Committee on Security and Defence Ordinary meeting
Legend
Transcript markers
- text Sentence being played
- text Search result
- text Intervention cited by the link you opened
Click a sentence to play the video from that moment. Select text to quote it with the speaker, timestamp and link.
More options
SEDE European Parliament
Follow its sittingsEngin Eroglu
I too would like to thank the rapporteur for the draft report. It is very important that we change structures. We have a new geopolitical situation, but we have to have the financial framework in place. There have to be funds available, otherwise all we have is words on a page. We have some amendments, and I think we will reach our goal, but unfortunately not all current challenges are covered.
We think that civil protection requires cooperation between us and the Commission. It's important for the commission to collect data, but the collection of the data, how automatic can it be? There are hundreds, thousands, perhaps millions of people working on this. Is it possible for them all to input data? No, it has to happen automatically.
At the end of the day, we need software that connects people working in civil protection. It has to be European if all the services are to be covered. If we think about infrastructure, if we're thinking about hospitals, other services too, they need to be covered. So we need to make it clear in this report that we need dedicated software and that we want to do more than, I don't know, forest firefighting because we could have a dynamic crisis spreading from one region to another across the European Union. And that means that we need to create a network throughout the union, so that if one node fails, others will be available.
And that has to be done locally, working with local volunteers. It can't be steered centrally from Brussels. I look forward to submitting the amendment.
Martins.
Mārtiņš Staķis
from the Queen's. Yeah. Thank you, Reins, for the draft report. We will propose four types of amendments. First, will be about civil society NGOs.
So we want to formally recognize the role of civil society and NGOs in the union's preparedness architecture. These organizations do the work nobody else wants to do, often without pay, from the first aid and shelter support to psychological assistance, and they deserve proper recognition and financing. Then 72, our preparedness. We support strengthening the household and community preparedness for the first 72 hours after disaster or crisis. This is one of the most successful ideas in our region because nothing makes you think about what could go wrong, quote, like actually packing a 72 hour bag.
Critical infrastructure, the regulation needs stronger language on protecting critical infrastructure and essential services against hybrid threats. We tend to forget how vulnerable our infrastructure really is until someone sends in a small drone, and we shut down our airports. And last but not least, about shelter infrastructure, we also want to see language on the necessity of adequate shelter infrastructure. When we think about the threats we face today, the safety of civilians must be the absolute priority, especially in regions that face conventional military threats, where this infrastructure is still missing. So we're looking forward to the thoughtful corporation.
Thank you.
Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
Thank you very much. Now I give the floor to any other members who would like to speak for 1 minute each. And, Helder, you have the floor.
Hélder Sousa Silva
Thank you, Sarah. I will speak in Portuguese.
Chair, we want to protect the euro. How long has it been since these mechanisms have been reformed? Europe has been affected by fires and by the pandemic, but we've also seen this war in Ukraine. The civil protection mechanism is a step in the right direction, but there are shortcomings that we can't ignore. And, of course, the most significant of these is, regarding the regulation, which doesn't provide for help in case of armed attack.
It's referred to in the recitals. But if a member state is attacked and its government can't respond, this mechanism won't be activated without a formal request. Our amendments resolve this fragility in two different ways. First of all, to ensure that assistance will be automatic by indicating the treaty and the article in the treaty and also ensuring that it can be mobilized to protect civilians and emergency services, without having to wait for bureaucracy, because in war, there is no time to wait. We also corrected the fact that there was no reference to NATO.
I think we need to refer to NATO. This is part of the civilian and military architecture in Europe, and ignoring NATO commitments, we think is not correct. That's why this committee exists to bring the security and defense dimension where it has been forgotten. So this is our contribution through the amendment that we've introduced to the initial proposal of the rapporteur, who I would like to thank.
Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
Thank you very much. Are there more comments? No? Okay. Then, finally, I give the floor to the commission for three minutes maximum each.
First, we start with the deputy director from DG Echio, Hans Das. The floor is yours.
Speaker 12
Thank you so much, madam chair, and thank you very much to the SEDA committee and to the rapporteur in particular for the importance it is attaching to this file, which might not be the largest file in budgetary terms, but which has a particular importance when it comes to dealing with crisis situations. And the context in which this proposal needs to be considered is grim. We have an increase in natural disasters linked to climate change. We have a very volatile security risk or security threat landscape. And so it's clear that we need to be prepared, and we need to prepare the civil protection mechanism for all scenarios, including the worst case scenario of an armed aggression against one or more member states.
Speaker 10
Recent developments in The Middle East have been another example highlighting the need to develop a more robust civil protection capacity. We have helped in the last few days to bring 13,000 EU citizens back from various countries, and that requires huge logistical capacity, just by way of example. But it also shows the need to develop more cross-sectoral crisis management approaches. And much of that requires that we work in advance of a crisis. We need to invest more in anticipation and preparedness, in capacity building.
Speaker 11
And much of that work needs to be done together between the civilian and the military actors, and that's where this committee obviously has a major contribution to make. We think it is important to strengthen the civil protection mechanism by strengthening the civil protection capacity to deal with disasters as well as the health capacity, to strengthen our cross sectoral approaches and to have more civil military cooperation on all of these issues. So we very much welcome your support on strengthening the civil military cooperation provisions in the proposal. I would like to highlight also that this has raised concerns on the council side from some member states, so it is very important that we hear from the Parliament on these issues. We also welcome your support on strengthening EU NATO cooperation in this respect, and this evolves around three elements in our view.
Speaker 10
It is about the need for more investments both to ramp up military readiness, but also to ramp up civilian preparedness across all sectors, including critical infrastructure, so that the two come hand in hand. It is about more joint concrete planning for scenarios, including the worst-case scenarios of war in Europe, and it is about more joint training and joint exercises. And so we very much welcome amendments like number 24 and 25. All of that work needs to be done at the national level and EU level. It's very clear that we have a supporting competence only, and that the primary competence is with member states.
We fully acknowledge that. But for us to carry out our supporting competence, we need to be fully plugged into that civil military coordination. Think about the rescue use stockpiles, for instance, that need to be mobilized. We need to be part of that coordination in order to make sure that they can usefully assist member states. So thank you very much for your help in bringing these two dimensions, the civilian and the military, closer together, and we're very keen to continue to work with you.
Thank you.
Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
Thank you very much. And the next will be for DG Herrera, Director General Florica Finck Ruija. The floor is yours.
Speaker 14
Thank you, madam chair, and thank you, Rapporteur, for acknowledging that the medical countermeasures will be strategic assets in any armed conflict, mass casualty situation, or hybrid attack situation. And MCMs, which we call medical countermeasures, are actually strategic assets. They are part and parcel of any national or collective defense. They are also part of our EU readiness. And when you look at CBRN medical countermeasures, so the antidotes in case of its use, then they are certainly part of our deterrence narrative.
Speaker 13
So, having this availability of what we would call medical countermeasures, these are vaccines, antidotes, protective equipment, but also devices for early detection. This availability, equitable availability, and also rapid availability is core mandate for D. J. Herra and for the Commission in health emergency, which would be triggered when some of these situations, the Honourable Member in its report referred to. So, for that, we will need funding because many of these medical countermeasures are niche products.
They're extremely expensive. And we normally, and I can't help not saying that, would use also the ECF fund for that because today we do this with the EIB and others to go for venture capital funding for small start-ups for SMEs, precisely in order to have niche and also biotechnologies ready, which we do not have normally at the market. A good example is the development, together also with the French Armed Forces, of an antidote against rising threats, which was one of the most potent agents in bioterrorist attacks, and we made it happen. And it is now available as a new antidote. We need the full end-to-end approach that I already mentioned, targeted innovation and research.
But also and then I come here to the UCPM HEAR instrument, which is a new funding instrument where we have a civil protection part and a health part under the overall approach of, of course, preparedness. And here, we would definitely have to fund early detection, emergency response, reservation, and production capabilities in the industry in order to scale up one of these medical countermeasures in case of need. And for that, UCPM HAIR instrument will be the main funding instrument for health preparedness in the future. I'm very happy to come back to this committee, should you be interested to inform you more about what we would do in health emergencies and how we would work with NATO and other military actors already today, and also in the future. Thank you.
Reinis Pozņaks
No. But I sure. Just want to thank all the colleagues for all the comments and ideas, and I'm very happy to hear that they are not contradicting each other but complementing each other. So I'm looking forward to all the amendments and work with all the shadows. So, see you.
Thank you.
Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
Thank you very much. That's good. Yes. See you. And we continue now with the defense Grunity European Defense Fund, and we have guests.
And please join us.
Sorry.
Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
Perfect. Okay. So, dear colleagues, the next point on the agenda is the scrutiny of the implementation of the European Defense Fund. It's my pleasure to welcome Sylvia Keinshuber, deputy director of the defense industrial programs at DG DEFIS. Since its creation, the European Defence Fund has supported the defense industry across member states to develop collaborative research and development projects with the aim of delivering innovative and interoperable defense technologies and equipment.
Today, we would like presentations on concrete outcomes from the EDF's investment in recent years. We would be grateful if you could present key projects that have led to the development of new military equipment, which is likely to be produced on an industrial scale, acquired by member states and used by their armed forces. So, missus Kainzhuber, the floor is yours for five minutes, and afterwards, your colleague, mister Praslavsky. Right? Yeah.
Yes. The floor is yours. Thank.
Speaker 16
Thank you very much, president. So, I will quickly run a bit, start up and then finish up, and I'll leave the presentation now, really, of the concrete outcomes which we have achieved so far under the program here to my Deputy Head of Unit. So we share. Very quickly, we had already had the pleasure and were invited and grateful for the presentation on the occasion we had to present the 2026 work program of the EDF, and now this is a bit of a follow-up. So if we could go to the first slide.
Yes. So let me just quickly recall. I don't want to go into the details of the work programme, just quickly recall where we stand. From the CHF 7,300,000,000, which is available for us under the EDF, we have committed so far 6,400,000,000 in defense R and D, so joint research and development projects. We have become, with that investment and with the budget available to the fund.
The EU or the EDF has become one of the top three defense R and D investors in Europe. Last time, I presented to you the sixth annual work program, which has just been published. Calls are open for submission until September. We have currently 24 ongoing collaborative R and D projects that involve 161,650 unique participants. Unique participants means we don't count the duplications of certain entities in the projects that are funded under the EDF.
What we also wanted to highlight is there is really an increasing traction and attractiveness to the program. So we had the 2025 calls last year, a record number of 410 proposals that were submitted, which is really an increase of 37% compared to the previous calls, 2024. And it is an increase literally of 3x of proposals received since we started the programme in 2021. So you see it's really attractiveness interest in the industry is really going up and keeps growing. What also is to highlight is the high number of participation, thanks to the specific calls we're focusing on, which focus on SMEs only, bonuses that are enshrined in the programme for increasing the EU funding contribution to SMEs.
So that led to a really impressive high participation of SMEs in all our projects. Next slide, please. Just very shortly, before we go into the concrete proposals, one needs to know, the EDF regulation provides that we have annual work programmes, annual calls to implement the programme, which led us a bit to the problem which we had to solve in the beginning as to how we ensure that we have a very clear red line that sort of leads us through the program with outputs and results which we want to achieve in all the different domains. And that ended or led to the creation of the indicative multiannual perspective map, which contains, and that's also important, a section where we not only say this is what we're going to do over the years and this is what we plan to do in the next three years. It's also containing really a section where we agreed with Member States this is the main expected outcomes which we want to achieve in all the projects, which in certain domains lead, contributing to a very specific output demonstrators, ideally prototypes, ideally in specific domains.
Two things still to highlight. What you see on the slide, of these 42 projects running currently, there are 17 who also aim at the development of standards, interoperable with NATO standards. That's important. So whenever we can in our projects, we refer to and use NATO standards to ensure interoperability and compatibility as well. And we have set out in this multi-annual planning perspective, in total, about 50 prototypes to be achieved in the different kinds of EU capability areas, roughly summarized here.
And I don't go into detail. You'll hear a lot about that in the coming slides from my colleague. What is important to underline is that all the topics, whenever we have a work programme, what we're trying to do is prioritise any R and D topic that Member States would like to see and put forward to us for a work programme, that we are trying to see that we prioritise what actually contributes, the topics that really contribute to these agreed outcomes, main expected outcomes in the map. What we're also trying to do is we have annual work programs trying to ensure over time that there is a continuation and a continuous effort put into pursuing certain main expected outcomes of the map over time. So we only have not one R and D project on a given topic.
We follow on over the years in a rhythm of two to three years, and try to really stepwise bring that to the expected outcomes, which can, at the moment, foresee the perspective up to 2031. And with that, I would then hand over right away to the next slide, and to my colleague, Cressio, next to my side.
Speaker 18
Thank you very much. Good morning, also from me. What we want to do in the next two slides is just to illustrate how all these projects lead to concrete capabilities that already start entering the armed forces. We have taken some examples. This is not an exhaustive list, but just for you to understand that we support projects in all five domains: land, maritime, air, space, cyber.
Speaker 17
So we have selected a few examples. We'll start with new capabilities that are actually already entering the armed forces because, as you know, defense R and D takes a lot of time. So for the major new platforms, this will happen in the next years, but we already see capabilities that are supported by our projects. I'll start with an example in the area of sea mine risk clearance, something that is very actual now both in the North Sea, in the Black Sea increasing, but also in the Gulf. So here, results from two of our projects are already integrated in the new mine countermeasure vessels, which are already jointly procured by two navies of EU member states.
So, actually, not only ordered, but the first of its class is already here in Belgium in Zebruche. You can go and see the ship, actually, that integrates Novo R and D solutions, how to detect and how to diffuse sea mines and underwater threats. And we understand that there is interest from other countries to follow. All these examples, of course, will enter the armed force of the member states. None of this will be procured by the EU, as such.
Another very interesting example, and this is the first ever major platform purely developed with EU funding, is the one on the left-hand side on the first line. We have a new light armored personnel carrier, which is not just a concept. It actually the hardware, the actual prototype is already not only there, but it's already being tested by the armed forces of one member state. For those of you who are aware of armored vehicles, basically, this is replacing the legacy platforms like the M113, the US platform, or the Soviet MTLB. So it'll it's a light armored vehicle that has multiple purposes.
So this is already actually being tested by the Armed Forces of Finland, and there is a clear potential for procurement. Another interesting example, we fund a number of already existing platforms, and we fund the further development of their capabilities. This is the third example I want to mention. This is the unmanned vehicle that you see in the desert background here. This is a platform called Temis, which is already in operation or used by more than 16 countries, including eight in NATO.
So with our projects, we help develop further the autonomy of the platform. So it's not that we are supporting the platform. Platform already exists since many years. But the fact that now it can operate much more autonomously is what we are supporting. This is already, interestingly, already in operational use in Ukraine.
So numerous of these units have been donated to Ukraine. They are used for missions like minefield clearing, casualty evacuation, logistics, bringing ammunition to the front, etcetera. So actually, already saving lives. Another interesting example, and this is the must that you see on the second line: these are autonomous surveillance and threat recognition solutions. So these are already existing platforms.
You can imagine this is a very big collapsing bus. It can go up to 15, 20 meters. And the sensors that are put on the top are supported by EU projects. I'm oversimplifying, of course, but, basically, the AI has autonomous surveillance capability. So this can be used, for example, for border protection.
This can be used to detect, for example, forest fires, but it is already operationally used in Ukraine. And with our funding, this gets additional autonomous capabilities to recognize, for example, to make the distinction between what is a deer in the woods and what is an infantryman. So, again, already something that is operationally used in member states and in Ukraine. We also have numerous projects in the area of cyber. We have taken one example here.
It's a cyber defense toolbox already used by the European Union institutions. It has already been used in the context of deployments under CSDP mandate. We also support numerous drones, from small tactical ones to big strategic ones, but we have amongst these already projects like the example here you have, you see on the third line, a project where we already actually have sales of these platforms in member states and in Ukraine. And then the last one on this slide, a very, very important, very strategic project, also where you see every day in the news now what happens not only in Ukraine but in The Gulf. You understand, of course, the relevance.
It relates to European Union autonomy in the area of missile detection. So we have two very strong projects, Odinsai and Odinsai two, which are about space based missile early warning, a capability currently on which EU purely depends on US capabilities. These projects are now basically the building block on which the bilateral French German JOE initiative will build further. The JOE initiative has two components, the space based early warning and the ground based early warning. And the space based early warning component is based on EDF projects, ODINS I, ODINS II. And on the second slide, we have put a few additional, if you can move, please, to the next slide, a few additional examples of concrete things that very soon will start entering the armed forces.
I'll start with the European patrol corvette. So it's a multipurpose vessel. We already have procurement contracts from four navies, a few member states, for around 20 ships expected to start delivering very soon, and likely there will be more to follow. So other additional EU member states are already interested in procuring this platform. And the interesting thing here is not the Corvette as such.
Of course, corvettes are produced by many producers in Europe, but the fact that we managed to bring together a big majority of the main naval producers in Europe, the shipbuilders. Another interesting example, the Eurodrone. First flight expected in 2027. Here, we already have a commitment from four member states to procure the systems, which means both the aircraft, but also the ground stations to manage them. There are also numerous other examples just for you to understand the polluter of EDF funded projects.
We put here a few interesting examples. Think about trauma simulation. So the way to train medical personnel, the way to train military personnel for basic medical skills. So a project supported by the EDF supports the innovative virtual reality. So they're virtually in a military hospital where they can do, they can train.
They can see how it works in real life, where to take the hospitals, how to treat the patient in a very economical and efficient way. And we see already interest from participating member states to procure this for their medical military services and for the general medical training of military staff. Another interesting project, this is the second one on the second line, it's about indoor soldier training. So, basically, this is a simulated environment where infantry soldiers, infantry squad, for example, they can train indoors, so much more cheaper and much more efficient to use digital weapons and simulators, for example, fighting vehicles. So fully submerged with screens around them.
We already know about one member state already intending to procure this for their armed forces. Final two examples, a very interesting subject: underwater communication. As you know, communication underwater is very difficult. So, basically, the moment you send a diver to a mission, you lose contact, and you hope he comes back. Now we have an interesting project that allows the live tracking of divers' depth and a secure communication with the ground station and the divers.
So something that is really truly innovative. And there is an interesting potential, already procurement potential, not contracts yet, but potential for procurement by numerous EU member states' navies. And as I mentioned, we support numerous projects related to drones, from small tactical drones to big strategic ones. Here, one additional example: projects Lotus and Actus. These are platforms that are used for surveillance and for reconnaissance, where we already see the potential of member states procuring these platforms.
So to conclude, defense R and D takes a lot of time, but we already see from the first projects under the EDIDP, the precursor program, and the first projects under EDF, actual capabilities entering the armed forces, actual capabilities already saving lives in Ukraine, and actual technologies, platforms, capabilities that are being used by the soldiers of our countries to keep Europe safe. Thank you.
Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
Thank you very much. Now I will give the floor to the colleague for a first round of questions, starting with the coordinators for two minutes, and we start with Helder for the EPP.
Hélder Sousa Silva
Thank you. Thank you, Kjell. Thank you. Thank you so much from the EDF and the DG DEFIS for this very important insights. Concerning the next MFF, it's my question.
And the commission proposal for 2834 MFF is, at best, ambiguous. Defense appears as a subheading of the European competitiveness fund, as you already said, alongside areas as varied as health, digital transition, and climate. At the same time, the commission has proposed the 131,000,000,000 for defense and space in the next MFF, an ambition this house has broadly welcomed, of course. Yet the tension between these two realities, a programmatic uncertain EDF, and a seemingly reinforcing global envelope, raises a fundamental question. The question is the following.
What is the actual programmatic architecture envisaged for defense research and development funding in the next MFF? Will the EDF be renewed as a standalone recognizable instrument, or will it be absorbed into a broader industrial competitiveness logic that risks diluting its strategic specific specificity? And how does the commission intend to articulate the EDF with ADIP and with joint procurement instruments so as to avoid precisely the kind of fragmentation that the EDF was created to address and to solve. Thank you. Thank you very much.
Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
Thank you very much. And the next will be Sven from the S and D.
Well,
Sven Mikser
There was not too much about Ukraine in the presentations. We know that this year, the funding calls have been open to Ukrainian companies, including small and medium-sized companies. And I wonder whether it's sort of too early at this point to make sort of thorough assessment as to what works and what doesn't and why. But I remember recently when we had the senate committee visit to Ukraine, and we managed to also go to some of the defense industrial enterprises. And we were very much impressed by, especially, this sort of speed of the innovation cycle, how they get feedback from the battlefield.
And then when there's a need for innovation, it actually makes so this sort of innovation makes its way back to the battlefield in a matter of a few weeks. While we when the commission presented its defense, simplification omnibus regulation to us and we started we kicked off our work with due urgency last summer. And now months have passed, and we are looking for suitable dates for next meetings. So I'm wondering whether the, I mean, the way we work in our peacetime environment and mentality that actually allows Ukraine to benefit from the new access to the EDF funds in such a way as to allow it to actually, among other goals, also to win the war against the aggressor. Thank you.
Mārtiņš Staķis
Right. Thank you. The one question goes for SMEs. You mentioned the high participation of SMEs, 43%, if I'm not mistaken. Is that 43% of all participants or is it 43% of the allocated funds?
And, what is the proportion of the funding received by SMEs? So this is the first question. Then there's on slide two, I was a little bit confused about the one thing you mentioned. And out of 210 projects, 17 are interoperable with the NATO standards. This little bit confused me.
In my understanding, all of them should be interoperable with the NATO standards. So could you elaborate a little bit more? What's the third one about the innovations? We had some cases in Europe that we, with the help of the European Defence Fund, developed really promising innovations and go to very good prototypes. But then if there's no orders following from the member states, sometimes they are simply sold to another countries, another armies.
Is this still a case? Or if you receive the EDF funds, the innovation should stay in Europe? Otherwise, it might be that we are spending taxpayers' money for innovation, which actually does not stay in Europe. Thank you.
Speaker 16
Thank you very much. On the question next, MFF, will the defense sort of play a sub role in that large European competitiveness fund in which it is proposed to be embedded according to the commission's proposal. What we're trying to do and trying to ensure, and did already reflect in the proposal, is to make sure that the logics which we're pursuing now with the different programs stand alone at the moment. So we have the EDF, which is focusing on supporting common and joint R&D efforts. Then there is now EDIP, so following on to the ASAB and the ADERPA programs.
So supporting joint common procurement. And then on the other side, looking at the supply side and trying to also support ramping up of production capacities where needed in relation also to the demand, which we will see. So what is now the idea is to bring all these three strengths together for the sake of also ensuring making sure that each of these logic finds its continuation under the European Competitiveness Fund, but also by bringing them together, and I guess that would have happened anyway, whether then the whole defense line or chain of contributions of funding contributions, two different activities would have probably been brought together into a single program in the future. So this kind of synergy is created between the different strengths, on the one hand, ensuring that they continue. So the key rules and the logic are there.
They are brought together. And yes, they are brought together also in a policy window with related, where I would say synergies could be seen and could be created in our case that was now Space, where there are indeed overlaps and synergy areas, it's raw materials and security. But it is now, I think, also from the programming side and also from the negotiations to ensure that, of course, while synergies should be gained, and there is a lot to gain, we want to also see that our R and D activities are really then leading to, at the end, an industrial project outcome or product that is and then can be procured and ideally also supported through the procurement phase. So there are overlaps, which could also be beneficial. So we hope not, and I fully agree with you.
I think the EDF was a very successful program, and still is. And it should be ensured that this logic is properly pursued with the appropriate budget under the next MFF. What we can say and what we already said last time, what we can see is from the mere research side, we could easily meet the requests and the proposals put forward by Member States, this amounts easily to the double or 2.5x as much budget as we could consume for really very useful and valuable research and development projects in the defense domain. On Ukraine, indeed, so what we are trying to do, yes, Ukraine can already, to some extent, and Ukrainian entities participate in the EDF today. Then we took the measures that we could under the given regulation and existing regulation to ensure that they can, through certain mechanisms, participate also in R&D activities.
What we have also done is creating a new kind of scheme, which is called BraveTech EU, where we used CHF 50,000,000 of EDF funding. CHF 50,000,000 is then coming from Brave One, so the kind of innovation driver in the Ukrainian entity driving defense innovation in Ukraine. And together with that €100,000,000, what we were setting up, and that's in the making, is really a new scheme that allows for also cooperation between EU entities, Ukrainian entities, allowing also the European entities to learn what is really to learn from the Ukrainian side, which is fast innovation. How do you test and bring lessons from the battlefield very quickly to industry, show them, and demonstrate where then innovation should be pursued and can also be implemented very quickly the way they do it. This may not be 100% implementable on our side, but that's what the scheme is trying to do, showing and bringing Ukrainian and European entities together, also allowing them to test their technologies if they want to, even in Ukraine under that scheme. So that's a bit what is built in already in the EDF.
What is then now also, since the mini omnibus, is the fact that we will associate now Ukraine to the program. There is, however, an association agreement that still needs to be negotiated. So this is on its way. We will see how fast that can be implemented. If that happens still this year, we could still at least include the Ukrainian entities and full participation in the EDF, hopefully in the last year.
If not, that would at least also be an investment for the future. And then finally, maybe on other programs where the Ukrainian participation is already fully foreseen, so that's the EDIT program, which we are currently preparing and where the work program is hopefully soon finalized, which provides for a proper support instrument, a program within the EDIT program geared at Ukrainian entities, Ukrainian needs where then out of the CHF 1,500,000,000, there will be CHF 300,000,000 dedicated to that UC Ukraine support instrument under ADIP. And then finally, and I hope I got your question right, so SMEs participation is indeed very high, but what the figure refers to was the 43% of the participants or the unique participants. When it comes to the funding, of course, it's not 43% that would go a little bit too far as to what also SMEs can then contribute to research and development, notably complex development programs. So the funding that is attributed or goes to SMEs amounts to 20% of the program's budget overall, so far.
The relevance to NATO standards, when we said that was meant that in all our projects, whenever it's relevant, we are referring to NATO standards where there are NATO standards. And what I was saying or trying to say was that there are already 17 projects that not only refer somewhere as an element, but literally to the development of standards in line with the NATO standards and take that into account and introduce them or take them into account in the development of a given project or technology. So that's what we meant when we referred to the 17 standardization projects. I think I covered all aspects raised.
I think so, but Helda has another question. Hello.
Hélder Sousa Silva
Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much for your clear answers. But, I have raised another question related with the transition period between the actual and the next, MFF. And having said that, the 2026, for example, work program launches calls with the deadlines running through September, and the projects selected will inevitably extend well beyond the hand of the current MFF.
My question is concrete. What guarantees exist for the continuity of funding for projects approved in this final cycle that, by their very nature, will not have completed their development cycle until 2027? And, is there a transition mechanism in place, or are the industrial consortia investing now in preparing applications, taking on real risk of midcourse funding disruption. It's a really important point and a critical point for the investors and especially for the SMEs, but for all of them. Thank you so much.
Mārtiņš Staķis
Yes. I had also a question about innovations that, how can we make sure that innovations stay in Europe and are not sold as a license to the other countries who then, you know, scale them up and make a profit?
Speaker 16
Good question, indeed. On the question of how to ensure a shorter transition, well, that's what we were trying to do at the moment with the program we have with this multi-annual perspective, which I was introducing in my first slide. The whole idea of that is to already lay the path a bit of what we are going to do, hopefully, then in the research and development component of the next ECF. So what we're trying to do is now coming basically to the last year, and the 2027 work programme is already under discussion, as you can imagine. What we're trying to do is, in this multi-annual perspective, to already lay the path a bit beyond in the first or even second year of the next MFF.
And then we do expect that, of course, all the work which we have done so far on the planning and the preparation of the work programs has all been done in close collaboration with Member States or the national MODs in the program committee. There will be, again, a program committee where, based on this informal planning, which we have already put forward, and the projects that are actually launched under '26 or '27, which will have a certain lifetime of several years, where we are sure that member states also in the program committee will come back to the request to pursue those projects that really meet their interest as reflected in this multiannual programming. So there is nothing formal, and no guarantee. But I think with the planning which we have now with the multiannual planning instrument, that will be very helpful to also guide the way into the future under the next MFF. And then, innovation.
Yes, what we did so far under the EDF is this UDIS innovation scheme, where we are trying not only on investing at the moment up to 20%, 24% of our annual budget on the EDF on innovation measures. So really trying to see that not only do we give start ups, smaller companies, scale ups, SMEs the chance to develop their technologies, mature them, ripen them, but very often, what also SMEs want to ensure and want to see is somehow that their technology, they find their way and their position in larger scale corporation projects. So the large majority of these 45% of SME participants are actually already integrated and work with larger primes in their larger scale projects related to capability development, which is good because that's what we want. We want to see them beyond the R and D projects, integrated in the supply chains of industry, and that actually works really well. The way we see it from the past is that this cooperation and integration of SMEs in larger industrial corporations or consortia endures beyond the duration of an R and D project.
And what we, of course, also would like to see with the other strengths, which we are having, the other intervention logics, notably, EDIP, where we would then also like to see in the future that, for example, outcomes of EDF projects are then sort of treated as a priority also in joint procurement projects launched by the Member States. We can't force them. But if what we do under the EDF is interesting, it will also be for the MODs, there should also be normally an interest of those MODs to procure and to keep it in the country or in the EU. Right. I'll stop here.
Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
Any other questions? Thank you very much. We are really looking forward to what's going on. And so we are happy if you come to our committee to tell us. So we wish you success.
I think it's very important for the whole Europe, and we could see what happens all around. So thank you very much, colleagues, for your interest, for your time, and our next meeting will take place on the 14th, April 2026. So thank you very much, and a Thursday. It's a nice weekend. A little bit early.
But, anyway, a sunny day.
Ask anything about this video — I analyse its transcript to answer.