el respaldo económico que necesita para seguir cumpliendo con sus objetivos.

     
       

     

      France Jamet (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, nourrir l’humanité est l’enjeu majeur de ce XXIᵉ siècle. C’est pourquoi nous devons non seulement repenser, mais soutenir le modèle de production. La mer fait partie intégrante de ce défi, avec une filière pêche puissante, durable et associée à une aquaculture raisonnée. Pour cela, nous devons créer toutes les conditions pour favoriser une synergie entre les nourriciers de la mer et les nourriciers de la terre. À l’instar de l’algoculture, dont le développement offre déjà des avancées décisives dans le domaine des engrais durables et recyclés pour notre agriculture, notre indépendance vis-à-vis des intrants chimiques, dont une grande partie vient de Russie, serait ainsi assurée.

    Alors que les accords de libre-échange que vous signez et l’obsession de verdissement imposée par Bruxelles, normative et punitive, contribuent tout simplement à fragiliser notre souveraineté alimentaire, en s’acharnant sur nos agriculteurs et nos pêcheurs. Nourrir l’humanité sera l’enjeu majeur de ce XXIᵉ siècle. C’est avec eux, et non pas contre eux, que nous relèverons ce défi.

     
       

     

      Alexander Bernhuber (PPE). – Sehr geehrter Herr Präsident, lieber Herr Kommissar! Die vergangenen fünf Jahre waren für die Landwirtschaft eher fünf magere Jahre: ein Kommissar, der sich wenig für die Landwirtschaft interessiert hat, eine Gesetzgebung, die sich mehr auf Flächenstilllegung und Außernutzungstellung konzentriert hat, als auf Ernährungssicherheit zu setzen, und politische Mehrheiten im Europäischen Parlament, die absolut nicht die Interessen unserer Bäuerinnen und Bauern vertreten haben.

    Umso mehr freue ich mich jetzt auf die nächsten fünf Jahre mit Ihnen, Herr Kommissar. Ihre Vision ist ein erster wichtiger Schritt: weniger Bürokratie auf unseren Höfen, faire Wettbewerbsbedingungen dann, wenn es um Lebensmittelimporte geht, und ein klares Bekenntnis zur Versorgungssicherheit sind richtige, wichtige Schritte.

    Doch jetzt geht es darum, aus dieser Vision auch wirklich in der praktischen Umsetzung etwas zu erreichen. Wir haben noch sehr vieles auf dem Tisch liegen, das mehr Bürokratie bedeutet: Industrieemissionsrichtlinie, Entwaldungsverordnung und, und, und, wo wir hier Lösungen finden müssen und gleichzeitig auch konkrete neue Schritte setzen – da können wir auf Sie zählen, da bin ich überzeugt; Sie können auf unsere Unterstützung zählen. Lassen Sie uns gemeinsam daran arbeiten!

     
       

     

      Marta Wcisło (PPE). – Panie Przewodniczący! Panie Komisarzu! Największym wyzwaniem, przed którym stoją dziś rolnicy, jest niska opłacalność, a nawet jej brak. Rolnicy w Europie, zwłaszcza Wschodniej, borykają się z rygorystycznymi regulacjami oraz nieuczciwą konkurencją produktów spoza Unii Europejskiej. Przedstawiona przez Komisję wizja dla rolnictwa i żywności zawiera między innymi dialog z rolnikami, o czym często zapominają instytucje europejskie, jak to miało miejsce w przypadku umowy z Mercosurem.

    Dziś jednak najważniejszym problemem dla rolników jest biurokracja, nadmierna sprawozdawczość, przesadne wymogi formalne. Rolnicy oczekują uproszczenia zasad dostępu do wsparcia finansowego i grantów, zwłaszcza dla mikro-, małych i rodzinnych przedsiębiorstw rolnych, a także rewizji Zielonego Ładu i zatrzymania umowy z Mercosurem. Propozycja Komisji idzie w dobrym kierunku, ale to zaledwie mały plaster, Panie Komisarzu, na wielką ranę europejskiego rolnictwa.

     
       

     

      Maria Walsh (PPE). – Mr President, the Commissioner mentioned two words: stability and predictability. Commissioner, if you ask young men and women in Ireland right now whether they would consider going into farming, sadly most would say ‘no’. You heard this no doubt, when you visited Ireland in January, because land is expensive, credit is hard to get, succession is complex to navigate and incomes and markets are volatile. We all know this. But what is incredibly important now is what we go forth with. We cannot ignore the fact that only 7 % of our farmers are under 35, and they need that stability and predictability, now more than ever. We need to make agriculture, the whole sector, more attractive and support young people in a practical manner now. Not later on, but now. It’s a matter of food security – you mentioned that – and the survival of our sector across the EU.

    And with all eyes being on how we’re going to fund everything that’s in this vision, Commissioner, I’m asking you in your strategy that you will put forward, that you think of the young men and women, which I know you do, but it’s incredibly important that we have those practical steps in place so that they can develop a stronger food security for us all.

     
       

       

    Vystúpenia na základe prihlásenia sa o slovo zdvihnutím ruky

     
       

     

      Francisco José Millán Mon (PPE). – Señor presidente, los agricultores y los pescadores desempeñan un papel crucial en nuestra seguridad alimentaria. Sin embargo, conocemos todos el malestar imperante en el sector agrícola, también en el pesquero, que se queja de la excesiva burocracia, de muchas restricciones, de la dificultad de conseguir, comisario, el llamado level playing field. Este malestar se ha exteriorizado recientemente respecto del Acuerdo de Mercosur, pero en el fondo refleja el descontento con la política agrícola desequilibrada que la Comisión llevó a cabo especialmente en la legislatura pasada.

    Yo creo que usted, señor comisario, representa, desde luego, un cambio muy positivo. Y lo primero que debemos hacer es flexibilizar la normativa europea y también reducir la burocracia y eliminar determinadas restricciones. Pero quiero insistir en otro punto. La seguridad alimentaria no es un tema solo agrícola. Usted ha mencionado los pescadores, y lo celebro. La pesca y acuicultura son vitales: aportan una fuente de proteína muy nutritiva y con baja huella de carbono. Lamento que este sector haya ocupado un lugar un tanto marginal en la llamada «visión para la agricultura y la alimentación» y me gustaría que estuviera plenamente representado…

    (el presidente retira la palabra al orador)

     
       

     

      Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis (S&D). – Posėdžio pirmininke, gerbiamas komisare. Norėčiau atkreipti dėmesį vizijoje į tuos du sektorius: į sektorių Competitive and resilient sector ir į sektorių Future-proof sector. Jiedu abudu be galo susiję vienu ypatingai svarbiu aspektu. Tai dalykais, kurie vizijoje turi būti aptarti kompleksiškai, kai yra baisūs iššūkiai, kurie nepriklauso nuo žemės ūkio, nuo fermerių, nuo ūkininkų situacijos – karas, klimato kaitos katastrofos, baisūs sutrikimai grandinėse. Ir tada reikia ieškoti, kad vizijoje būtų kompleksinės priemonės harmonizuotos tarp abiejų šitų sektorių, kad mes galėtume užtikrinti ir kompetentingumą, ir ištvermę. Ir aš noriu pasakyti, kad kalbant apie viską, labai svarbu atkreipti dėmesį, kad tiesioginių išmokų suvienodinimas šiandien visiems ūkininkams yra tiesiog būtinybė.

     
       

     

      Anna Zalewska (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Panie Komisarzu! Myślę, że rolnicy zasługują na to, żeby powiedzieć im prawdę. Komisja Europejska mówi wprost. Unia Europejska jest zadłużona na ponad 500 mld euro, a jeszcze nie zaczęła spłacać odsetek od funduszu odbudowy. Komisarz von der Leyen mówi jednoznacznie i wielokrotnie: nie będzie odrębnego funduszu dla rolnictwa. Będzie jeden dla jednego państwa. Jednocześnie Komisja jest zdecydowana, zachęca. Pan komisarz też wije się, nie odpowiadając na pytania. Zapadła decyzja o podpisaniu umowy z Merkosurem. Jednocześnie odbyło się spotkanie w komisji AGRI, gdzie usłyszeliśmy, że od czerwca pełnym strumieniem, otwartą granicą będą płynąć produkty rolne z Ukrainy. Tak bardzo się boicie, że nie pokazujecie nawet rozporządzenia. Mówię to po to, żeby zderzyć Pana i Państwa z rzeczywistością. Ta wizja do niej nie przystaje.

     
       

     

      Benoit Cassart (Renew). – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, la vision pour l’agriculture marque un tournant décisif pour notre agriculture. Enfin, nous mettons les agriculteurs au cœur de la transition. C’est un changement de paradigme essentiel pour garantir une agriculture durable, compétitive et résiliente. Merci.

    Permettez-moi cependant d’insister sur un point crucial, l’élevage. Nos éleveurs font face à des défis majeurs, et trop de jeunes renoncent à reprendre les exploitations. Or, sans eux, notre souveraineté alimentaire est en péril. Monsieur le Commissaire, serait-il envisageable de mettre en place un groupe de haut niveau sur l’élevage, comme c’est le cas pour le vin? Nous devons trouver des solutions d’urgence. Notre bétail disparaît chaque jour un peu plus de nos prairies.

     
       

     

      João Oliveira (The Left). – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Comissário, o que a Comissão Europeia propõe é o acentuar de um caminho errado de concentração e intensificação da produção.

    O caminho devia ser outro. Devia ser o do apoio à pequena e média produção, à agricultura familiar, promovendo um modelo de produção de qualidade — e sustentável —, que assegure a coesão social e territorial.

    O caminho devia ser o da defesa da soberania e segurança alimentar no quadro de cada país, aplicando um princípio de preferência nacional, criando e utilizando um sistema de obrigatoriedade de quotas de comercialização de produção nacional, para combater dependências externas e défices produtivos.

    Devia ser o do encurtamento das cadeias de produção, distribuição e consumo, e de uma política agrícola que intervenha nos mercados agrícolas, garantindo o escoamento das produções e preços justos aos produtores, enfrentando os interesses da grande distribuição comercial que esmagam esses rendimentos.

    O caminho devia ser o de uma política agrícola comum que vincule os apoios à produção, pondo fim ao vergonhoso princípio de pagamentos sem obrigação de produzir. Esse caminho é recusado pela União Europeia, mas vamos continuar a bater-nos por ele, que é ele que serve os agricultores e o desenvolvimento.

     
       

     

      Milan Mazurek (ESN). – Vážený pán predsedajúci, keď človek v tomto pléne počúva názory niektorých extrémnych ľavicových vegánskych aktivistov, tak musí byť skutočne zdesený o budúcnosť a slobodu ľudí v Európskej únii. Normálne tu chcete ľuďom hovoriť, aby prestali jesť mäso, že majú prestať piť mlieko, že majú jesť nejakú sóju a že majú jesť len v laboratóriu vypestované mäso? Stále chcete niekomu prikazovať, čo má či nemá robiť?

    Ja vám teraz niečo poviem, vegáni, počúvajte ma dobre: Ja som mäsožravec. Jem mäso na kilá, pijem pol litra zdravého, čerstvého nepasterizovaného mlieka každý deň a v živote som nebol zdravší, ako som teraz. Preto ma vaša propaganda nezaujíma. A keď chcete žiť podľa vlastných pravidiel, robte to, ako chcete, ale nevnucujte to všetkým ľuďom v celej Európskej únii len preto, že ste presvedčení, že vaša agenda je pravdivá. Nie mäso, nie mlieko sú nezdravé, ale vaša nebezpečná propaganda, ktorá berie ľuďom slobodu a mení Európsku úniu na progresivistický nezmysel. To je skutočná hrozba pre ľudské zdravie.

     
       

     

      Katarína Roth Neveďalová (NI). – Vážený pán predsedajúci, pán komisár, veľmi ma zaujíma, ako sa Európska komisia vysporiada s predĺžením dohody s Ukrajinou o dovoze ukrajinských produktov na naše územie, pretože vieme, že my vo východnej Európe sme mali s tým veľký problém, a už sa blíži ten čas a je okolo toho veľmi ticho. Takže bola by som veľmi rada, keby ste možno mohli odpovedať.

    Slovenskí poľnohospodári aj poľnohospodári v Európskej únii si zaslúžia, samozrejme, rešpekt a úctu. A videli sme, že sme tu mali veľmi veľa protestov a veľa tých požiadaviek bolo, samozrejme, veľmi relevantných. V poľnohospodárstve by sme sa mali snažiť o zníženie byrokracie, o zníženie kontrol pre poľnohospodárov a som rada, že aj vďaka ich tlaku sa nám to čiastočne podarilo, pre tých menších v poslednom období.

    Môžeme hovoriť o potravinárstve. Ja som si všimla, že vo vašom predstavení takisto sa zaoberáte potravinárstvom. Je to druhý najväčší sektor v európskej ekonomike a myslím si, že by sme sa mali zameriavať aj na to, ako ochrániť potravinárov, ktorí vyrábajú veľmi veľa veľmi dôležitých a zdravých potravín v Európskej únii, ale aj v súvislosti s vývozom do krajín, ako sú Spojené štáty, kde nám hrozia momentálne takisto niektoré clá alebo dane na takýto dovoz. Samozrejme, diverzifikácia poľnohospodárstva je dôležitá aj v súvislosti s klimatickými zmenami a takisto by sme ju mali podporovať, ale hlavne zachovať peniaze v poľnohospodárstve pre ďalšie obdobie.

     
       


     

      Stefan Köhler (PPE). – Herr Präsident! Sehr geehrter Herr Kommissar, vielen Dank für Ihre Vision, die sehr gute Ansätze liefert für die Zukunft und endlich die Wertschätzung, die die Landwirtschaft benötigt, entgegenbringt. Aber eine Vision, das sind nur Ideen für die Zukunft. Wenn ich mit Landwirten rede – und Sie haben gesagt, Sie haben schon viele Länder besucht –, die wollen jetzt einfach Aktion sehen, die wollen an die Umsetzung rangehen: Da möchte ich Sie ermuntern.

    Und was brauchen wir für eine starke Umsetzung? Wir brauchen ein starkes Budget, ist heute öfters gesagt worden, wir brauchen aber auch Innovation und Forschung und vor allen Dingen Erleichterung – die bringen Sie ja jetzt demnächst auf den Weg; und ich bin auch dankbar, dass wir dafür auch einen starken Kommissar haben.

    Lassen Sie uns gemeinsam die Vision schnell angehen und umsetzen! Dazu sichere ich Ihnen meine persönliche Unterstützung, aber auch die unserer Fraktion zu.

     
       

       

    (Koniec vystúpení na základe prihlásenia sa o slovo zdvihnutím ruky)

     
       

     

      Christophe Hansen, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, thank you very much for this open and frank first exchange of views on the vision on the future of agriculture and food. I have the feeling that most of you are quite positive about this new direction – a new Commission that is going and putting farmers back in the centre and is also not afraid to speak about productivity in the farming and food‑producing sector. I believe this is very important due to the geopolitical challenges that we are going through.

    You all remember one year ago that the farmers took to the streets and they had three main concerns they expressed. One was reciprocity in standards. We are addressing this reciprocity, and we are taking the first steps now, and it is clearly stated in the vision. They ask for fairer prices.

    In the first ten days of the new mandate of this Commission, we presented a targeted amendment of the Common Market Organisation Regulation and the Unfair Trading Practices Directive. And we will deliver as well on the third part, which was clearly the administrative burden that was too heavy for the agriculture and food‑producing sectors. So I’m very keen to present, already in the month of April, a first simplification package based on the common agricultural policy, but more needs to follow.

    I have travelled to several Member States, and most of the concerns I got were not related to the common agricultural policy; it was the overlap of several European laws, but as well of national laws. So we have to work and deliver by the end of the year – and I clearly stated this and it is also part of the vision – a cross-cutting simplification package that will really touch to the farms and that is well needed.

    So on the three main concerns, we are delivering concretely now as well. But, of course, you are right when you say you are lacking some details on one part or the other. And, of course, you are right that the proof of the pudding will be in the tasting afterwards. And there I believe it is very important that we take up now the workstreams that are identified in this vision together, not only with the European Parliament, but as well with the newly created European Board on Agriculture and Food, which brings together not only the farming community, but also the entire food value chain and other citizens and NGOs. This is very important to depolarise the debate and find common solutions, and I think this will deliver.

    Of course, we have to be very aware as well, as some have stated, of concerns about the ‘common’ or the ‘c’ in ‘common agricultural policy’, which will remain very important as well to have a fair level playing field between the Member States and our different farming communities.

    I believe it is also important that we speak about the next steps, and there are very many workstreams on livestock, generation renewal. Those need to be addressed together, and I think that will bring us all together forward.

    Then, of course, we have several other initiatives. I haven’t yet mentioned the wine package, although some of you have mentioned the High‑Level Group on Wine. There as well we intend to deliver the proposal already in the month of April to be able to get relief to that sector too which is very much under pressure. I am looking very much forward to doing this work together with you.

    I think it is very important that we keep up the depolarising debate and put the farmers in the centre of the discussion, not only here, but I think it’s very important that, in general, the policies are meant not in opposition here from one side to another. That is not being helpful. Let’s work in the interest of the farmers. A lot has been delivered, and I’m looking forward to future exchanges.

    For those who are members of the AGRI Committee, we will see each other on 19 March. I’m ready to discuss further in detail with a little bit more extended time, and I’m very much looking forward to that good cooperation.

     
       

       

    IN THE CHAIR: VICTOR NEGRESCU
    Vice-President

    Written Statements (Rule 178)

     
       


     

     

      Christine Schneider (PPE), schriftlich. – Die heute debattierte Vision der EU-Kommission setzt die richtigen Schwerpunkte: mehr „Farm“ statt „Fork“. Eine anreizbasierte GAP ist der richtige Weg, um die Landwirtschaft zukunftsfähig und attraktiv zu halten. Es ist alarmierend, dass nur 12 % der Landwirte unter 40 Jahren sind. Ohne gezielte Einkommensunterstützung wird der Generationswechsel nicht möglich sein.

    Bürokratieabbau ist dringend notwendig. Die angekündigte „Simplification“-Initiative im zweiten Quartal ist ein wichtiger Schritt. Sie muss aber direkt auf den Höfen ankommen wie auch in der Verwaltung. Auch beim Pflanzenschutz braucht es eine bessere Balance: Verbote dürfen erst erfolgen, wenn praxistaugliche Alternativen verfügbar sind.

    Besonders positiv ist der Ansatz der nature credits. Statt auf weitere Verbote setzt dieser Mechanismus auf Anreize für nachhaltiges Wirtschaften – ein zukunftsweisender Ansatz.

    Diese Vision bietet Landwirten Planungssicherheit, stärkt ihre Wettbewerbsfähigkeit und ermöglicht Verbrauchern eine informierte Wahl. Europa braucht eine starke Landwirtschaft – mit weniger Bürokratie, fairen Einkommen und innovativen Lösungen. Hansen setzt hier die richtigen Impulse.

     

    3. Action Plan for Affordable Energy (debate)


     

      Dan Jørgensen, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, according to Google, in my home country, the name most searched for last year was actually Taylor Swift. I don’t know what it was in Strasbourg and Brussels, but I’m pretty sure I can guess. It was probably Mario Draghi.

    Indeed, the Draghi Report is extremely important. I’m sure you’ve also all read it and will know that it mentions energy quite a lot – 700 times actually. Why? Because European industries pay two to three times more for energy than their competitors in the US and China. Because last year almost 47 million Europeans were unable to adequately heat their homes due to the high prices. Because since the war began, Europe has imported fossil fuels from Russia for an amount equal to the cost price of 2 400 F-35 fighter jets.

    For our solidarity of Ukraine and for the security of Europe, this cannot continue. And because we need to fight even harder to decarbonise our economies, when the US steps out of the Paris Agreement, it means that the EU has to step up.

    For these reasons and more, the Commission has presented the European action plan for affordable energy: an ambitious strategy to reduce energy costs for households and businesses now, while building a clean, competitive and secure energy union for future generations.

    The first pillar of our plan is focused on immediate steps to lower energy costs. We set out how Member States can tackle inefficiencies in network tariffs and taxation to achieve a more rational energy system with significantly lower prices.

    We also push for the faster deployment of clean, affordable energy. There will be no backtracking. Instead, we will fast track. We will reduce permitting times for clean energy projects significantly. For simpler projects, it should take no longer than six months to get a permit – not years, not decades as is sometimes the case today. Six months.

    We also respond to Professor Draghi’s recommendation to decouple electricity prices from gas prices by boosting longer-term contracts for renewable energy, like power purchase agreements. We will work with the EIB to create new facilities to promote and de-risk these contracts.

    Additionally, as we decarbonise our economy, demand for gas declines, but it will remain a significant part of our energy mix for some time. Our action plan therefore targets fairer gas markets. To this end, we have set up a gas market taskforce to scrutinise the operation of EU gas markets and intervene when necessary.

    So, while the first pillar sets out immediate actions to lower energy bills, the second pillar responds to structural drivers of higher costs that require long-term solutions. We accelerate our paths towards an energy union that delivers competitiveness, security, decarbonisation and a just transition, passing the benefits of clean, affordable energy on to our citizens and businesses.

    This means massive investments in grids and interconnectors. According to the Commission estimates, the EU will need investments of over EUR 570 billion annually to boost renewables, energy efficiency and grids over the course of this decade. That is why later this year, we will introduce a clean energy investment strategy to streamline the use of financial instruments such as grants, loans and blended finance to maximise impact.

    We also need to modernise our systems through electrification and digitalisation. Upcoming initiatives announced in the action plan, such as the electrification action plan, heating and cooling strategy and strategic roadmap on digitalisation in AI, can yield remarkable cost savings and benefits for Europeans. For example, increased electrification could cut energy system costs by EUR 32 billion annually by 2030. Widespread heat pump adoption could slash fossil fuel import spending by EUR 60 billion until 2030.

    The third pillar of our action plan ensures scale and certainty for investments by establishing a tripartite contract for affordable energy. This contract brings together the public sector, clean energy developers and producers, and the energy consuming industry. Our goal is to enable shared commitments and coordinated planning, providing stability in the face of market uncertainties that would otherwise hold back investments in clean transition.

    The final pillar of our plan recognises that the energy crisis exposed critical vulnerabilities in our energy system. We need to learn from this experience and be better equipped. We will therefore revise the EU energy security framework to strengthen our resilience against emerging threats and prepare for future shocks.

    At the same time, we will enhance our crisis response to better prepare for situations such as the one faced by southeast Europe last summer. We will leverage smarter demand management and better cross-border cooperation to mitigate price peaks and ensure electricity flows where it is needed the most.

    What do all of these actions mean for homes and businesses in Europe? Well, taken together, we have the potential to deliver EUR 45 billion in savings just in 2025, growing to at least EUR 130 billion in annual savings by 2030 and to EUR 260 billion annually as of 2040. Overall, between now and 2040, we can save up to EUR 2.5 trillion on fossil fuel imports. Let me just repeat that number – that is huge. EUR 2.5 trillion we can save by deploying faster our renewable energy, by becoming more energy efficient, by controlling the gas markets better, by implementing legislation that’s already been made and by interconnecting our energy systems much better than is the case today.

    If and when we do all these things, we will become much more independent of Russian fuels, our competitiveness will be much better than it is today and we will have decarbonised our economy.

     
       

     

      Peter Liese, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Die Energiekosten runterzubringen, ist eine absolute Notwendigkeit: Unsere Wirtschaft und auch die Bürgerinnen und Bürger leiden unter den hohen Energiekosten. Und für die Ziele, die wir politisch haben – Klimaschutz, Unabhängigkeit von Importen – ist es absolut notwendig, vor allen Dingen die Stromkosten runter zu bekommen. Strom ist die Energie der Transformation zur Klimaneutralität. Ob beim Heizen, bei der Mobilität oder bei industriellen Prozessen: Nicht immer, aber meistens liegt die Antwort in der Elektrifizierung, und deswegen ist es irre, dass wir so hohe Strompreise haben.

    Ich kenne Leute, die sind im Jahr 2022 jeden Morgen klimaneutral mit einem Hybrid zur Arbeit gefahren, und dann haben sie ihre Stromrechnung gesehen und haben den Hybrid verkauft, weil wir die Strompreise nicht im Griff hatten. Und es gibt Menschen, die sagen – gerade in Ihrer Fraktion, Herr Kommissar: Das ETS 1 kann gar nicht ambitioniert genug sein, aber ETS 2 wollen wir nicht. Das ist genau das Gegenteil, was wir für die Transformation brauchen – wir brauchen niedrige Strompreise. Und Strom ist eben auch die Energie, um uns unabhängig von Russland, Aserbaidschan, Katar und anderen problematischen Lieferanten zu machen; deswegen müssen die Stromkosten runter.

    Aber Kosten sind immer das Produkt von Preis und Verbrauch; das heißt, wenn wir den Verbrauch senken durch Energieeffizienz, dann gehen die Kosten eben auch runter. Und deswegen ist es so wichtig, was Sie gesagt haben, Herr Kommissar: Wir brauchen eben auch die Energieeffizienz. Und ich bitte Sie, da noch intensiver mit der Europäischen Investitionsbank zu arbeiten, um z. B. ein Frontloading der ETS 2-Einnahmen zu haben, damit wir gerade Menschen mit niedrigen und mittleren Einkommen bei der Energieeffizienz so schnell wie möglich helfen können.

     
       

     

      Dan Nica, în numele grupului S&D. – Domnule președinte, domnule comisar Jørgensen, sunteți comisarul pentru energie al Uniunii Europene și aveți în fața dumneavoastră un mandat cu extrem de multe provocări. Piața energiei electrice a Uniunii Europene este într-o situație extrem de îngrijorătoare. În țara mea, România, luna trecută, prețul energiei electrice a ajuns la 160 de euro/megawatt‑oră, de mai mult de două ori mai mare decât în aceeași lună a anului trecut și mai mare decât în Franța, Germania, unde prețurile au fost mici, mult mai mici decât în România. Această situație trebuie să fie rezolvată de urgență, pentru că ea a condus la o situație extrem de îngrijorătoare pentru economia, de exemplu, a României. 70 de mari companii sunt în pericol de delocalizare pentru că aceste costuri ale energiei electrice și ale gazelor naturale fac imposibilă desfășurarea unor activități economice.

    Peste 300 de mii de oameni pot să-și piardă locurile de muncă. Una din cinci familii din România are probleme să își plătească în același timp, în aceeași lună, factura la energie și gaze naturale și să își cumpere mâncare sau haine. Acest lucru necesită o abordare imediată și o schimbare rapidă. Pe de o parte, trebuie să știm ce s-a întâmplat și ce se întâmplă cu cei care au recurs la practici înșelătoare, care au mințit și au încălcat legea. Sunt peste 300 de cazuri în investigații și vreau ca aceste soluții să apară, domnule comisar. În plus, vrem o piață, o piață bursieră a energiei și a gazelor, să știm și noi, să avem transparență totală: cine vinde, cât vinde, cine sunt acționarii, de ce apar aceste venituri excepționale, profituri excepționale care au devenit o regulă în Uniunea Europeană. Aceste lucruri necesită o abordare și știu că puteți face acest lucru. Aveți sprijinul meu și al Parlamentului European. Luați măsuri rapide și fără niciun fel de ezitare.

     
       

     

      András Gyürk, a PfE képviselőcsoport nevében. – Elnök Úr! A magas energiaárak az uniós polgárok mindennapjainak fájdalmas részévé váltak. Európában tavaly átlagosan minden negyedik családnak okozott nehézséget, rezsiszámlájának időben történő befizetése. Ez az eredménye az elhibázott brüsszeli energiapolitikának. A valósággal szembesülve immár a Bizottság is elismeri, hogy a jelenlegi energiaárszint tarthatatlan. Azonban ez a dokumentum nem jelent valódi megoldást a problémára.

    Először is, nem vizsgálja felül az energiaárakat magasba lökő szankciós politikát. Másodszor, nem vállalkozik az árdrágító hatású klímacélok módosítására. Harmadszor, Brüsszel újfent az európai árampiaci szabályozás azonnali bevezetését követeli. Ez ellehetetlenítené a lakosságot védő hatósági árak, mint például a magyar rezsicsökkentés alkalmazását, ami elfogadhatatlan. Tisztelt Ház, az energiaárak letöréséhez nem ehhez hasonlóan sajnos hatástalan bizottsági akciótervekre, hanem bátor intézkedésekre, ha úgy tetszik, a józan ész lázadás ára van szükség, mi, patrióták ezt képviseljük.

     
       

     

      Daniel Obajtek, w imieniu grupy ECR. – Panie Przewodniczący! Szanowny Panie Komisarzu! Przedstawienie przez panią przewodniczącą Ursulę von der Leyen planu obniżenia cen energii jest niczym innym jak skandalem. Nie zawiera żadnych realnych, szybkich mechanizmów, byśmy mogli jak najszybciej obniżyć ceny energii. Zaproponowane kontrakty różnicowe i kontrakty długoterminowe już były i te kontrakty nie pozwoliły na obniżenie tak naprawdę cen energii ani w Polsce, ani gdzie indziej.

    Propozycja obniżenia podatków to jest nic innego jak generalnie coś, co mogą zrobić państwa członkowskie. Wcale nie muszą o to prosić Komisji. Rozbudowa sieci. Macie rację, rozbudowa sieci, ale to potrwa tak naprawdę dekady i pochłonie miliardy euro. Nie jesteśmy w stanie szybko tego zrobić.

    Rozwiązania są następujące, proszę Państwa, żeby tu i teraz ratować przemysł, obniżyć cenę energii. Zawiesić kwestię ETS-u. Błyskawicznie ETS zreformować z jednej prostej przyczyny: nie mogą w systemie ETS-u być instytucje finansowe, które podnoszą ceny tak naprawdę ETS-u, i zamienić ETS na inwestycje, jeżeli chodzi o emitentów.

     
       

     

      Christophe Grudler, au nom du groupe Renew. – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, le plan pour une énergie abordable doit répondre à une urgence: réduire la facture énergétique de nos industries et de nos concitoyens, car sans une énergie stable et compétitive, il n’y a ni industrie ni prospérité. Aujourd’hui, les coûts de l’énergie pèsent jusqu’à 40 % des coûts de production des industries les plus énergivores. Nos entreprises paient leur électricité deux à trois fois plus cher que leurs concurrents chinois ou américains. Comment être compétitif dans ces conditions? Il faut agir dans trois directions.

    Tout d’abord, l’électrification, vous l’avez souligné. L’objectif de 32 % d’électrification d’ici 2030 est un bon cap; mais sans réseau modernisé, procédures accélérées, stockage et flexibilité, ce chiffre ne sera pas atteignable.

    Ensuite, les financements. 584 milliards d’euros seront nécessaires d’ici 2030, rien que pour renforcer les réseaux électriques. Il faut mobiliser tous les leviers publics et privés, sans alourdir la facture des entreprises et des citoyens.

    Enfin, la stabilité. Il est clair que les contrats de long terme offriront des prix plus stables et de la visibilité aux industriels. Ils doivent concerner, Monsieur le Commissaire, toutes les énergies propres, qu’elles soient renouvelables ou nucléaires.

    Une énergie abordable est une énergie que nous n’importons plus. Je terminerai donc par une question: où est passée la feuille de route pour sortir des énergies russes?

     
       

     

      Kira Marie Peter-Hansen, for Verts/ALE-Gruppen. – Hr. formand! Kære Dan. Tillykke med planen. Den har været spændende at læse, for vi står i en afgørende tid. Vores kommissionsformand beskrev os denne uge som Europas øjeblik. Jeg er enig. Jeg tror, at borgerne mere end nogensinde før, ser mod EU for at løse de store udfordringer, og derfor skal vi minde hinanden om, at den mest effektive vej til et sikkert, et uafhængigt og et bæredygtigt Europa, det går gennem en ambitiøs grøn omstilling. Det kræver, at vi gør Europa fri for fossile brændsler. Det kræver også, at vi modstår fristelsen til at jagte kortsigtede gevinster gennem investeringer i nye gasprojekter, som der ellers lægges op til.

    Vejen til lavere energipriser går gennem massive investeringer i grøn energi, ikke gennem fossile kontrakter. Mere sol og mere vind er den billigste og hurtigste måde at reducere vores CO2-aftryk på og undgå de katastrofale konsekvenser af klimakrisen. Mere sol og vind er også den billigste og hurtigste måde at opnå uafhængighed fra gamle mænd med imperialistiske ambitioner, og det er vores stærkeste kort til at sikre en konkurrencedygtig europæisk industri. Så derfor skal vi sikre mere grøn energi. Vi skal investere massivt i vedvarende grøn energi. Det er godt for kloden, det er godt for mennesker, og det er godt for økonomien. Vi skal drastisk reducere vores udledninger, derfor skal vi vedtage et ambitiøst 2040-mål for vores CO2-reduktioner og sætte gang i handling, der sørger for, at vi når Parisaftalen. Vi kan ikke blive ved med at forurene og forvente, at fremtidige generationer rydder op efter os.

    Med grøn energi kan vi samtidig skabe konkrete forandringer for helt almindelige mennesker i hverdagen. I dag kæmper over 41 millioner europæere med at betale deres energiregning. Det er et politisk svigt, for ingen børn skal gå rundt og fryse. Derfor skal vi energirenovere vores boliger. Vi skal investere i energieffektivitet, og vi skal holde hånden under dem, der har svært ved at få enderne til at mødes. Billig, grøn energi er ikke bare godt for klimaet. Det er socialpolitik, der sikrer, at alle kan leve et værdigt liv.

    Billig og grøn energi er også den bedste hjælp, vi kan give de virksomheder, der skal ud at konkurrere med Kina og USA. Derfor skal vi fjerne de barrierer, der gør det svært at tilslutte grøn strøm til elnettet. Alt, der kan elektrificeres, skal elektrificeres. Det er vejen til et stærkt og konkurrencedygtigt europæisk erhvervsliv. Det kræver mod at træffe de beslutninger, men som Van der Leyen sagde, så er det her Europas øjeblik, og vi kan godt!

     
       

     

      Dario Tamburrano, a nome del gruppo The Left. – Signor Presidente, signor Commissario, onorevoli colleghi, venerdì un rapporto di Bloomberg – che noto non essere un collettivo di un centro sociale – stimava che con l’ETS2 i prezzi del gas per le famiglie saliranno del 20% già dal 2027 e del 43% nel 2030.

    L’ETS2 è stato proposto e negoziato per aumentare artificialmente i prezzi del gas, per orientare le scelte energetico-impiantistiche e ridurre le emissioni. Io e il mio gruppo siamo fortemente a favore della decarbonizzazione di trasporti e riscaldamento, ma essa va raggiunta senza renderla insostenibile a famiglie, imprese e pubbliche amministrazioni, già gravate dai costi energetici, dalla stagnazione economica industriale e dal ridotto gettito fiscale.

    Oggi che il gas è già molto costoso per motivi esogeni, questo meccanismo va rivisto urgentemente. Il Fondo sociale per il clima non è probabilmente sufficiente. Mi sarei aspettato delle proposte di modifica in un piano d’azione chiamato per l’energia accessibile: non c’è nulla, ma siamo ancora in tempo per correggere il tiro.

    Va disaccoppiato il costo dell’elettricità dal gas e non aumentato il prezzo del gas.

     
       

     

      Станислав Стоянов, от името на групата ESN. – Г-н Председател, достъпната енергия означава евтина енергия, а най-евтините и надеждни източници днес са ядрената и въглищна енергия. Вместо да ги отхвърляме под натиска на идеологически догми, трябва да ги разглеждаме като ключови за стабилността на нашата енергийна система.

    Ние подкрепяме напредъка и опазването на околната среда, но това не означава, че трябва с лека ръка да се откажем от работещи и достъпни технологии, особено в такива несигурни времена. Индустриите ни се нуждаят от предвидима енергия, а гражданите от сметки, които могат да си позволят. Достъпната енергия означава и сигурни доставки на ресурси. Отказът от енергийни източници заради налагане на санкции означава по-скъпа и съответно по-недостъпна енергия. За да гарантираме достъпност и икономическа стабилност, се нуждаем от всички възможни енергийни източници. Всяко необмислено ограничаване на тези възможности води до по-високи цени, по-слаба индустрия и обедняване на европейските граждани.

     
       

     

      Raúl de la Hoz Quintano (PPE). – Señor presidente, la Comisión señala en su comunicación que la energía nuclear es clave para la descarbonización, también para la seguridad del suministro y, por supuesto, para el abaratamiento del coste de la energía. En línea con esto, la mayoría de los Estados de la Unión se están planteando nuevas inversiones en el ámbito de la energía nuclear o, al menos, la prolongación de la vida útil de sus plantas. Solo hay un país cuyo Gobierno va a la contra y se está planteando el cierre de las centrales nucleares que existen en su territorio: España. Y no lo hace por cuestiones técnicas o de seguridad. Lo hace única y exclusivamente por sectarismo, por radicalismo ideológico.

    Es el legado de la señora Ribera, el legado que nos deja en España, y tiene como consecuencia inmediata el cierre, en el año 2027, de la central nuclear de Almaraz, una central nuclear que genera el 7 % de la electricidad que se consume en nuestro país. Ni que decir tiene cuál va a ser la repercusión en términos económicos, de empleo y, por supuesto, también en el precio de la factura eléctrica que pagamos en nuestro país. Así que mientras en Europa se plantea el debate en torno al abaratamiento del coste de la energía, en nuestro país seguimos anclados en el debate de «renovables sí, nucleares no». Entiendan ustedes que así es imposible avanzar.

    No es en absoluto el momento de los dogmatismos energéticos e ideológicos. Es el momento del pragmatismo económico. Si no entendemos esto, es imposible que asumamos el concepto de competitividad.

     
       

     

      Γιάννης Μανιάτης (S&D). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, αγαπητέ Επίτροπε, οι τιμές ηλεκτρισμού και φυσικού αερίου αυξήθηκαν δραστικά στην Ευρώπη, σε αντίθεση με τις Ηνωμένες Πολιτείες, που τελικά είναι ο μόνος ωφελημένος από την εισβολή της Ρωσίας στην Ουκρανία. Ασφαλώς η φορολογία της ενέργειας, όπου η Ελλάδα είναι δυστυχώς αρνητικός πρωταθλητής, τα τέλη δικτύου, οι χρόνοι αδειοδότησης κλπ., όλα αυτά, αυξάνουν το κόστος ενέργειας, και ορθά ζητάτε να αντιμετωπιστούν. Όμως το βασικό πρόβλημα είναι ότι, ενώ οι ανανεώσιμες πηγές, που όλοι σωστά προωθούμε, έχουν μικρότερο κόστος παραγωγής σε σχέση με τα ορυκτά, αυτό δεν αντανακλάται ακόμα στις τιμές για τους καταναλωτές. Χρειαζόμαστε, λοιπόν, επενδύσεις σε δίκτυα, διασυνδέσεις, αποθήκευση, με τουλάχιστον υπερδιπλασιασμό των κονδυλίων ενέργειας του Connecting Europe Facility.

    Όμως δεν είμαστε ευχαριστημένοι ούτε με την ανύπαρκτη διαφάνεια, ούτε με την αναποτελεσματική λειτουργία, ούτε με τη μηδενική εποπτεία πολλών αγορών ενέργειας στα κράτη μέλη. Τέλος, θα ήθελα να σας ρωτήσω πώς θα αντιμετωπιστούν οι διαχρονικά αυξημένες τιμές ενέργειας σε Ελλάδα, Βουλγαρία, Ρουμανία σε σχέση με την υπόλοιπη Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση.

     
       

     

      Ondřej Knotek (PfE). – Mr President, dear colleagues, Commissioner, I naively thought that the aim of the affordable energy action plan was to provide affordable energy. But I tell you something: this plan will achieve no substantial energy cost reductions, because you, the European Commission, repeat the same failures as in the past.

    You are obsessed by an energy mix based on renewables. You blindly push forward the electricity market integration. You have disrespect for the existing reliable coal industry. You are failing to place nuclear on the forefront of the energy transition in parallel to renewables. You egotistically insist on maintaining unsustainable EU climate goals. You completely ignore what’s going on in the US and in the BRICS countries. And you naively believe that you will mobilise private capital through your bad plan.

    You will not, and your plan will fail. So if you really want to help, Commissioner, cap immediately the ETS price at EUR 30, and instead of bringing new climate targets for 2040, please cancel the existing targets for 2030 and 2050.

    (The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question)

     
       



     

      Francesco Torselli (ECR). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, è impossibile non condividere un piano d’azione che si prefigge di arginare la povertà energetica e di arginare l’aumento dei prezzi.

    I dubbi, semmai, ci arrivano sulle modalità che vogliamo mettere in campo per raggiungere questi obiettivi: nei prossimi 25 anni, ci dicono i dati, il consumo energetico in UE raddoppierà e le reti elettriche nazionali dovranno essere estese di almeno il 70%.

    E noi con quali mezzi economici ci possiamo prefissare il raggiungimento di questi obiettivi? Basterà la contrattazione a lungo termine? Basterà dire agli Stati membri: “Diminuite le tasse?”. Basterà dire: “Miglioriamo il mercato del gas?”. Ad oggi per noi la risposta è “no”.

    Servono investimenti concreti e azioni concrete; servono per mantenere, Commissario, quelle promesse che lei ha fatto per risolvere il tema della povertà energetica. Ad oggi mancano le ricette: io non ho sentito da lei una parola su biofuel e biogas, per esempio, che sono ricette assolutamente valide per conseguire i nostri obiettivi.

     
       

     

      Martin Hojsík (Renew). – Vážený pán predsedajúci, pán komisár, vysoké ceny energie škodia ľuďom aj firmám. Ohrozujú prosperitu, konkurencieschopnosť. Energetická chudoba špeciálne na Slovensku ohrozuje štvrtinu domácností. Kde je príčina? Povedzme si to rovno: z veľkej časti v našej závislosti na dovážanom fosílnom plyne. Najdrahšie plynové elektrárne určujú cenu všetkej elektriny, kolega Knotek.

    Preto vítam plán pre cenovo dostupnú energiu Európskej komisie. Obsahuje opatrenia pre zníženie platieb ako domácnostiam, tak priemyslu. Zlepšuje našu pripravenosť na krízy. Verím, že zníži účty pre domácnosti a firmy a hlavne posilní našu odolnosť voči krízam. A rieši aj hlavnú príčinu problému: závislosť od dovážaných fosílnych palív. Do roku 2030 môže pomôcť ušetriť 130 miliárd eur. Môže.

    A tu je to kľúčové. Bude závisieť od toho, či ten plán premeníme na skutky, či členské štáty vrátane Slovenska naozaj začnú robiť kroky, alebo budú niektoré ďalej hádzať polená pod nohy rozvoju zelenej energie a energetickým úsporám. Pretože bez nich budeme mať naďalej vysoké ceny a budeme závislí.

    (Rečník súhlasil, že odpovie na otázku položenú zdvihnutím modrej karty)

     
       

     

      Bogdan Rzońca (ECR), pytanie zadane przez podniesienie niebieskiej kartki. – Bardzo uważnie słuchałem Pana wystąpienia i wiem, że Pan się na tym zna. I mam prośbę, nie tylko pytanie, ale prośbę, dlatego, że poszukuję bardzo detalicznych informacji na temat kosztu budowy średniej farmy wiatrowej w Europie. Ile trzeba żwiru, cementu, wody, metalu, metali szlachetnych? Ile to wszystko kosztuje? I nigdzie nie mogę tego znaleźć. Czy Pan może mi wskazać źródło, bo chciałbym porównać. Gdyż Pan mówił o wielkich kosztach i cenach gazu, a ja nie mogę znaleźć, jak rozmawiam z wyborcami, jakie są koszty budowy farmy wiatrowej? Proszę o taką informację.

     
       


     

      Marina Mesure (The Left). – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Commissaire, nous le savons tous ici: le prix de l’électricité est déterminant pour notre compétitivité. Or, l’électricité est trois fois plus chère en Europe que chez nos concurrents. Malheureusement, votre plan d’action pour l’énergie abordable ne règle rien. Vous affichez une ambition de découpler le prix de l’électricité de celui du gaz. C’est un objectif louable et d’ailleurs, Ursula von der Leyen le promettait, elle aussi, dans son discours sur l’état de l’Union en 2022. Pourtant, trois ans plus tard, le prix du gaz augmente de nouveau et rien ne change.

    Par ailleurs, rien ne nous protège du président américain, qui pourrait menacer d’augmenter les prix du GNL, que nous importons massivement des États-Unis. Nous n’avons plus les moyens de payer encore une fois le prix de notre dépendance, que ce soit à la Russie ou aux États-Unis.

    De nombreux secteurs industriels stratégiques pour notre souveraineté sont aux abois. La précarité énergétique touche 10 % des foyers européens. La solution est pourtant simple, et nous le répétons en commission comme ici dans l’hémicycle: proposez une réforme du marché de l’électricité, cette fois-ci ambitieuse; ayez le courage de sortir du dogme du marché et de privilégier l’intérêt général, plutôt que ceux des énergéticiens.

     
       

     

      Milan Mazurek (ESN). – Vážený pán predsedajúci, máme trojnásobne vyššiu cenu elektriny než v Spojených štátoch amerických, päťnásobne vyššiu cenu plynu než v Spojených štátoch a to ani nehovorme o tom, ako vysoko sa líšia ceny nafty alebo benzínu. A prečo je tomu tak? No jednoducho preto, že máme Európsku komisiu, ktorá zaviedla politiky, ktoré k tomuto cieľu neskôr viedli. Je to kvôli tomu, že počúvame ľavicových marxistických extrémistov s ich zeleným podvodom, ktorý planétu nezachráni, nič nezmení, ale ľuďom predraží ich život.

    Dnes, keď sa pozrieme na to, čo sa deje v USA, ktorí odstupujú od týchto nezmyslov, alebo na Čínu, ktorá otvára skoro dve uhoľné elektrárne za týždeň, tak vidíme, že celý svet nám uniká. A kým ľudia v Európe si už ani len nemôžu zakladať rodiny, pretože nedokážu platiť svoje mesačné účty, tak príde Komisia a povie, že ona má riešenie. Tá Komisia, ktorá to spôsobila, nám povie, že musíme investovať ešte viac do zeleného podvodu, ešte viac do zelených nezmyslov a že sa to nakoniec rieši. Je šialenstvom robiť to isté stále dookola a očakávať odlišný výsledok.

    (Rečník odmietol otázku, ktorú zdvihnutím modrej karty položila Jadwiga Wiśniewska)

     
       

     

      Kateřina Konečná (NI). – Pane předsedající, říká se, že starého psa novým trikům nenaučíš. Myslím, že Komise pod vedením předsedkyně von der Leyenové tímto starým psem je. Akční plán pro dostupné ceny energií je totiž opakováním toho samého, co slyšíme od vypuknutí krize s cenami energií, i když vidíme, že dosud plány Komise na jejich zlevnění nefungovaly. Přesto je podpora obnovitelných zdrojů jediné, s čím Komise neustále přichází.

    Energie určitě nebudou dostupnější a levnější, pokud jádro zůstane opomenuto. Naopak jádro musí být podporováno alespoň tak jako obnovitelné zdroje. Nemusíte hledat nový zdroj levného plynu ze zahraničí, protože ten již existuje, jen jste na něj z politických důvodů uvalili sankce a ruský plyn teď dráže překupujete. Zrušte proto sankce! Podpořte členské státy v úplném zestátnění energetických firem, protože pokud bude s elektřinou zacházeno jako se zbožím, tak se také nikam nepohneme. Nic z toho v plánu Komise není, a pokud Komise není schopna se z minulosti poučit, pak je načase se zamyslet, zda ji není čas vyměnit.

     
       

     

      Angelika Winzig (PPE). – Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissar! Die hohen Energiepreise gefährden die Wettbewerbsfähigkeit Europas. Jetzt ist schnelles Handeln gefordert, um den Kostendruck vor allem für unsere Betriebe zu reduzieren. Herr Kommissar, Sie haben gute Ansätze vorgelegt, aber eines hat mir gefehlt, und zwar, wenn ich an den Netzausbau denke. Immer mehr Bürgerinnen und Bürger verhindern wichtige Leitungsprojekte. Auch wenn ich heute heimfahre, komme ich an einem tollen Infrastrukturprojekt vorbei, das wahrscheinlich nicht umgesetzt werden kann. Vermehrt kommt es jetzt auch dazu, dass die Bürgerinnen und Bürger Erdkabel fordern, die natürlich wesentlich teurer sind; das führt natürlich dazu, dass auch Investoren häufig abspringen.

    Herr Kommissar, ich glaube, wir brauchen einen ganzheitlichen Ansatz, um Mitgliedstaaten, Gemeinden, vor allem auch die Bürgermeister, aber auch die Bürgerinnen und Bürger einzubeziehen, wie wir das schaffen, damit grenzüberschreitende Stromverbindungen wirklich möglich sind.

     
       

     

      Nicolás González Casares (S&D). – Señor presidente, señor comisario, no nos engañemos, la energía en Europa siempre ha sido más cara que en otros lugares como los Estados Unidos. ¿Por qué? Porque estaba basada en los combustibles fósiles. Está muy claro.

    Además, hemos visto cómo los amigos de Putin o los aliados de Trump, esos caballos de Troya, defienden consumir combustibles fósiles y apostar por más y más gas. Nosotros debemos ir en la dirección contraria: seguir con el Pacto Verde Europeo, confiar en fuentes de energías renovables que no emiten gases y, además, nos ayudan a luchar contra el cambio climático. Esa es nuestra garantía de éxito, esa es nuestra seguridad energética. Y es cierto que seguimos teniendo riesgos. Por lo tanto, reducir nuestro consumo de energías fósiles es el camino.

    Pero, además, siempre hemos defendido desde este grupo desacoplar los precios de la electricidad de los precios del gas. Creo que debemos avanzar en todas las oportunidades que nos permite la reforma del mercado eléctrico. Por lo tanto, señor Jørgensen, ¿por qué no adelantar la revisión de los mercados a corto plazo prevista en esta reforma? Se puede y se debe hacer, manteniendo la seguridad regulatoria.

    (El orador acepta responder a una pregunta formulada con arreglo al procedimiento de la «tarjeta azul»)

     
       




     

      Kateřina Konečná (NI), otázka položená zvednutím modré karty. – Pane kolego, já bych s vámi v podstatě, kromě té obrany, úplně souhlasila. Podepsala bych všechno, co jste řekl, ale vy jste členem vládní strany a já se vás ptám: Kdy česká vláda pod vedením vašeho premiéra Fialy přijde na Evropskou radu a navrhne tam, aby se zrušila nebo změnila taxonomie a aby se zrušil nebo změnil systém emisních povolenek tak, aby opravdu došlo ke snížení ceny elektrické energie? Já vám děkuju za to, co tady říkáte. Česká vláda zatím nemá odvahu cokoliv z toho udělat, nejen v České republice, ale ani to přenést na evropskou úroveň.

     
       

     

      Ondřej Krutílek (ECR), odpověď na otázku položenou zvednutím modré karty. – Paní kolegyně, pokud víte, tak česká vláda pracuje na jiných věcech týkajících se Green Deal, když už se bavíme o automobilovém průmyslu. Co se týče ETS, tak rozvíjíme iniciativy, které povedou minimálně k odložení ETS2 o rok až dva. A co se týče těch dalších věcí, o kterých jsem tady hovořil, tak jsem v kontaktu s lidmi, kteří k tomu mají co říct v Radě, naslouchají mi a je to běh na trošičku delší trať. Ale nebojte, pracujeme na tom.

     
       

     

      Isabel Serra Sánchez (The Left). – Señor presidente, señor comisario, cuando se inició la guerra de Ucrania ustedes dijeron que, con la escalada bélica, aumentando el gasto militar íbamos a ser más independientes y más soberanos; hoy se ve que eso es una gran mentira. Tras tres años somos más dependientes —sobre todo energéticamente— de los Estados Unidos, que desde el año 2018 ha aumentado su exportación de gas licuado un 1 749 %. Quien se ha forrado con la guerra, aparte de las grandes empresas armamentísticas, son las empresas energéticas. Y ahora, frente a su fracaso, proponen más gasto militar y recortes de los derechos sociales, lo que aumenta también la pobreza energética.

    Este Plan que proponen hoy es papel mojado, lo saben perfectamente, en una Unión Europea donde hay nada menos que 42 millones de personas que sufren pobreza energética y donde, desde sus inicios, el mercado energético es un oligopolio, un robo y una estafa a la ciudadanía. Para bajar la factura de la luz, para que seamos realmente soberanos, hacen falta más impuestos a las grandes energéticas, una intervención decidida del mercado energético, control público y paz.

     
       

     

      Siegbert Frank Droese (ESN). – Herr Präsident, verehrte Kollegen! Das einzig Richtige im Aktionsplan für erschwingliche Energie ist die Feststellung der Tatsache, dass es zu hohe Energiepreise gibt. Falsch im Plan sind dagegen die Ursachen, die genannt werden, z. B. Verbrauch der Konsumenten oder gar das Wetter – was für ein Unfug steht da drin!

    Richtig ist: Die ganze Energiepolitik der EU ist falsch. Falsch ist besonders die Abkopplung von günstigen Gas- und Ölimporten aus Russland. Daher sagen wir: Wettbewerbskompass – weg damit! Aktionspläne – weg damit! Flaggschiffprojekte oder Pilotprogramme – weg damit!

    Die EU muss einfach ökonomisch denken, profitorientiert und nicht grün-ideologisch. Wir brauchen Marktwirtschaft statt Planwirtschaft, weg mit dem grünen Energiesozialismus. Die Lösung in der Energiefrage ist nicht clean energy, sondern cheap energy. Solange das die Kommission nicht begreift, wäre es bei den Aktivitäten der Kommission für die Menschen besser, Sie würden gar nichts tun. Die fossilen Brennstoffe sind nicht das Problem, sondern die Fossile in der Kommission sind das Problem – da darf sich der Herr Kommissar ruhig angesprochen fühlen. Und man kann daher nur hoffen, dass die aussterben wie die Dinosaurier.

    (Der Redner ist damit einverstanden, auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“ zu antworten.)

     
       


     

      Siegbert Frank Droese (ESN), Antwort auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“. – Herr Kollege, ich weiß nicht, wie alt Sie sind, aber es ist Ihnen sicherlich entgangen, dass wir in Zeiten des Kalten Krieges mit der früheren Sowjetunion – die ja durchaus deutlich aggressiver gegenüber dem Westen auftrat als das heutige Russland das eigentlich tut – sehr, sehr gute Verträge gehabt haben. Ich weiß nicht, wo hier das Problem ist.

    Also, für uns ist wichtig, dass wir unseren Verbrauchern günstige Energie zur Verfügung stellen. Die Administration in den USA hat das erkannt. Wir hoffen sehr als deutsche Volksvertreter, dass Nordstream 2 repariert wird und dass wir dann dort gemeinsam als amerikanisch‑russisches Projekt Nordstream 2 wieder günstige Energie beziehen können. Das ist eine absolute Frage der Souveränität; günstige Energie ist auch eine Form von Souveränität.

     
       


     

      Katarína Roth Neveďalová (NI). – Vážený pán predsedajúci, kolegovia, dostupná energia je právo, nie privilégium pre ľudí a mali by sme sa snažiť, aby ceny energií boli celkovo dostupné pre občanov, nielen pre firmy, ale aj pre občanov. Viacerí kolegovia tu hovorili o tom, že ako môžeme porovnávať ceny v Spojených štátoch amerických a Európskej únii, koľkonásobne vyššie sú ceny v Európskej únii oproti Spojeným štátom, čo znižuje našu konkurencieschopnosť a zvyšuje cenu našich produktov. Toto je jedna z vecí, na ktoré by sme sa mali viacej pozrieť.

    Takisto si myslím, že odstrihávanie sa od lacných zdrojov a fosílnych palív je nesprávnym krokom, ktorý Európska únia robí, a mali by sme ho prehodnotiť. Takisto si myslím, že keď hovoríme o kúrení a teple, zákaz kotlov na fosílne palivá bolo zlé riešenie. A keď budeme všetko iba elektrifikovať, tej elektriny nemáme momentálne dostatok a musíme tým pádom viac budovať aj siete. A oceňujem, že Komisia to takisto chce robiť.

    Takisto by som chcela povedať, pán komisár Jørgensen, že veľmi oceňujem váš príspevok do debaty, ktorú má Slovenská republika s Ukrajinou, kde sa snažíme obnoviť tranzit plynu cez ukrajinské územie pre Slovenskú republiku, aby sme mali lepšiu bezpečnosť energetickú aj pre Slovákov, ale aj pre celú východnú a strednú Európu.

     
       

     

      Aura Salla (PPE). – Mr President, the affordable energy action plan has a market-based approach, but execution is the key. We must accelerate investment, cut red tape and ensure that competition – not subsidies – drives our transition. Europe cannot afford to slip into state-driven energy markets. Overreliance on government planning will drive investment elsewhere and hidden subsidies would distort price signals.

    As the Nordic model shows, a market-based, diverse and clean energy mix lowers energy costs. And yes, nuclear power is one of the key elements in this mix. Europe can do the same: scale renewables, strengthen our grids and develop long-term contract models.

    We must invest in grids. But this is not a cost; it is a down payment on lower energy bills, cheaper transport and industrial competitiveness.

    So, let’s be clear: free markets, competition and private investments must lead our energy transition.

     
       

     

      Bruno Gonçalves (S&D). – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Comissário, colegas, investir na produção de energia renovável não é uma questão ideológica: é a aposta certa para uma Europa que quer mais autonomia estratégica, uma trajetória favorável de preços e menos emissões poluentes.

    Sabemos que, no curto prazo, será muito difícil competir com os preços de energia, seja dos competidores americanos, seja dos competidores chineses. Temos falta de recursos naturais endógenos e a dependência do gás barato da Rússia, que agora se extingue, inibiu durante muito tempo o investimento em alternativas. Mas o caminho é este — e o caminho é certo.

    Comissário Jørgensen, terá todo o meu apoio para o seu plano para a energia acessível. Mas, como diz o relatório Draghi, há uma forma de a Europa aliviar já, hoje, os preços da eletricidade. E isso é caminhar para acabar com a indexação do preço do gás. Contamos consigo para essa batalha.

    A política energética e a transição climática precisam de entregar resultados para as pessoas e para as pequenas e médias empresas, não para grandes empresas do setor energético, nem para especuladores do sistema financeiro, cujos interesses não são os interesses europeus.

    (O orador aceita responder a uma pergunta «cartão azul»)

     
       

     

      João Oliveira (The Left), Pergunta segundo o procedimento «cartão azul». – Senhor Deputado Bruno Gonçalves, este plano de ação para preços de energia acessíveis anuncia a intenção de desacoplar o preço da energia do preço do gás, como, de resto, referiu na sua intervenção, mas faz esse anúncio de forma muito tímida e não introduz nenhuma alteração de fundo ao mecanismo de formação de preços.

    E, portanto, o que isso significa é que a energia produzida a partir de fontes renováveis — e mais barata — continua a ser paga aos preços, mais altos e voláteis, do gás.

    E a pergunta que lhe faço, por isso, é se é possível, nestas condições, esperar mesmo que os preços da energia baixem para as famílias e para as empresas ou se, pelo contrário, vão continuar elevados, a alimentar os lucros dos grupos económicos do setor energético.

     
       

     

      Bruno Gonçalves (S&D), Resposta segundo o procedimento «cartão azul». – Caro Deputado, como mencionei na minha intervenção — e menciona também bem —, o mais importante neste momento é reduzir o preço para as famílias, para as pequenas e médias empresas, para quem precisa.

    Isso significa, obviamente, olhar para o mecanismo de formação de preços, entendê-lo e reformulá-lo. E é por isso que eu vejo com muito agrado que esta Comissão, pela primeira vez, encara este desafio e diz, desde logo, não só para o futuro, como para o presente, que os Estados‑Membros têm também a responsabilidade de desenhar mecanismos que possam prever já isso.

    Olhe o nosso caso em Portugal: é responsabilidade do Governo português começar já a desenhar esses mecanismos, esse mecanismo de desacoplamento. Não é aceitável que, num país onde a produção renovável é tão alta, os preços continuem como estão.

    E, portanto, essa é uma boa medida, essa é uma boa proposta.

     
       

     

      Kris Van Dijck (ECR). – Voorzitter, commissaris, de energiekosten in de EU zijn te hoog en daar lijden dus de burgers en onze ondernemingen onder. De vraag is dus: “hoe maken we die energie goedkoper, terwijl we ook steeds meer elektriciteit nodig hebben?” Ik volg de Commissie als het gaat om de realisatie van de energie-unie en onder andere het beter connecteren van het Europese net.

    Maar wat mis ik toch wel in deze nota? Dat is de plaats van, ook op korte termijn, kernenergie, die zeker betaalbaar, efficiënt en schoon is. De elektriciteitsprijs wordt bepaald door de duurste productie. Die moet vervangen worden en dat doe je dus niet door het sluiten van kerncentrales. Ik geef een voorbeeld: in februari betaalden een Belgisch gezin en een Belgische kmo 50 % meer voor elektriciteit dan een Frans gezin of een Franse kmo. En ja, waar zit het verschil, denk je? Ik vraag dus, mijnheer de commissaris, met aandrang om de ideologische vooringenomenheid die de Europeanen veel geld kost, te stoppen en naar de volledige systeemkosten van elke technologie te kijken.

     
       

     

      Gabriella Gerzsenyi (PPE). – Elnök úr! Magyar családok százezrei fáznak a saját otthonukban, és vannak, akik télen megfagynak. Orbán Viktor a versenyképesség élharcosának mutatja magát, miközben elhanyagolják az infrastruktúra fejlesztését. Magyarország több áramot importál, mint Németország. Az ipari fogyasztók pedig az Európai Unió ötödik legmagasabb áramszámláját fizetik. Hatalmas energiaigényű kínai akkumulátorgyárakat építenek az országban, és nem csökkentik az orosz fosszilis forrásoktól való függőséget.

    Megjegyzem, lehet, hogy ezentúl az amerikai forrásokra fognak áttérni, hiszen tudjuk, hogy Orbánnak nem csak Putyin, hanem Trump is a barátja. Mi a Tisza Pártnál azon dolgozunk, hogy a diverzifikálás, az energiahatékonyság és a megújulók, például a geotermikus energia jobb kihasználása révén minden magyar számára biztosítsuk az otthon melegét.

     
       


     

      Massimiliano Salini (PPE). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il piano proposto dalla Commissione europea va nella direzione corretta per molti motivi, individuando strumenti di carattere finanziario o interventi di carattere infrastrutturale che certamente aiuteranno a ridurre l’impatto del costo dell’energia.

    Il problema è che la gran parte dei provvedimenti individuati all’interno di questo piano sono lenti, cioè genereranno nel lungo termine gli effetti auspicati. Noi abbiamo bisogno di interventi anche, che, però, consentano oggi a chi consuma energia, in particolare la nostra industria energivora, di avere effetti positivi.

    Il Commissario ha fatto correttamente riferimento alla necessità di disaccoppiare in forme particolari il calcolo del prezzo dell’energia, distinguendo l’energia prodotta da fonti fossili da quella da fonti rinnovabili.

    Ma non viene messo in discussione la possibilità, almeno, della revisione del disegno del mercato elettrico. Valutiamo di fare una vera valutazione dell’impatto di questo disegno, perché è stato costruito in tempi troppo diversi da quelli attuali.

     
       

     

      Thomas Pellerin-Carlin (S&D). – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, pour rester maîtres de notre destin, maîtrisons nos prix de l’électricité. Mon pays, la France, produit déjà de l’électricité décarbonée en abondance, grâce au nucléaire et aux renouvelables. Pour rester maîtres de notre destin, nous devons investir massivement dans toutes les énergies renouvelables, y compris l’éolien terrestre, les énergies marines et le solaire sur toiture. Cela nous permettra de continuer à produire de l’électricité à un prix abordable, tout en respectant les objectifs européens fixés dans les plans nationaux en matière d’énergie et de climat. Pour rester maître de notre destin, le gouvernement français doit écouter la Commission européenne et arrêter d’augmenter les taxes sur l’électricité.

    Chers collègues, nous disposons aujourd’hui de tous les outils pour mieux maîtriser les prix de l’électricité. À nous d’en faire bon usage. C’est ainsi que nous restaurerons la confiance dans les prix de l’électricité pour aider nos industriels, nos collectivités locales et nos citoyens à pouvoir faire sereinement le choix de l’électrique.

     
       

     

      Bruno Tobback (S&D). – Voorzitter, commissaris, collega’s, nog erger dan een half miljard Europeanen te laten gijzelen door Vladimir Poetin is om een half miljard Europeanen laten gijzelen door Donald Trump én Vladimir Poetin. De beste manier om daaraan te ontkomen, is aan onze welvaart te bouwen met de energie die we zelf produceren en controleren. Dat is ook de basis van uw actieplan. Laat ons nu zorgen voor actie.

    De Europese energie-unie moet meer zijn dan een verzameling van 27 aparte energiemarkten met te hoge prijzen, waar burgers niet alleen moeten betalen voor dure stroom omdat we die met gas moeten produceren, maar zelfs moeten betalen wanneer ze zelf groene stroom produceren en gratis leveren, omdat onze netten niet in staat zijn om die te brengen naar de bedrijven die erom smeken. In een markt die schreeuwt om goedkope energie is het absurd dat honderden projecten waarmee goedkope stroom kan worden geproduceerd, vandaag wachten op een aansluiting.

    Commissaris, iedere politicus droomt ervan om te verbinden. Enfin, misschien niet iedereen in dit halfrond, maar toch velen. Verbindingen vermenigvuldigen is vandaag de beste garantie voor lagere energieprijzen voor onze gezinnen en voor onze bedrijven. Laat die kans niet liggen.

     
       

     

      Elena Sancho Murillo (S&D). – Señor presidente, señor comisario Jørgensen, con la publicación del Plan de Acción para una Energía Asequible, la Comisión reconoce que los obstáculos fundamentales para la competitividad europea siguen siendo los precios de la energía y la dependencia de la energía fósil externa. Este es un gran paso en la dirección correcta.

    Sí, tenemos que reducir las tarifas de red y tenemos que aportar más oferta y flexibilidad al sistema acortando los plazos de autorización, aumentando la velocidad a la que incorporamos las energías renovables y desacoplando los precios de las renovables de los precios de los combustibles fósiles. La Comisión también señala de manera correcta en este Plan algunos de los principales cuellos de botella que siguen obstaculizando nuestros objetivos, como la capacidad de red y, especialmente, las interconexiones.

    Además, este Plan debe ir más allá y poner el foco en un aspecto realmente decisivo: el de la inversión pública. Debemos ser capaces de reducir los precios de las tarifas e invertir para mejorar y ampliar nuestras redes e interconexiones. Debemos tomar ejemplo del trabajo que lleva haciendo el Gobierno de España estos últimos años, optando por las energías renovables y consiguiendo una bajada histórica de los precios.

    Trabajemos por una Unión Europea limpia, conectada y competitiva que no deje a nadie atrás.

     
       

     

      Michael McNamara (Renew). – Mr President, I’m not here very long, but already I have the impression that this place operates like a bubble. I’ve listened to numerous speeches this week saying that the only thing that our citizens care about is defence. Colleagues, I do not believe for a moment that this Parliament will be judged on whether or not there are soldiers wearing the European Union insignia on their shoulder in five years’ time. The success or failure of this Parliament will be judged on whether or not we bring down energy prices in Europe, and whether or not we provide energy stability and security across Europe. And the same is true, Commissioner, of your Commission, in my view.

    I do very much welcome the action plan that has been announced, though. Clearly, we need a huge investment in our infrastructure. Clearly, we need to break the link between gas‑pricing and energy‑pricing, because that has resulted in energy prices remaining artificially high across Europe. But we can’t wait for grid infrastructure. We do need to look at innovative solutions.

    Everybody across Europe is talking about the benefits of AI. At the same time, the same people are saying that we can’t have data centres. Well, we can’t have it both ways. We do need to look at whether data centres can be used to stabilise our grid in the short term, while we wait for our grid to be enhanced.

     
       

       

    Catch-the-eye procedure

     
       

     

      Elena Nevado del Campo (PPE). – Señor presidente, señor comisario de Energía, en su propósito tiene usted al enemigo en casa: la señora Ribera. Nos enfrentamos en Europa a un reto crucial: garantizar a las familias, y a las empresas que dan trabajo, una energía asequible sostenible y segura. La ciencia es clara: la combinación de las energías renovables y la energía nuclear es clave para reducir las emisiones y proteger nuestro planeta.

    Mientras los Estados Unidos prolongan hasta ochenta años la vida útil de las centrales nucleares, Sánchez las cierra en España sin importarle las familias ni de Extremadura ni de Cataluña. Por lo tanto, el desmantelamiento de la central nuclear de Almaraz, en mi tierra, que abastece a más de 4 millones de hogares en España y evita la emisión de 7,2 millones de toneladas de CO2 al año, es un sacrificio que no podemos permitir.

    Por eso les pido a todos ustedes que apoyen el no al cierre de la central nuclear de Almaraz.

     
       

     

      Maria Grapini (S&D). – Domnule președinte, domnule comisar, discutăm despre prețuri accesibile, însă mi-aș fi dorit să dați o definiție: ce înțelegeți dumneavoastră prin prețuri accesibile la energie? Pentru că alt preț este accesibil pentru cetățenii din Luxemburg, alt preț este accesibil pentru cei din România sau din țările din est. Ați fost foarte sigur pe dumneavoastră, ca și cum aveți asul în buzunar. Puteți să rezolvați făcând o uniune a energiei, reducând prețurile, energie curată – toate acestea înseamnă investiție și mai ales timp. Cetățeanul are nevoie astăzi, pentru că de trei ani Europa este mereu în criză.

    Unde se duce criza? La buzunarul cetățeanului. Aș vrea să ne spuneți în răspunsurile pe care le dați acum, când? Un termen, un timp. Eu așa am înțeles, ca om de afaceri: să spun măsura și timpul. Când avem prețuri accesibile pentru toți cetățenii, în funcție de veniturile pe care le au? În plus, mai cred ceva, domnule comisar. E o speculă în prețul energiei, necercetată, necăutată și lăsată așa, să trăiască bine producătorii de energie necontrolați și furnizorii de energie, iar costurile din nou să meargă la buzunarul cetățeanului.

     
       

     

      Anna Zalewska (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Panie Komisarzu! Pan zdaje sobie sprawę, że Pana plan to wzrost cen energii. Czas uwolnić się od algorytmów, szantażystów, zielonych, którym płacicie, lobbystów. Czas usiąść z inżynierami, energetykami, chemikami i fizykami. Czas wrócić do ETS-u sprzed 2014 roku, bo w tej chwili stał się bańką, piramidą finansową, która spekuluje i manipuluje. Jednocześnie czas wyrzucić ETS 2 do kosza. Obywatele nie mogą ponosić odpowiedzialności za Wasze beztroskie pomysły, za Waszą ideologię i za to, że jesteście zakładnikami wielkich biznesów.

    ECR w ciągu najbliższych tygodni przygotuje projekt rezolucji i debatę na temat wyrzucenia ETS 2 do kosza.

     
       

     

      Billy Kelleher (Renew). – Mr President, I welcome the publication of the Action Plan for Affordable Energy. Of course, affordable energy and energy in the context of security is vital for the development of the European economy, to give certainty in terms of investment, but equally – and importantly – we have to address a very fundamental issue around our competitiveness, the cost to businesses and the cost to families and households right across Europe.

    Reference has been made to affordability and, of course, affordability varies greatly across the European Union itself. I would like to see greater investment in generation capacities and in harnessing capacities, particularly in the area of solar and wind, and we do need a Eurogrid, Commissioner, whereby we can transport electricity from where it is produced to where it is needed, and there will be significant challenges.

    From an Irish perspective, of course, we are an island nation. We have great potential in terms of wind energy, but we need to have the capacity to export it through interconnectors, via France directly, and also via the UK as well. There would be significant costs and challenges, but this needs to be done to advance our wind energy capacity.

     
       

     

      Ana Miranda Paz (Verts/ALE). – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Comissário, como eurodeputada galega, quero advertir que, para ter energia acessível, há que travar os benefícios escandalosos do lobby elétrico.

    No meu país, somos produtores de energia elétrica e estamos penalizados por produzir sem que se favoreça o nosso povo. O preço da energia disparou nos últimos anos em 300 %. Os benefícios das empresas elétricas também.

    O lobby elétrico é apoiado no meu país pelo Governo do Partido Popular, que permite que se espolie energia, com benefícios que emigram. Por isso, defendemos uma tarifa elétrica pública.

    Advirto também, Senhor Comissário, que, perante esse espólio, há muitos lares afetados pela pobreza energética e pelo preço iníquo, sem poderem aquecer mais a casa e passando frio. A pobreza energética na Galiza é o dobro da média europeia — 20 % dos nossos habitantes não podem pagar a conta da luz.

    Advirto também, Senhor Comissário, que acelerar o licenciamento nos projetos eólicos tem um perigo: o PP no Governo galego acelera projetos, violando normativas ambientais. Energia acessível…

    (o Presidente retira a palavra à oradora)

     
       


     

      Lukas Sieper (NI). – Herr Präsident, liebe Menschen Europas, liebe Schülerinnen und Schüler des DBG, Felix! Bezahlbare Energie ist nicht nur eine wirtschaftliche Frage; es ist die große politische Frontlinie unserer Zeit. Denn Energie bedeutet nicht nur, die urmenschlichen Bedürfnisse wie Wärme im Winter zu erfüllen, sondern auch Arbeit und industrielle Zukunft.

    Nach wie vor beziehen wir unsere Energie maßgeblich von Autokraten; es sind nun andere, aber immer noch Autokraten. Und das müssen wir ändern: Wir brauchen echte europäische Energieunabhängigkeit. Wir brauchen ein massives Solarprogramm, mit dem wir bis 2035 auf jedem öffentlichen Gebäude in Europa Solarzellen haben. Wir brauchen ein 100 Milliarden Euro‑Sondervermögen für den Ausbau der Infrastruktur, insbesondere der Ladeinfrastruktur. Wir brauchen einen europaweiten Windkraftausbau mit weniger Bürokratie, schnelleren Genehmigungen und Mindestkapazitäten für jeden Mitgliedstaat.

    Bezahlbare Energie ist kein Luxus, sie ist Grundlage sozialen Friedens, wirtschaftlicher Stärke und geopolitischer Unabhängigkeit.

     
       

       

    (End of catch-the-eye procedure)

     
       

     

      Dan Jørgensen, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, we are now in a situation where we are still, in Europe, dependent on Russian gas. Every day we use gas bought in Russia and thereby indirectly help fill up Putin’s war chest. This is, of course, unacceptable.

    At the same time, last year was the year with the highest temperatures ever measured. So, climate change is not going away. Actually, it’s probably even more serious than we thought.

    These two huge fundamental problems need to be solved. But the good news is that the tools that we need to solve these problems, to make us independent of fossil fuels, to decarbonise our economies, are also the tools that will make us more competitive. If we look at the deployment of renewable energy from 2021 to 2023, it saved us more than EUR 100 billion – more than EUR 100 billion!

    If we then also look at how connected we are, how connected our grids are, that rationality saves us more than EUR 30 billion a year on top of that.

    So yes, our energy prices are too high, but they would have been even higher had we not had the green transition that we are in the middle of going through in Europe. And we can do even better: we will deploy renewable energy faster, we will become much more energy efficient, and we will connect our energy systems in Europe much better. Thank you so much for a very good debate today.

     
       


       

    (The sitting was suspended at 11:58)

     
       

       

    IN THE CHAIR: MARTIN HOJSÍK
    Vice-President

     

    4. Resumption of the sitting

       

    (The sitting resumed at 12:03)

     

    5. Announcement by the President

     

      President. – Yesterday, the President made an announcement about the name of Péter Magyar having been added to the names of the signatories of the joint motion for a resolution on the future of European defence due to a clerical error. After a thorough investigation into the matter was launched, it can be confirmed, as already said yesterday, that the name should not have been on the list of signatories since it was not in the names transmitted by the EPP Group to the services.

    The President has asked the services to put measures in place to prevent similar errors in the future. However, I would also like to invite the Members of this House not to escalate such a regrettable situation and to stick to the facts.

     

    6. Request for an urgent decision (Rule 170)



     

      President. – As important as this situation is, this is not a point of order. Thank you for understanding.

     

    7. Voting time

     

      President. – The next item is the vote.

     

    7.1. European Defence Industry Programme and a framework of measures to ensure the timely availability and supply of defence products (EDIP) (vote)


     

      François-Xavier Bellamy, rapporteur. – Mr President, the time for having the floor will be longer than the time for taking the floor.

    I just wanted to say that with our EPP Group, we are asking our Parliament to go for an urgent procedure on the European Defence Industry Programme.

    This will allow us to work, of course, in a very inclusive manner. With the rapporteur of the SEDE Committee, we are very much looking forward to working with all of you on the proposals you will make, but it will allow us to deliver fast. In this very important geopolitical moment, our Parliament has to show that we are ready to be efficient, precise and to work fast on this absolutely decisive programme for the defence of our Europe.

     

     

      President. – The next vote is on the joint motion for a resolution on democracy and human rights in Thailand, notably the lese-majesty law and the deportation of Uyghur refugees (see minutes, item 7.2).

     

     

      President. – The next vote is on the joint motion for a resolution on the severe political, humanitarian and human rights crisis in Sudan, in particular the sexual violence and child rape (see minutes, item 7.3).

     

    7.4. Unlawful detention and sham trials of Armenian hostages, including high-ranking political representatives from Nagorno-Karabakh, by Azerbaijan (RC-B10-0177/2025, B10-0177/2025, B10-0178/2025, B10-0179/2025, B10-0180/2025, B10-0181/2025, B10-0182/2025, B10-0183/2025, B10-0184/2025) (vote)


       

    – After the vote on paragraph 7:

     
       


       

    (Parliament did not agree to put the oral amendment to the vote)

     

    8. Resumption of the sitting

       

    (Rokovanie pokračovalo od 15.02 h.)

     

    9. Approval of the minutes of the previous sitting

     

      Predsedajúci . – Zápisnica zo včerajšieho rokovania a prijaté texty sú k dispozícii. Má niekto pripomienky? Nie. Ďakujem. Zápisnica je týmto schválená.

     

    10. European Schools Alliance: potential to achieve the European education area by driving innovation, enhancing mobility and championing inclusivity (debate)


     

      Christophe Hansen, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, last week, Executive Vice-President Roxana Mînzatu delivered the Union of Skills package, and she presented it to you yesterday.

    The Union of Skills is a bold and ambitious package which strives to equip people with the right skills, starting with basic skills, and to support balanced cross-border mobility and free movement of knowledge and skills. The Union of Skills, with the European Education Area as a key enabler, will help to lay strong foundations for learning.

    A key objective of these efforts is ensuring that everyone has the basic skills they need to thrive in life. Currently, one third of 15-year-olds struggle with real life mathematics, one quarter fail to understand basic texts, and 43 % of eighth-graders lack basic digital skills. Most countries have either declined or shown no improvement. This concerning trend demands immediate action.

    One of the first deliverables of the Union of Skills is the action plan on basic skills. The first objective of this action plan is to set an ambitious target by complementing the existing target on basic skills as follows. By 2030, the share of underachievement in literacy, mathematics, science and digital skills should be less than 15 %, whereas the share of top performance in literacy, mathematics and science should be at least 15 %. For this, we will pilot a basic skills support scheme as from next year.

    In addition, we will pilot in 2026 the first European school alliances with the support of the Erasmus+ programme. The European school alliances aim to foster better cooperation and mobility among schools across Europe, acting as a catalyst to enhance the learning and teaching of basic skills. These alliances will test innovative teaching methods, curricula and competence frameworks, including in collaboration with local authorities.

    To support this, we will work to make mobility a standard in schools. Indeed, what better way to learn citizenship than by exchanging with learners from another country and culture. This is what opens the mind. The alliances will lead the way towards structural, strategic and sustainable cooperation between schools across Europe. They will provide a new format of cooperation both for schools and for school authorities, and they will serve as a springboard, enabling the transfer of knowledge and of innovative best practices at all levels.

    Erasmus+ has highlighted the benefits of learning, mobility and cross-border cooperation. However, national school systems often face obstacles that prevent them from fully reaping these benefits, lacking the legal autonomy needed. Schools rely heavily on local, regional and national authorities. The European school alliances will help address these barriers, ensuring all schools have equal access to opportunities. They will support teachers’ professional development and contribute to the future EU teachers and trainers agenda.

    To conclude, let me say that we are glad to see your interest in this initiative and we look forward to hearing your views and ideas on how together we can shape the European school alliances to offer Europe’s children the best possible start in life.

     
       

     

      Tomislav Sokol, u ime kluba PPE. – Poštovani predsjedavajući, povjereniče, kolegice i kolege, obrazovni sustav je institucionalni stup društva, temelj društvenog poretka i ključni instrument nacionalne suverenosti i identiteta.

    Dok promišljamo o jačanju obrazovne suradnje unutar Europske unije moramo osigurati da se svaka inicijativa odvija u okviru načela supsidijarnosti i proporcionalnosti kako bi nacionalne vlade zadržale primarnu regulatornu nadležnost nad svojim obrazovnim politikama. Europska unija je ovlaštena podupirati, koordinirati i dopunjavati djelovanja država članica u području obrazovanja. U tom kontekstu Europski savez škola može poslužiti kao mehanizam za unapređenje obrazovne mobilnosti, znanstvene izvrsnosti, institucionalne kohezije i općenito za unaprjeđenje vještina, kao što rekao i povjerenik, ali ne može dovesti do harmonizacije nacionalnih obrazovnih sustava. To se posebno odnosi na obrazovne programe, odnosno kurikulume, gdje države članice zadržavaju punu autonomiju njihovog definiranja, a Europska unija im, naravno, pri tome može pomoći.

    Drugim riječima, pravo na obrazovanje mora se prvenstveno ostvarivati u nacionalnim okvirima koji najbolje reflektiraju kulturne, gospodarske i društvene prioritete svake države članice. Mobilnost unutar europskog obrazovnog prostora može biti koristan instrument akademskog razvoja, no moramo osigurati da se ona ne koristi kao instrument društvenog inženjeringa ili prisilne homogenizacije obrazovnih standarda. Inkluzivnost obrazovnog sustava važan je društveni cilj, no treba biti oprezan da nas ovaj put ne vodi k normativnim rješenjima koja favoriziraju političku korektnost na štetu meritokracije.

    Europska unija može djelovati u onim područjima gdje dodana vrijednost nadilazi ono što se može postići na nacionalnoj razini. Bilo kakva tendencija prema unifikaciji obrazovnih sustava putem sekundarnog zakonodavstva ili financijskih uvjetovanja predstavljalo bi korak u krivom smjeru koji bi ugrozio stabilnost europske integracije i dao argumente onima koji žele njenu propast.

    No, svakako, na kraju bih istaknuo da ovakvi programi jesu dobri, da suradnja i razmjena su ono što jača europsku integraciju, što stvara nove generacije koje su odgojene na europskim vrijednostima, ali isto tako moramo biti oprezni da, dok to radimo, postupamo isključivo u okviru nadležnosti koje Europska unija ima.

     
       

     

      Sabrina Repp, im Namen der S&D-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, Herr Kommissar! Stellen Sie sich vor: eine junge Schülerin aus einer Kleinstadt in einer ländlichen Region. Ihre Eltern haben nie die Möglichkeit gehabt, im Ausland Urlaub zu machen, und finanzielle Sorgen stehen an der Tagesordnung. Für diese junge Frau scheint Europa weit weg – eine Idee auf dem Papier, aber nicht Teil ihres Alltags. Doch sie ist nicht alleine. Viele junge Menschen haben nicht die Chance, mit Gleichaltrigen aus anderen Ländern in Kontakt zu kommen. Ihnen fehlt die Möglichkeit, Europa wirklich zu erleben, weil es zu teuer ist, weil die Schule es nicht anbietet oder weil sich niemand um sie kümmert. Genau hier setzt die Europäische Schulallianz an.

    Sie bietet jungen Menschen die Chance, über Grenzen hinweg zusammenzuarbeiten, neue Perspektiven zu entdecken und Freundschaften zu schließen. Programme wie Erasmus+ und eTraining ermöglichen es Schülerinnen und Schülern, andere Kulturen kennenzulernen, Sprachen zu üben und zu verstehen, was europäische Zusammenarbeit bedeutet.

    Aber diese Chancen müssen für alle gelten. Der europäische Austausch darf nicht nur für junge Menschen da sein, deren Eltern es sich leisten können. Er muss auch diejenigen erreichen, die es schwerer haben – junge Menschen aus Familien mit wenig Geld, aus kleinen Dörfern, aus schwierigen Lebensverhältnissen.

    Schule ist dabei der Schlüssel. Sie können dafür sorgen, dass alle jungen Menschen an Austauschprogrammen teilnehmen können, unabhängig vom Einkommen oder Bildungsstand der Eltern. Doch das funktioniert nur, wenn wir Hürden abbauen und mehr Möglichkeiten schaffen. Daher brauchen wir mehr finanzielle Unterstützung für benachteiligte Schülerinnen und Schüler, digitale und lokale Austauschformate, mehr Informationen in Schulen, damit alle erfahren, welche Chancen es gibt, und mehr Geld für Programme wie Erasmus+ und eTraining.

    Der europäische Austausch ist mehr als nur ein Vorteil für den Arbeitsmarkt. Er verändert Menschen; er macht sie offener, neugieriger und selbstbewusster. Und vor allem zeigt er, dass Europa für alle da ist, nicht nur für einige. Er ist das Versprechen, dass nicht Herkunft über Zukunft entscheidet, sondern Bildung.

    Ich wünsche mir, dass die Schülerin vom Anfang meiner Rede diese Chance bekommt. Und wer weiß, vielleicht steht sie irgendwann hier vor Ihnen im Europäischen Parlament und ist eine der jüngsten Abgeordneten und setzt sich dafür ein, dass noch mehr junge Menschen Europa entdecken möchten.

     
       

     

      Annamária Vicsek, a PfE képviselőcsoport nevében. – Elnök Úr! Az európai oktatási térség megteremtése egy ambiciózus célkitűzés, ugyanakkor egy kiváló lehetőség, amely hosszú távon meghatározza Európa versenyképességét, társadalmi kohézióját és kulturális sokszínűségét. Az Európai Iskolák Szövetsége kezdeményezés tényleges megoldásokat kínál ehhez, hiszen az innováció, a mobilitás és az inkluzivitás hármas pillérére épít. Támogatnunk kell az ilyen projekteket, de egyúttal biztosítanunk kell azt is, hogy az európai oktatási térség építése tiszteletben tartsa a nemzeti identitásokat, a tagállamok oktatási hagyományait és szuverenitását.

    Az egységes Európa nem az uniformizálásról kell, hogy szóljon, hanem a sokszínűség és az együttműködés erejéről. A tagállamok jó gyakorlatainak és esettanulmányainak egymás közötti megosztása hozzájárulhat ahhoz, hogy uniós szinten még jobb eredményeket érjünk el e téren. Az európai oktatási térség megvalósítását jelentősen segíti az Erasmus+ program, a diákok és pedagógusok mobilitásának lehetővé tételével. Örömmel vehetjük tudomásul, hogy az EU-n kívüli, csatlakozni kívánó országok is részt vehetnek az Erasmus+ programokban, de követeljük, hogy az EU-s tagállamok minden diákja és oktatója megkülönböztetés nélkül férjen hozzá a mobilitási programokhoz. Nem engedhet meg magának az EU olyan negatív példákat, mint egyes magyar és osztrák egyetemisták kizárása az Erasmus+ programokból. Ugyanis ez teljesen összeegyeztethetetlen a sokszor emlegetett európai értékekkel és az európai oktatási térség vállalt céljaival.

    Végezetül szeretném hangsúlyozni, mennyire fontos az EU-s tagjelölt államok minél szorosabb bekapcsolása a térség kínálta programokba és lehetőségekbe. Különösen fontos az ott élő fiatalok számára, hiszen ők azok, akik egy nap remélhetőleg uniós állampolgárok lehetnek. A tagjelöltek bekapcsolásával elérhetjük azt, hogy a csatlakozás pillanatában az oktatási rendszereik jobban össze legyenek hangolva az uniós elvárásokkal.

     
       

     

      Христо Петров, от името на групата Renew. – Г-н Председател, знаете ли кое е най-важното нещо, което научих през последните години, докато помагах на деца и младежи, много от които в неравностойно положение. Те могат, те имат талантите и желанието. Това, което им липсва, е възможност. Просто трябва да им се даде шанс. Те имат всички качества, за да успеят, и потенциалът и желанието им надминават нашия ритъм. За да отговорим на техния потенциал, ние трябва да осигурим не само повече, но и по-разнообразни и качествени възможности за развитие.

    “European Schools Alliance” е точно този шанс, който те заслужават. За да бъде успешен този Съюз на училищата, той не трябва просто да повтаря стари практики в нов формат. Аз призовавам Европейската комисия да отвори Съюза на училищата към широк спектър от дейности по мобилността, включително неформални форми на образование като летни лагери с фокус върху изкуство, спорт и езикови умения. Една от причините да имам възможността да бъда днес тук сред вас е, че аз съм обещал на хората в моята страна да се боря за тази идея, защото тя е онова, което може да накара децата и младежите в България, Румъния, Гърция, но също и във Франция, Германия и Испания, да могат да приемат дълбоко в себе си истината, че Европа, това сме всички ние. Има нужда да заложим гражданското образование като приоритет на Съюза на училищата, за да бъде този съюз успешен, той трябва да достигне до най уязвимите деца и младежи. От личен опит знам, че успехът зависи от способността на училищата да участват в подобни проекти. Ето защо трябва да направим всичко, за да бъдат подготвени учителите и да гарантираме, че процедурите за кандидатстване и участие са опростени и насочени към децата с най-малко възможности. Колкото повече подкрепяме учителите, толкова по-добре ще се развиват учениците.

    Що се отнася до структурата на Съюза, нека се поучим от опита на европейските университети, които от самосебеси се организират тематично. Мисля, че ще е подходящо да окуражим училищата също да сформират съюзи тематично на тема спорт, изкуство, а също и по професионални сектори. Така ще може от самото начало да стимулираме задълбочаване на техните учебни методи и по-дълбокото профилиране на учителите като специалисти. “European Schools Alliance”, Съюза на училищата една уникална възможност за нашите деца в цяла Европа. Аз призовавам както Комисията, така и всички мои колеги тук, които се вълнуват от съдбата и бъдещето на децата, да работим заедно, за да направим така, че този съюз да бъде успешен и за да могат и нашите деца един ден да покажат на техните деца, че най-хубавото място на света е Европа.

     
       

     

      Marc Jongen, im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Überall, wo die EU ihre Hände im Spiel hat, folgen Bürokratie, Zentralisierung, Gleichmacherei und regelmäßige Berichtspflichten für die Betroffenen sowie eine schleichende Infiltrierung mit den EU-Ideologien wie Klimarettung, Genderismus, diversity usw. Die unter den EU-Auflagen ächzende Wirtschaft kann ein Lied davon singen, und in der Bildungspolitik ist es nicht anders. Wir trauen daher den schönen Worten nicht, mit denen jetzt eine europäische Schulallianz etabliert werden soll.

    Mobilität von Schülern – ähnlich wie bereits von Studenten durch Erasmus+ – Fortbildung und Karrieremöglichkeiten von Lehrkräften, lebenslanges Lernen: klingt alles wunderbar, wird aber teuer erkauft, nämlich durch den Abbau der nationalen Bildungstraditionen, auch den Abbau der Qualität und den schleichenden Verlust nationaler Souveränität im Sinne der ever closer union.

    Dabei zeigt sich besonders deutlich der Grundwiderspruch dieses Ansatzes: Man feiert einerseits die europäische Vielfalt und tut zugleich alles dafür, diese zu eliminieren und überall gleiche Standards, gleiches Denken, gleiche Ergebnisse einzuführen. Und sobald die EU hier durch Subventionen einen Fuß in der Tür hat, wird sie auch jeden bestrafen, der ihre Vorgaben nicht erfüllt – davon ist mit Sicherheit auszugehen.

    Dabei sind die schulischen Ergebnisse zunehmend katastrophal. In Deutschland können nach der Grundschule ein Viertel der Kinder nicht richtig lesen und schreiben. Trotzdem dürfen immer mehr aufs Gymnasium, und 30 % erhalten dann ein Einserabitur – nicht nur der Euro inflationiert, sondern auch die Schulnoten. Die Rezepte der EU wie mehr Inklusion und sogenannte Geschlechtergerechtigkeit werden diese Misere nicht beheben. Sie verstärken nur nationale Fehlentwicklungen, die etwa das deutsche Schulsystem zu einer leistungsfeindlichen Komfortzone und einer Spielwiese für Bildungsideologen gemacht haben.

    Was wir brauchen, ist eine Rückkehr zum Leistungsprinzip und zu einer differenzierten Schulbildung, je nach den Talenten der Kinder, die ja auch sehr unterschiedlich sind. Dann wird es auch etwas mit der vielbeschworenen europäischen Wettbewerbsfähigkeit, und zwar ganz ohne EU-Zentralismus.

     
       

     

      Giusi Princi (PPE). – Signor Presidente, signor Commissario, onorevoli colleghi, l’Europa deve costruire con determinazione un sistema educativo interconnesso e globale, un sistema in cui l’innovazione, la mobilità e l’inclusività siano i pilastri fondamentali.

    In questo contesto, il modello di riconoscimento automatico dei titoli sta trovando efficace applicazione nell’istruzione accademica attraverso il diploma europeo. Ma sorge spontanea una domanda: perché fermarsi all’università e non estendere l’iniziativa anche ai licei? Se l’obiettivo è realizzare lo spazio europeo dell’istruzione, è necessario partire dalle fondamenta, ovvero dalla scuola secondaria.

    Da donna di scuola, lo so bene perché conosco a perfezione queste dinamiche. Immaginiamo l’impatto trasformativo che un’iniziativa del genere potrebbe avere nelle aree periferiche delle nostre regioni.

    Penso alla mia Calabria: un’integrazione effettiva delle scuole in un sistema educativo europeo interconnesso porterebbe non solo al riconoscimento universale dei titoli ma anche alla creazione di uno standard educativo europeo, non solo una garanzia di qualità per i nostri studenti, ma un’opportunità concreta di accesso a percorsi formativi e professionali in tutti gli Stati membri.

    Semplificherebbe maggiormente la mobilità studentesca eliminando barriere burocratiche e linguistiche, rafforzando un’identità europea condivisa. L’Alleanza delle scuole europee, dunque, non deve essere solo una proposta ma un imperativo categorico per realizzare pienamente lo spazio europeo dell’istruzione.

    Attraverso la promozione di una mobilità attiva e strutturale, l’innovazione dei metodi didattici e la garanzia di un’istruzione inclusiva creerebbe una comunità educativa che non solo forma, ma prepara i giovani a essere cittadini europei consapevoli e pronti a rispondere alle sfide globali di oggi.

     
       

     

      Victor Negrescu (S&D). – Mr President, Commissioner, education is a foundation of a united, competitive and inclusive Europe. To shape the future, we must invest in education, skills, knowledge, values and mobility. The European Schools Alliance has the potential to become a game changer in achieving the European Education Area, bringing together innovation, mobility and inclusivity to create a truly borderless learning experience.

    As Vice-President of the European Parliament and a strong advocate for education, I work alongside colleagues in the EPP Intergroup on the Future of Education and Skills to push for ambitious and transformative policies supported by adequate funding. One of our key demands is to allocate at least 20 % of the next multiannual financial framework to education and skills. If we want Europe to remain a global leader, we must treat education as a strategic investment, not just another policy or a cost.

    We need a new European framework for education and skills – a comprehensive plan that ensures every child and young person, regardless of their background, has access to quality education, modern learning environments and future-proof skills. This can and must be Europe’s vision of the future.

    This means also fostering greater synergies between them and avoiding fragmentation. At the heart of this vision is a need for a real Erasmus 2.0. It should be not just a mobility programme, but a pillar for quality education and training across Europe. We must move towards a common curriculum, share learning objectives and truly European diplomas that are recognised across borders. Our students should not only gain knowledge in different European countries, but also learn about what it means to be together in Europe, strengthening their sense of belonging and shared responsibility.

    The European Schools Alliance can be a driving force behind these ambitions. By fostering collaboration between schools, educators and policymakers, we can create a system that transcends national borders, ensures fair access to opportunities and equips the next generation with the skills they need to thrive in an increasingly complex world.

    The time to act is now. The European Education Area must be more than just a concept; it must become a reality. If we speak more and more about defence, we should also speak more and more about education and working together. Investing in education means investing in a better future for our citizens.

     
       

     

      Virginie Joron (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, parler de stratégie et d’alliances, c’est aussi parler de bilan. L’éducation en Europe s’effondre. C’est le crash des écoles en France: les examens PISA de 2022 le prouvent. Les résultats s’écroulent, alors que les pays d’Asie progressent. Singapour culmine à 575 points, tandis que la France traîne à 474; c’est un écart gigantesque. L’OCDE nous dit que les enfants issus de l’immigration ont encore plus de difficultés. Cela, on s’en doutait un peu; mais, même parmi les enfants les plus favorisés, nous sommes désormais très loin des pays asiatiques en maths. Dans les écoles américaines, les plus pauvres ont de meilleurs scores en maths qu’en France.

    Voici les pays devant la France en mathématiques: Singapour, Macao, Taïwan, Hong Kong, Japon, Corée du Sud, Estonie, Suisse, Canada, Pays-Bas, Irlande, Belgique, Danemark, Pologne, Royaume-Uni, Australie, Autriche, Tchéquie, Slovénie, Finlande, Lettonie, Suède, Nouvelle-Zélande, Lituanie et Allemagne. En lecture, nous sommes très loin derrière les États-Unis.

    Un autre chiffre est effrayant: 13 % des enfants ont peur pour leur sécurité en allant à l’école, soit plus d’un million d’enfants et d’adolescents qui ont peur. Moi, j’ai envie de vous dire d’arrêter avec ces slogans creux. Votre inclusion ne s’adresse pas aux enfants handicapés, autistes ou hospitalisés; c’est pour les toilettes neutres sans urinoir et les livres LGBT obligatoires à la bibliothèque; ne pas dire «père» ou «mère», mais «parent 1» et «parent 2». Voilà les priorités de la caste de Bruxelles.

    L’exemple à suivre est pourtant simple. Regardez Singapour; c’est notre programme: rigueur académique, autorité des enseignants, priorité aux matières essentielles, fin des dérives idéologiques et soutien aux élèves en difficulté. Finalement, et c’est tragique, nous avons le résultat de cette idéologie mortifère, qui tire les écoles vers le bas.

    (L’oratrice refuse de répondre aux questions carton bleu de Sieper et Repp.)

     
       

     

      Seán Kelly (PPE). – As a former teacher, I am particularly pleased to see the European Schools Alliance being proposed by President von der Leyen. Education is the foundation of our future, and this initiative represents a crucial step in ensuring that young people across Europe have access to high-quality, innovative and inclusive learning opportunities.

    The success of the European University Alliance has demonstrated the power of cross-border collaboration in higher education. The European Schools Alliance should take inspiration from this model. The University Alliance has proven that overcoming fragmentation and enhancing cooperation leads to real benefits, such as joint degrees in research, collaboration and mobility programmes.

    At the school level, we must aim for similarly tangible outcomes, ensuring that students and teachers alike can benefit from a truly European approach to education. To be effective, the European Schools Alliance must focus on delivering measurable outcomes, much like the University Alliance has done with research, innovation and joint degree programmes.

    This is particularly important from my own country, Ireland, an island nation. Strengthening ties between our schools will help bridge the physical gap, ensuring Irish students and teachers have the same opportunities for collaboration and exchange as their counterparts across the continent. By building these connections, the European Schools Alliance will not only benefit students and teachers, but also contribute to a more unified and competitive Europe.

    Now to conclude, next Monday is our national holiday, Saint Patrick’s Day. Isn’t that right, Billy?

    Lá Fhéile Pádraig sona daoibh uilig agus caith an tseamróg.

     
       

       

    Vystúpenia na základe prihlásenia sa o slovo zdvihnutím ruky

     
       

     

      Bogdan Rzońca (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Mamy fatalne wyniki szkolnictwa podstawowego. Mamy fatalne wyniki działalności uniwersytetów. W pierwszych 30 uniwersytetach świata jest tylko jeden uniwersytet, jedna politechnika, monachijska, z Europy, z Unii Europejskiej. Przegrywamy. Ale tak jest dlatego, że lewicowo-liberalne trendy powodują, że w przedszkolach i w szkołach przebiera się chłopców za dziewczynki i dziewczynki za chłopców. To jest pierwsze zadanie niektórych nauczycieli. Dalej przekazuje się dzieciom książki z gołymi kobietami i mężczyznami. Uczy się je po prostu hedonistycznych zachowań, do których dzieci nie dorosły, burzy się ich intelekt. Trzeba więc po prostu wrócić do normalnej psychologii rozwojowej. Wielu psychologów doskonale wie, jak uczyć dzieci. I wielu doskonałych nauczycieli wie, jak uczyć dzieci. Trzeba im tylko dać szansę, dać lepsze płace. I wara, i z daleka odsuńmy eksperymentatorów i eksperymenty od natury dziecięcej.

     
       

     

      Billy Kelleher (Renew). – Mr President, I am very excited about this European Schools Alliance, and I really do welcome it, and I hope that it is supported across the entirety of the European Union. This is not about integration. It’s about a celebration of diversity, broadening horizons and deepening understanding, learning about each other and learning from each other. And if we can get to that principle in terms of education, I think we will have done an awful lot for the generations of children to come.

    If you look at the Erasmus+ programme, it has has been really beneficial to third‑level students right across the European Union. To learn to live, to love in another country and another culture is a beautiful experience and something that stays with people for evermore.

    So I hope that this particular programme will be supported and encouraged at Member State level, facilitated by local authorities. But we need to ensure that in areas of deprivation, they are not forgotten, and that they’re as entitled to access this programme as any other child across the continent. There must be no barriers to children being able to access this programme and facilitated by the educators that support them. I commend it and support it.

     
       

     

      Lukas Sieper (NI). – Mr President, all students in Europe will hate this idea, but we need new school subjects in all of the European schools. Before I elaborate, let me educate some colleagues like Mr Jongen, who struggles to read Article 1 of the Treaty on European Union or, for example, Article 23 of the German Constitution, which in fact set the aim of ‘ever closer union’.

    But a Europe-wide school policy makes sense. What difference is there in teaching English, art, music or maths. And in the same way, all our European children need to understand these topics.

    All of our European children today need to be educated in two new subjects. The first one is digitalisation. All the possibilities and dangers of the digital realm need to be taught to them. And the second thing – and this is ever more important – is democracy. How does this Parliament work? How does the European Union work? Those are things that children need to learn all over Europe. So let’s go forward and enact these ideas.

     
       

       

    (Koniec vystúpení na základe prihlásenia sa o slovo zdvihnutím ruky)

     
       

     

      Christophe Hansen, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, the design and development of the European Schools Alliance is still in its very early days. That is why a debate like the one today is so useful, and the outcomes will feed into the design of the pilot.

    After the pilot, the success of the European Schools Alliance will depend on the next Erasmus+ programme and, of course, the future multiannual financial framework. This is why we believe we must give priority to investment in people, in pupils and their skills. We have to invest where it matters the most.

    You will be part of the debates, and we hope that the budget for the next Erasmus+ programme will match the expectations that some of you – like Mr Negrescu and Mr Petrov have mentioned – including for future European school alliances. To build a true Union of Skills, to make the European Schools Alliance a success, we need your support and we know we can count on you to make a difference.

     
       

     

      Predsedajúci . – Rozprava k tomuto bodu sa týmto skončila.

     

    11. Explanations of votes

     

      Predsedajúci . – Ďalším bodom programu sú vysvetlenia hlasovania.

     

    11.1. Social and employment aspects of restructuring processes: the need to protect jobs and workers’ rights (B10-0143/2025)



     

      Predsedajúci . – Tento bod programu je ukončený.

     

    12. Approval of the minutes of the sitting and forwarding of texts adopted

     

      Predsedajúci . – Zápisnica z tohto rokovania bude predložená na schválenie na začiatku nasledujúceho rokovania. Pokiaľ nie sú žiadne námietky, uznesenia prijaté na dnešnom rokovaní budú ihneď postúpené osobám a orgánom, ktoré sú v nich uvedené.

     

    13. Calendar of part-sessions

     

      Predsedajúci . – Nasledujúca schôdza sa uskutoční od 31. marca do 3. apríla 2025 v Štrasburgu.

     

    14. Closure of the sitting

       

    (Rokovanie sa skončilo o 15.37 h.)

     

    15. Adjournment of the session

     

      Predsedajúci . – Schôdza Európskeho parlamentu je týmto prerušená. Rokovanie sa skončilo.

     

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Text adopted – The need for EU support towards a just transition and reconstruction in Syria – P10_TA(2025)0035 – Wednesday, 12 March 2025 – Strasbourg

    Source: European Parliament

    The European Parliament,

    –  having regard to UN Security Council Resolution 2254 (2015) of 18 December 2015,

    –  having regard to the establishment of the UN Independent Institution on Missing Persons in the Syrian Arab Republic, under UN General Assembly Resolution 77/301 of 29 June 2023,

    –  having regard to its recommendation of 28 February 2024 to the Council, the Commission and the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy on the situation in Syria(1),

    –  having regard to the statement by the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 9 December 2024,

    –  having regard to the Council conclusions of 19 December 2024,

    –  having regard to the orders of the Paris Judicial Court of 14 November 2023 and 21 January 2025 issuing international arrest warrants for Bashar al-Assad and members of his family, and to universal jurisdiction cases in European courts,

    –  having regard to the joint statement by the Governments of France, Syria, Bahrain, Canada, Egypt, Germany, Greece, Iraq, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Spain, Türkiye, the United Arab Emirates and the United Kingdom, the European Union, the United Nations Special Envoy for Syria, the Secretary General of the League of Arab States and the Secretary General of the Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf of 13 February 2025,

    –  having regard to Council Decision (CFSP) 2025/406 of 24 February 2025 amending Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria(2),

    –  having regard to the statement issued following Syria’s National Dialogue Conference, held in Damascus on 25 February 2025,

    –  having regard to the statement of 8 March 2025 by the Spokesperson of the European External Action Service on the latest developments in Syria,

    –  having regard to Rules 136(2) and (4) of its Rules of Procedure,

    A.  whereas in December 2024 Syria witnessed momentous change, as a rebel coalition spearheaded by the armed group Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), the Syrian National Army (SNA), the Southern Operations Room (formerly Southern Front) and several other opposition forces toppled Bashar al-Assad’s murderous regime; whereas the historic collapse of the Assad dynasty marked the end of half of a century of suffering for the Syrian people, with unprecedented tyranny and chaos unfolding after Bashar al-Assad brutally repressed the 2011 uprising and led the country into civil war, as well as the beginning of a new chapter for the Syrian people and the broader Middle East;

    B.  whereas the fallen Assad regime engaged in systematic repression, mass arrests, torture, enforced disappearances, extrajudicial executions and other grave human rights violations, and is responsible for documented war crimes and crimes against humanity, including the deliberate targeting of civilians, siege warfare leading to mass starvation, the use of barrel bombs and the deployment of chemical weapons, in violation of international law; whereas since 2011, at least half a million Syrians have died and 14 million have been forced to flee their homes, of which roughly 7 million have been internally displaced, as a result of the fierce repression and demographic engineering by the Assad regime and his allies, as well as at the hands of terrorist groups; whereas the fates and whereabouts of tens of thousands of people remain unknown;

    C.  whereas Russia and Iran, under the guise of strategic alliances, were both enablers and active players in the war waged by the bloody Assad regime against its own people and used Syria as a geopolitical battleground for destabilising the region, as a hub for arms and drug trafficking, as well as a testing ground for military capabilities and tactics, systematically targeting civilian infrastructure and humanitarian aid convoys in clear violation of international law; whereas Assad’s power relied on Russia and Iran’s continued support and their supply of manpower and weapons, as well as that of their proxies, including the Wagner Group, the Lebanese Hezbollah, Iraqi militias and Afghan mercenaries; whereas his sudden fall is a clear geostrategic defeat for both countries;

    D.  whereas after assuming a leading role in overthrowing the regime, former HTS leader Ahmed al-Sharaa was designated caretaker President and launched a political transition process, entailing plans for a new constitution and the holding of elections in four to five years from now; whereas the caretaker president was tasked with forming a temporary legislative council, appointed a caretaker government and pledged to establish, by early March 2025, a new non-sectarian, comprehensive, credible and inclusive government reflecting Syria’s ethnic and religious diversity; whereas on 24 and 25 February 2025, the Syrian interim government held the announced National Dialogue Conference; whereas the Syrian constitution of 2012 was nullified and the People’s Assembly and the Baath Party dissolved; whereas many armed groups also formally agreed to dissolve and be integrated into the Syrian army;

    E.  whereas the EU rightly refused to normalise its ties with the Assad regime right through to its demise and played a significant role as a major humanitarian donor to Syrian civilians and as host to 1,3 million refugees fleeing the conflicts; whereas since 2011, the EU and its Member States have mobilised more than EUR 33,3 billion in humanitarian, development, economic and stabilisation assistance focusing on life-saving aid, resilience programmes and the political implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 2254 (2015); whereas in December 2024 the EU launched a humanitarian air bridge to deliver emergency healthcare and other essential supplies; whereas in the aftermath of the fall of the Assad regime, some Member States announced a suspension of pending asylum applications by Syrians; whereas the EU has suspended sanctions on key economic sectors to facilitate engagement with Syria and its reconstruction;

    F.  whereas the caretaker government authorities control most but not all of Syrian territory, with the overall security situation in Syria remaining fragmented and volatile; whereas violent events, including revenge killings, sectarian violence and criminal activities, are seen to be increasing, particularly in the coastal and rural areas; whereas pro-Assad armed groups and, allegedly, others have conducted coordinated attacks starting on 6 March 2025 in the Latakia, Tartus and Homs governorates, leading to deadly clashes with Syrian security forces; whereas in return, members of the Syrian security forces and the SNA, foreign fighters and jihadists reportedly participated in unjustifiable retaliations and executions targeting Alawite civilians on the basis of their ethno-religious affiliation; deplores also the confirmed killings of at least 10 Christians; whereas, despite the statement delivered by de facto President al-Sharaa, the fighting lasted several days and has so far caused over 1 000 casualties; whereas de facto President al-Shaara has announced the creation of a ‘fact-finding committee’ and of a ‘higher committee’;

    G.  whereas north-eastern Syria is still currently administered by the self-proclaimed Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria and controlled militarily by the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF); whereas on 10 March 2025 an agreement towards their integration within all institutions of the Syrian state was jointly signed by de facto President al-Sharaa and Commander in Chief of the SDF Mazloum Abdi; whereas since December 2024, the Turkish-backed SNA militias, some of which have not been included in the transitional government, and Türkiye itself, have intensified attacks and incursions within northern Syrian territory, including attacks on civilians and civilian infrastructure in the Manbij and Kobani areas, which may amount to war crimes;

    H.  whereas Israel has occupied a part of the Syrian territory in the Golan Heights since 1967; whereas following the overthrow of the Assad regime, Israel has further seized the UN-patrolled demilitarised zone beyond the Golan Heights and repeatedly carried out strikes on military targets in Syria; whereas the Israeli Minister of Defence has declared that ‘the IDF will remain at the summit of Mount Hermon and the security zone indefinitely’;

    I.  whereas Russia seeks to retain its military bases in Syria, particularly the Tartus naval base and the Hmeimim military airfield; whereas Bashar al-Assad and his family fled the country and have been granted political asylum in Russia; whereas diplomatic contact has been made between Russia and the new Syrian authorities;

    J.  whereas the Assad regime supported Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and recognised the occupied Luhansk and Donetsk regions in Ukraine, as well as the Abkhazia region in Georgia; whereas Ukraine’s military intelligence service systematically reported that Russia was training mercenaries recruited in Syria to support Russia’s war against Ukraine; whereas the ‘Grain from Ukraine’ initiative was deployed in Syria after the suspension of Russian food exports;

    K.  whereas Daesh has caused tremendous suffering in Syria, triggered numerous terrorist attacks worldwide and continues to operate within and from Syria, relying on its centre for external operational planning in the Badia region; whereas approximately 10 000 Daesh fighters and 40 000 Daesh family members are currently being detained in the Al-Hol and Roj detention facilities, primarily guarded by the Kurdish-led SDF; whereas Syrian security forces may reportedly take over the management of the detention facilities following the agreement of 10 March 2025 made between de facto President al-Sharaa and SDF Commander in Chief Mazloum Abdi;

    L.  whereas Syria’s Christian population has steeply declined since 2011 due to its targeting by both the Assad regime, as well as by Daesh and other terrorist groups;

    M.  whereas the situation in Syria remains one of the world’s most acute humanitarian crises, with nine out of ten Syrians below the poverty line and almost 17 million people – 70 % of the population – requiring humanitarian assistance because of widespread food insecurity and a lack of basic infrastructure and public services;

    N.  whereas, according to the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, the humanitarian response for Syria is significantly underfunded, having secured less than 10 % of the USD 1.2 billion needed until March 2025; whereas the executive order issued by US President Donald Trump’s administration, enacting a 90-day suspension of all foreign assistance programmes, including those administered by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), has and will have an impact on the humanitarian programmes and non-governmental organisations that operate on the ground in Syria; whereas the UK and several EU Member States have also announced significant decreases in their global aid budgets;

    O.  whereas Syria finds itself in a tremendously dire economic situation, with soaring inflation in the country reaching a record high level of 40,2 % in 2024, electricity shortages and rising commodity prices; whereas the collapse of the Syrian economy was exacerbated by regime corruption, predatory economic policies and reliance on illicit activities, including the production and trafficking of Captagon; whereas a colossal reconstruction effort must be undertaken while navigating the shift to an open market economy, with exports having dramatically decreased compared to pre-war levels;

    P.  whereas 5,5 million Syrian refugees live in the five countries neighbouring Syria, namely Türkiye, Lebanon, Jordan, Iraq and Egypt, with the EU providing financial assistance to help shoulder the associated costs; whereas approximately 500 000 internally displaced persons and 300 000 external refugees have returned to their areas of origin since the collapse of the Assad regime, with inadequate services, limited livelihoods and damaged infrastructure hindering their sustainable reintegration;

    1.  Praises the bravery, dignity and resilience of the Syrian people, who finally succeeded in overthrowing the cruel Assad dictatorship; pays tribute to the countless victims of the regime; calls for the EU to seize this historic opportunity to support a Syrian-led political transition in order to unite and rebuild the country, and to assist Syria in implementing its reconstruction and achieving a just and inclusive political transition; remains concerned, however, by the high degree of instability, both in Syria and in the region; underlines that a stable and peaceful Syria is in the interests of the Middle East, the EU’s southern neighbourhood and the EU itself;

    2.  Welcomes the fresh start in EU-Syria relations, manifested by the appointment of an EU Chargé d’affaires in Damascus, diplomatic engagement and high-level meetings undertaken by Member States and EU leaders, as well as the anticipated organisation of the Ninth Brussels Conference set to take place on 17 March 2025; encourages the EU and all its Member States to cooperate with Syria’s interim authorities in a transparent, coordinated and responsible manner, and to convey readiness to provide state-building assistance if and as needed; welcomes dialogue held alongside regional partners in the so-called ‘Aqaba’ format;

    3.  Strongly believes that stability in Syria will come from a pluralistic political transition that includes credible representatives of all components of Syrian society and of all geographical areas, that is to say all religious and ethnic communities, women, civil society and peaceful opposition forces; welcomes the caretaker president’s acknowledgement of Syria’s diversity while taking note that the composition of the current interim government is lacking in this regard; underlines the importance of the future government reflecting this plurality and for a future constitutional framework guaranteeing equal rights and access to opportunities for all Syrians, in line with democratic principles, the rule of law, fundamental rights and freedoms, including religious freedom, as upheld by international law, as well as clear and concrete evidence that these rights are respected in national and local decisions;

    4.  Acknowledges in this regard, the National Dialogue Conference that took place on 25 February 2025 as a starting point for establishing a culture of dialogue for all Syrians; expresses its concern about the exclusion of Kurdish political representatives, as well as the failure to ensure the participation of all segments of Syrian civil society, particularly women; recalls, further, that this dialogue ought to be upheld in order to prevent deepening societal divisions and discord within key segments of Syrian society and further destabilising an already fragile security situation; calls on the interim government to craft a roadmap setting out its plan for carrying out the political transition process and improve transparency in respect of Syrian citizens;

    5.  Notes with concern the violent past of factions that toppled the Assad regime and are now participating in government; takes good note of the caretaker President’s declarations of intent, while pledging to monitor the actions of national and local authorities when evaluating further engagement; expresses cautious optimism regarding the behaviour of the caretaker authorities regarding freedom of religion and encourages them to implement further confidence-building measures; calls on the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and the Member States to consistently speak out against any possible violation of fundamental freedoms and human rights in Syria by the interim government or other groups;

    6.  Is deeply worried by the fragile security situation across Syria, particularly the coastal area, and firmly condemns the retaliatory targeting of the Alawite community based on its perceived association with the Assad regime; calls on the caretaker authorities to rein in all violent factions, including those set to be incorporated within the Syrian army and security forces, protect all civilian citizens from violence and ensure their right to live in safety; calls for prompt, transparent and impartial investigations into all killings and other violations and for those responsible to be held to account, in line with international legal norms and standards; urges the caretaker government to ensure that all military and security appointments are based strictly on professional qualifications, respect for international human rights and humanitarian law, and a commitment to combating terrorism; expresses concern regarding the presence of foreign extremist fighters, including European citizens, among the forces that overthrew the Assad regime, and cautions against integrating them permanently into the Syrian security apparatus; recognises the challenge for orderly state-building linked to the risk of insurgency by armed groups loyal to the former regime; encourages caretaker authorities to organise paramilitary and civilian disarmament;

    7.  Praises the invaluable contribution of civil society, in Syria and abroad, as the legitimate repository and defender of the aspirations of the Syrian people during years of brutal oppression; pays particular tribute to the White Helmets, target of a regime-orchestrated and Russia-backed smear campaign; calls for the EU to increase financial support, especially for Syrian civil society organisations as they adapt to shifting operating conditions, with a focus on promoting civic dialogue, notably between ethnic, cultural and religious communities, to foster pluralism, peaceful coexistence and trust within Syrian society;

    8.  Stresses the importance of recognising the role of sexualised and gender-based violence in justice and accountability processes, as well as of policies to ensure women’s full participation and representation in political life, as well as their economic empowerment; calls, further, to address specifically the suffering inflicted on children;

    9.  Is concerned by the exponential rise of disinformation originating both within Syria and from abroad; warns of the risk of instrumentalisation of communities also by foreign actors; stresses the need for a pluralistic media landscape to flourish and operate free of censorship and under a legally protected freedom of the press; calls for the EU and its Member States to provide funding and capacity-building in this regard;

    10.  Strongly believes that the success of the Syrian political transition, notably the safeguarding of civil peace and the building of trust in state institutions, hinges on transitional justice and reconciliation as a path to fighting the impunity of all parties responsible for violations of international humanitarian law and human rights abuses; calls for judicial reform to be made an urgent political priority; encourages the caretaker Syrian Government to establish an independent transitional justice committee to ensure accountability for past human rights violations committed by all factions, emphasising that military unification cannot be achieved without a credible justice mechanism to build trust among armed groups, including representatives from the southern factions, the SDF and former regime officers;

    11.  Calls on caretaker authorities to fully cooperate with competent international instances, including UN mechanisms established specifically for investigating serious crimes in Syria, such as the UN International, Impartial and Independent Mechanism, the UN Commission of Inquiry on Syria, the UN Independent Institution on Missing Persons, and the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and facilitate their on-site operations; encourages Syria to ratify the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) and align national legislation accordingly, as well as give the ICC retroactive jurisdiction through a declaration; recognises the irreplaceable contribution of Fareed al-Madhhan (‘Caesar’) to documenting regime crimes, as well as the Syrian Network of Human Rights’ work in tracking disappearances; stresses the importance of these processes now being completed; calls for the EU to support the renewal of the mandate of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Syria and increase funding for all relevant mechanisms, notably in light of US disinvestment;

    12.  Commends the steps taken to fight impunity through universal jurisdiction cases in Germany, France and other Member States, of individuals linked to the Assad regime and Daesh; encourages courts to continue such prosecutions and expects newfound evidence and fruitful cooperation with Syrian authorities to lead to leaps in investigations and convictions;

    13.  Stresses the need for Syria’s transitional authorities to urgently take all steps to secure and preserve physical evidence of serious international crimes across the country, including through cooperation and engagement with international experts and current international mechanisms, and to grant all competent organisations access to archival documents; encourages the EU to provide support for timely evidence collection on the ground, including forensic equipment and expertise to identify and analyse mass graves, as well as the collection of survivors’ testimonies;

    14.  Highlights that Syria is among the most heavily mine-contaminated countries; is alarmed by the rising number of victims, including children, who have been killed or injured by mines and other explosives, a problem that is further increasing as people start to return; commends efforts by international and local organisations in identifying, marking and clearing explosive ordnance, and calls for the EU to urgently support demining efforts jointly with specialised actors and Syrian authorities;

    15.  Reiterates its strongest condemnation of the appalling use of chemical weapons against Syrian civilians by the Assad regime; welcomes the announcement by Syria’s interim government to destroy any remaining stockpiles of chemical weapons in Syria and its openness to cooperate with the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons;

    16.  Appreciates the determination demonstrated by caretaker authorities in discontinuing the production and trafficking of drugs, in particular Captagon, which have negatively affected the whole region for years; encourages international cooperation against the trafficking of drugs, arms and human beings;

    17.  Highlights the importance of protecting Syria’s cultural heritage and calls for international collaboration to restore historical sites and religious landmarks and to prevent the illicit trade in looted artefacts; urges the EU to support Syria in efforts to restore areas and places of cultural significance to the Syrian public and the world, including the UNESCO site of Palmyra after its revolting partial destruction by Daesh in 2015;

    18.  Acknowledges that the Syrian economy is shattered, with considerable investment gaps towards achieving price stability and sustained job creation; calls for all necessary steps to be taken in order to incentivise and facilitate foreign direct investment in accordance with international standards, as well as for reforms addressing housing, land and property rights and policies balancing development across urban and rural areas to reduce regional disparities; encourages economic disentanglement from Russia and Iran after both countries have profited from Syria’s economic collapse to extract resources and control strategic industries;

    19.  Welcomes the gradual and conditional suspension of sanctions on a range of economic sectors and the indefinite extension of humanitarian exemptions; underlines that despite recent adjustments, the EU, US and UK sanctions policies towards Syria are an obstacle to reconstruction efforts; calls on the Commission and the Council to reach out to other countries imposing sanctions on Syria, notably the US and the UK; supports a full yet reversible lifting of all sectoral sanctions, with a focus on the financial sector, so as to provide the Syrian economy a much-needed lifeline, while closely monitoring the political transition process; expects over-compliance to remain an issue as long as extensive US and UK sanctions remain in place, notably due to the former’s extraterritorial dimension; calls on the Commission and the Member States to provide European businesses and banks with legal assurances to counteract over-compliance; calls, nevertheless, for individual sanctions against military personnel, officials, business entities and individuals associated with the Assad family to be maintained; expects the yearly update of the EU sanction regime ahead of its expiration on 1 June 2025 to adequately assess the relevance of all renewed sanctions, allowing for much-needed clarity, and asks the European Council to define and clearly communicate clear steps that Syria’s authorities must carry out, to secure further sanctions easing or prevent the activation of a snapback;

    20.  Welcomes the announcement by the Commission to allocate EUR 235 million in new humanitarian support to Syrians and calls for the EU and its Member States to sustain humanitarian and development aid efforts and to maintain financial support for neighbouring countries hosting Syrian refugees; invites the EU to explore pathways to use frozen assets of the Assad regime for a trust fund for Syrian reconstruction, rehabilitation and compensation of victims; is extremely concerned by the suspension of all USAID funding related to Syria or Syrian refugees and by the foreseen non-participation of the US in the next Brussels conference;

    21.  Calls for the EU to strategically extend its focus from humanitarian aid to accelerated and early economic recovery and reconstruction in key sectors such as energy, water supply, healthcare and education, in order to reach tangible results while ensuring that programming is accompanied by due diligence and independent monitoring; urges the European Union and its Members States to agree on the joint provision of sustainable funding at the forthcoming Ninth Brussels Conference;

    22.  Welcomes the decision taken, for example, by France to allow refugees to return to Syria and participate in its reconstruction without jeopardising their status, including for ‘go-and-see’ visits to Syria; calls on the Member States and third countries to urgently replicate this initiative; calls on the Commission to encourage and provide the Member States with guidance and best practice on the implementation of EU law on this issue, including as regards the difference between ‘travel’ and ‘re-establishment’; insists that all asylum status claims and renewals must be assessed individually and thoroughly; stresses the importance of balanced participation in the political transition process of the Syrian diaspora as a key asset for the country’s transition and reconstruction; recognises the importance of remittances alongside official development assistance and urges the Member States to lift any restrictions placed on sending remittances to Syria; recalls, moreover, that according to the UN Refugee Convention, conditions for the safe, voluntary and dignified return of refugees can only be met following fundamental and durable changes in Syria;

    23.  Recalls the presence of over 400 000 Palestinian refugees residing in Syria, some of them displaced multiple times, and the role of the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) in assisting its needs; remembers the siege of the Yarmouk camp by Assadist factions between 2013 and 2015;

    24.  Calls on Syria to break free from its notorious long-standing alliances with Tehran and Moscow, which have brought suffering to the Syrian people and destabilisation to the Middle East and beyond; calls, further, on the caretaker Syrian authorities to bring the Russian military presence in Syria to an end; condemns Russia for hosting Bashar al-Assad and his family and shielding them from justice, after having obstructed justice by actively interfering in international investigations and vetoing UN Security Council resolutions aimed at addressing the regime’s war crimes and their own;

    25.  Calls on neighbouring countries to respect Syria’s territorial integrity and sovereignty and to immediately cease all attacks and incursions on and occupation of Syrian territory in full compliance with international law;

    26.  Firmly believes that the unification of all segments of Syria, including the integration of all armed factions within a national army, require a Syrian-led political solution; calls for the EU and the Member States to use all diplomatic channels to advocate the stabilisation of Syria, which is in the interest of most countries in the region, and support discussions towards a peaceful and stable solution and ensure that the well-being and preservation of fundamental freedoms, economic, social and cultural rights, as well as the gender equality of all Syrians, notably those living in north-eastern Syria, remain at the centre of decisions; welcomes, in this regard, the agreement of 10 March 2025 between de facto President al-Sharaa and SDF Commander in Chief Mazloum Abdi and hopes for its smooth implementation; takes note of the positive result of recent negotiations between Kurdish armed groups in Türkiye and the Turkish Government towards disarmament;

    27.  Insists that different ethnic and religious groups must be protected in order to create a peaceful Syria; therefore calls for the European Union and the Member States to support the implementation process of the agreement between the Syrian transitional government and the Kurdish-led SDF, in order to guarantee the Kurdish community full recognition and political participation in Syria;

    28.  Stresses the importance of the fight led by the international coalition against Daesh, with the invaluable support of Kurdish fighters, and calls for it to cooperate with the Syrian interim government to prevent Daesh and other jihadist groups from reorganising; expresses deep concerns as attacks led or supported by Türkiye in north-eastern Syria not only cause civilian casualties and increase the number of internally displaced persons, but also threaten the efficiency and continuity of the fight against Daesh; urges the caretaker authorities to demonstrate clear commitment to the fight against terrorism and to cooperate with international partners both to fight remaining active cells in Syria and to investigate past crimes, notably against the Yazidi community;

    29.  Urgently calls for a lasting solution to be found among all the parties concerned as these camps continue to be breeding grounds for radicalisation and constitute a dormant threat to both Syrian and European security; warns against the serious international security risk a sudden disengagement of the United States in the region would cause in this uncertain context; reiterates its call on the Member States to repatriate all their nationals, especially children, from Al-Hol and Roj and to bring adults to justice in fair trials;

    30.  Calls on the Islamic Republic of Iran to cease all activities aimed at torpedoing the Syrian caretaker government’s political and economic efforts and forcedly altering the status quo; commends the interim authorities for intercepting Iranian weapon shipments destined for Hezbollah in Lebanon and welcomes the complete collapse of Iran’s extensive infrastructure and networks in Syria;

    31.  Welcomes de facto President al-Sharaa’s pledge to seek peaceful relations with all of Syria’s neighbours; calls on the caretaker Syrian authorities to ensure this commitment is turned into concrete action to prevent and refrain from taking any security-threatening measures against neighbouring countries and beyond;

    32.  Condemns those European politicians, including current and former MEPs, who have repeatedly spread pro-Assad narratives and actively engaged in whitewashing the bloody dictatorship; expresses deep concern regarding the recent invitation by Parliament’s Intergroup on Christians in the Middle East of organisations closely linked to EU-sanctioned Assadists;

    33.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the relevant EU institutions, the governments and parliaments of the Member States and the caretaker Syrian government, and to have it translated and published in Arabic.

    (1) OJ C, C/2024/6749, 26.11.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/6749/oj.
    (2) OJ L, 2025/406, 25.2.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec/2025/406/oj.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Almost €80 million in EU investment to modernise Cambodia’s agricultural sector and to boost farmers’ access to domestic and global markets

    Source: European Investment Bank

    • The comprehensive EU investment package – which blends an EIB Global loan, an EU grant, and technical assistance – will strengthen Cambodia’s agricultural sector, improve food security, make selected value chains more competitive and boost exports.
    • This investment will benefit 100 000 smallholder farmers, 25 000 land-poor households and 500 agricultural enterprises, enhancing productivity and competitiveness.
    • It will upgrade the National Agricultural Laboratory, expand key agricultural facilities to enhance the country’s sanitary and phytosanitary capacities, and support the construction of the Kaoh Khsach Tonlea bridge to improve transport and market access.
    • This initiative is in line with the European Union’s Global Gateway strategy, promoting sustainable growth, climate resilience and inclusive economic development.

    EIB Global – the European Investment Bank’s global arm – and the Ministry of Economy and Finance (MEF) of the Kingdom of Cambodia have signed an agreement today for a €15 million EU grant to support the Agriculture Services Programme for an Inclusive Rural Economy and Agricultural Trade (ASPIRE-AT). A key priority for the Cambodian government, ASPIRE-AT aims to modernise the agricultural sector, enhance food security and strengthen export potential. This grant supplements a €60 million loan from EIB Global and €4.5 million of support from the European Union for technical assistance, which will be implemented by the European Investment Bank (EIB). This brings the total of EU-backed investment in the programme to nearly €80 million. The International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), the UN’s rural development agency, is co-financing the programme with $49 million.

    The agreement was signed in Phnom Penh by Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Economy and Finance Aun Pornmoniroth and EIB Vice-President Nicola Beer during her first visit to Cambodia as the EIB Vice-President responsible for Southeast Asia. The signing took place in the presence of EU Ambassador to Cambodia Igor Driesmans and Country Director for Cambodia at the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) Frew Behabtu.

    The EU financing will help modernise Cambodia’s agricultural sector, equipping smallholder farmers, agribusinesses and producer organisations with tools and infrastructure to boost production, provide access to new markets, and improve food safety. The project will directly benefit 100 000 smallholder farmers and 25 000 land-poor households, creating new income opportunities – particularly in rural areas – with a strong focus on empowering women, engaging young people and supporting indigenous communities.

    EIB Vice-President Nicola Beer said: “The European Investment Bank is proud to support ASPIRE-AT and Cambodia’s agricultural sector, which plays a vital role in the country’s economy and food security. With this financing, we are helping the government to strengthen food security, increase farmers’ incomes, and open up new market opportunities for Cambodian products. It is a great example of how Team Europe delivers real impact, creating jobs, driving trade, and strengthening Cambodia’s economy.”

    Ambassador of the European Union to the Kingdom of Cambodia Igor Driesmans said: “I am proud to be part of this important agricultural investment project by partnering with our European Investment Bank and IFAD under the European Union Global Gateway and our Team Europe initiatives. Our support of €19.5 million ($21.06 million) in grants will help farmers and their communities improve primary production, processing capabilities and market access through capacity building and access to financing, agricultural laboratory support, and better rural and urban connectivity. Together, we are helping the sector to become more inclusive and resilient, benefiting all Cambodians, and especially those in rural communities.”

    Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Economy and Finance (MEF) Aun Pornmoniroth expressed his deep appreciation to the EIB, the European Union and to IFAD for their support and cooperation in successfully designing and preparing the ASPIRE-AT programme. He reiterated that the agreement signed today for the ASPIRE-AT programme is a testament to the increased and closer cooperation between the Government of the Kingdom of Cambodia and the EIB, the European Union and IFAD, as well as to the unwavering support of key development partners in the reform agenda of the government’s Pentagonal Strategy (Phase I), as Cambodia aims to achieve its goal of becoming an upper-middle-income country in 2030 and a high-income country in 2050. In this spirit, the Government of the Kingdom of Cambodia reaffirmed its commitment to fostering and strengthening future partnerships with the EIB, the European Union and IFAD across multifaceted sectors.

    International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) Country Director for Cambodia Frew Behabtu said: “This significant EU grant, alongside the EIB loan and IFAD’s co-financing, marks a powerful step towards transforming Cambodia’s agricultural sector. IFAD is proud to be part of this collaborative effort to empower rural communities, enhance food security, and unlock the export potential that drives sustainable economic growth.”

    This investment will strengthen Cambodia’s agricultural infrastructure and market connectivity, supporting collection and handling facilities, warehouses, drying pads, and access roads to improve bulk produce transport. It will also fund the Kaoh Khsach Tonlea bridge, linking the island to the mainland to enhance market access and pilot a new agricultural cooperative model. Additionally, the financing will improve food safety and quality control by supporting laboratories, research and quarantine stations and the expansion of the National Agricultural Laboratory. These investments are strategically distributed across a range of locations in Cambodia, ensuring that they have a broad geographic impact and enable greater integration into regional and global markets.

    Background information

    About EIB Global

    EIB Global is the EIB Group’s specialised arm dedicated to increasing the impact of international partnerships and development finance. EIB Global is designed to foster strong, focused partnership within Team Europe, alongside fellow development finance institutions and civil society. EIB Global brings the Group closer to local people, companies and institutions through our offices around the world.

    About the EIB in Cambodia

    Since 2018, EIB Global has been a key partner in Cambodia’s sustainable development, investing €310 million across various sectors, including in water and agriculture, as well as to rehabilitate rural roads. In close collaboration with the Delegation of the European Union to the Kingdom of Cambodia, the Royal Government of Cambodia, and other development partners, the EIB supports projects that foster economic growth, enhance environmental sustainability, and improve living standards. The Bank’s investments focus on clean water access, rural infrastructure, climate-resilient agriculture and food security. These initiatives have expanded irrigation systems, upgraded rural roads, and strengthened agricultural value chains, directly benefiting millions of Cambodians by creating new economic opportunities and building resilience in local communities.

    The Agriculture Services Programme for an Inclusive Rural Economy and Agricultural Trade (ASPIRE-AT) is an initiative of the Cambodian government – implemented by the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries (MAFF) – that is aimed at reducing rural poverty and enhancing climate resilience in Cambodian households. Building on the success of the previous ASPIRE programme (2015-2022), ASPIRE-AT focuses on sustainable agricultural growth by providing small-scale producers with productive assets, fostering business partnerships, and improving market access. The programme targets 125 000 rural households, emphasising inclusivity with at least 50% of beneficiaries being women, 20% young people and 1.5% indigenous people.

    The International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) is an international financial institution and a United Nations specialized agency. Based in Rome – the United Nations food and agriculture hub – IFAD invests in rural people, empowering them to reduce poverty, increase food security, improve nutrition and strengthen resilience. Since 1978, we have provided more than US$25 billion in grants and low-interest loans to fund projects in developing countries.

    MIL OSI Europe News