Committee on Petitions 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
PETI European Parliament
Follow its sittingsSpeaker 2
These are just fine words. A lot of these children need individual assistance like a shadow teacher in order to be able to communicate with their fellow pupils, to be able to follow instructions, and to be educated in a friendly environment. But this fundamental support is not financed by the public sector in Andalusia, which means that a lot of families have to pay for this themselves. And obviously, this is a very unfair situation. If a family can pay for the support and assistance, their child is able to be accompanied in the classroom, and can learn.
Otherwise, the child cannot learn and gets behind. And this situation generates a parallel situation where a lot of the assistants don't have the necessary education to properly accompany the children. And the level of education should not be able to depend on the income level of a family. And education should not, inclusive education should not be a privilege. It should be a reality.
And as a mother, I have experienced myself what it means for a system to recognize the rights of your child but that does not provide the necessary resources to guarantee these rights. And there are very many people who obviously are trying to do as much as they can, but they're overwhelmed because they don't have sufficient professional support, and they can't work properly in a classroom. I've spoken to thousands of families who are living the same kind of situation. Families are exhausted about having to fight for their rights, children who want to learn, participate and form part, be involved in their schools, but don't get the necessary support or resources that they need. And this reality means that there's nothing to do with the political party.
We're talking about families that have to make many sacrifices. And this is a violation of rights. And obviously, the rights of our children cannot be negotiated. And I'm speaking on behalf of an association, which has been set up by mothers and is fighting for all children to have inclusive education and to get support, whether we're talking about disabilities or developmental disorders. And this is why we have submitted our petition, because we believe in the values underpinning the European Union. And the United Nations mentioned on the rights of people with disabilities also recognize the right to education, as does the Spanish law.
But what about resources? That's what you need. And we need the laws that do exist to be properly applied. And what about the European funds that are being allocated to this kind of action? We don't have proper specialized education.
There are thousands of families wondering where the funds go for inclusive education because they're not ending up in the classroom, where they're most needed. We need educational support and assistance. And I think if Europe does believe in equality, dignity, and human rights, then these principles also have to be found in our classroom. Because if this doesn't work for children who are vulnerable, it means that the administration is failing, as does society and Europe. This is a photograph of my son, and this is why I'm here, so that he has opportunities and chances for the future.
And this is a photograph of other families who've asked me to relay their voice to the European Parliament, so that the members of the European Parliament can listen to them and hear them, because they aren't getting support anywhere else. This is Brendan, 13 years old, who goes to school, and he draws because he can't speak. He's autistic and he is drawing the bullying, the lack of resources, and everything that he's suffering. There are small children, young people who are committing suicide, taking their lives in the public education sector because they don't have the necessary support and resources. And if we fail our children in this way, we fail as a society.
Thank you.
Thank.
Bogdan Rzońca
you. Yes, thank you very much for presenting your petition. I'd now like to hand the floor to the representative of the commission from the Directorate General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture. I don't know who's here for the European Commission today.
Okay.
Yes.
Ten minutes for you, madam.
Speaker 3
Yes. Thank you, chair, honorable members of the European Parliament, petitioner. First, we would like to thank the petitioner for its very clear and moving presentation, as a mother and as representative of the association representing parents of children with special educational needs. It is important to acknowledge the scope of the European Union's role in education, according to article 165 of the treaty of the functioning of the European Union. The union must contribute to the development of quality education by encouraging cooperation between member states, and if necessary, by supporting and supplementing their action while fully respecting the responsibility of the member states for the content of teaching and the organization of their education systems.
Member states are therefore free to set up their educational systems as they deem appropriate, as long as they comply with EU law. Since decisions on educational arrangements for children with special educational needs or disabilities fall within the organization of national education systems, the Union cannot impose binding rules or review decisions taken by national authorities in this area. Spain, like any other member states and the European Union, is a party to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and has therefore committed to comply with its provisions, including in the field of education. In Spain, the national framework for inclusive education is well established. The general law on the rights of persons with disabilities under social inclusion requires educational authorities to ensure accessible and inclusive education, prioritizing mainstream settings and the necessary support for children with special needs.
Likewise, the organic law on education requires that sufficient resources be allocated to meet the educational needs of all students, particularly those with special educational needs. The implementation and monitoring of these provisions fall under the remit of the Spanish government. Nevertheless, the commission analyzes the main challenges and developments for children with special educational needs and/or disabilities in the annual education and training monitor, as well as within the framework of the European semester. Over the past five years, the European Commission has significantly strengthened its commitment to advancing inclusive education under the European education area through peer learning opportunities, policy guidance, and funding via Erasmus plus and coalition policy funds. Since 2022, the Pathways to School Success initiative promotes a preventive and systemic approach to reducing underachievement, fostering inclusive learning environments, and encouraging collaboration between schools, families, and communities through a whole-school approach.
Concrete measures proposed by pathways policy include the inclusion of learners with disability and/or special educational needs in mainstream schools, with effective support provided by trained educators and other educational staff or health professionals. We acknowledge that significant inequalities persist, particularly for learners with disabilities. In 2024, the share of early leavers among young people aged 18 to 24 with some disability was 17.1 percent, 44.2 percent for those with severe disability, compared with only 8 percent for those without a disability. The issue encompasses both school dropouts and out-of-school rates, which are particularly high among young people with disabilities. The importance of equal access to education has been underlined in the commission's strategy for the rights of persons with disabilities 2021, 2030.
With the forthcoming communication enhancing the strategy for the rights of persons with disabilities up to 2030, announced in the commission work program for 2026, the commission will aim to reinforce action in the area of disability. Finally, the European Commission is committed to ensuring that EU funds are properly used. The European Social Fund Plus 2021-2027 in Andalusia supports families with children with special needs through various measures. Under the European Child Guarantee, educational support services are funded to provide personalized assistance to students with learning difficulties. In addition, the ESF plus supports the curricular support program for students with special educational needs, including reinforcement of specialized teaching staff, as well as school transport to ensure access to education for students with specific needs or those living in areas with limited accessibility.
The European Commission, together with national authorities, monitors the proper use of such funds through rigorous systems of verification, supervision, and audits. The petition does not provide any supporting evidence of irregularities or fraud affecting EU funds. If the petitioner has concrete evidence of misuse, it may be reported to the competent national authorities or to the European Anti-Fraud Office. To conclude, while the EU strongly supports inclusive education and closely monitors developments in this area, the final policy decision for the organization of the education system lies with the member states, which also remain responsible for designing national disability policies in line with the obligations to implement the United Nations Convention and relevant EU rules. Please note that the written reply will include further information for the petitioner on how to obtain a remedy in the member states through competent national authorities, such as the ombudsperson or through the courts, or refer the matter to the EU Convent Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities once all available domestic remedies have been exhausted.
Thank you very much for your attention.
Bogdan Rzońca
Thank you so much. Now the political group, on behalf of EPP, mister Pascal de la Parte.
Nicolás Pascual de la Parte
Thank you very much, Chairman. I'm going to be speaking Spanish on behalf of my colleague, Carmen Crespo, who is unable to be here this afternoon. I'd like to start off by recognizing the work of the Andalusian government, who has entered into a specific commitment when it comes to supporting pupils with special educational needs. This commitment speaks for itself in figures. Over €600,000 have been set aside for this in 2025, 2026.
So there's an increase of 27% over four years. And we're talking about €7,500 a year per pupil, about €2,000 more than in 2024. Over the last seven school years, an integral strategy has been put into place for inclusivity to guarantee every pupil the best education possible within the Andalusian school system. We've lost 120,000 pupils over the past few years, but the number of pupils with special educational needs has continued to increase by about seven percent. And this is in part due to early diagnosis and detection.
When it comes to pupils with autism who represent about 20 percent of all pupils with special educational needs, I think this we do have the unit for special educational needs. So that's increased obviously since 2020. The number of people who support and assist children with special educational needs has increased by about 37 percent, including therapeutic pedagogy, teaching in language, technical staff for social integration. And this, one important figure, eighty-seven percent of pupils with special educational needs are at school in ordinary classrooms. When it comes to both national and European funds, both are being used to strengthen the effort.
We have Provoa Andalusia program, more support, a summer program, and various other programs. And over 2,500 professionals participated in this €77,000,000 budget. And in there are sixteen oh six ten sixty-six centers who are incorporated into this for this particular school year. And obviously, the corresponding teachers and assistants who are there to provide support for pupils with special needs. To conclude, obviously, good support depends on continuous ongoing professional training and help to the parents as well.
And this is the effort that is being made by the Andalusian government, and it is worthy of recognition. And so we would like this petition to be closed. Thank you.
Lina Gálvez
Yes. Thank you very much. I'd like to thank the petitioner Eugenia Palomina from MIDE, her association, for having brought this request of Andalusian parents to our petitions committee. And obviously, this question of fairness and justice, that's what we usually discuss here in the committee, the petitions committee. And this is something that Mrs.
Palomino has highlighted. She's the mother of two children, and the government of Andalusia is not really allowing the children to have inclusive education or education at all. And in the light of the comments from the commission, when it comes to education in Spain, the competencies are in the hands of the autonomous communities, the regions. Children with special educational needs are not just a number or a percentage, nor isolated cases. These are individuals.
These are people with rights. And they cannot be ignored by the Andalusian government, which recently happened in the case of children whose mothers have breast cancer. So we're talking about the children here. We're not talking about the interest of the private sector. And this is not something that we should be pushing to the fore.
Obviously, the laws have to be properly respected, and especially when we're talking about European funding. And I think this perhaps is the key to what lies behind the petition that's been brought before the European Parliament. Inclusive education. E, education for everybody should not be seen as a privilege. Rights cannot be enjoyed.
They do not exist if they are not properly respected. As the petitioner herself has said, rights cannot be negotiated, nor can they be there for one or two people to make a profit. As seems to be the case for President Borrello Borneo. The Europe we believe that the petitioner should be kept open and that an effort be made to recruit the necessary people, who can provide the support rather than trying to go to private companies. The commissioner said there's not been any misuse of the European funding.
But we hear that there are these parents who are saying they can only have access to these shadow teachers and the assistance if they pay for them themselves. So what is being paid for by the funds? Well, actually, it's these private companies who provide extracurricular activities, and that is not inclusive education. Mr. Moreno Borneo, who's responsible for education in the Andalusian government, should answer the questions of the association and explain what has been happening with European funds.
Misuse of European funds leads to discrimination against those pupils with special educational needs. We have listened to a petitioner, and we know that in her case and the case of other children, the Andalusian government is not actually guaranteeing their right to education. So we should not be deceived in Europe. I mean, as the petitioner has said, if we don't do something about this, we fail as a society.
Margarita de la Pisa Carrión
Missus de la Pise. Yes. Thank you. Thank you, chair. Thank you, colleagues.
We support the Association on Inclusive Mothers Fighting for Equality. And, obviously, we need specific solutions in the education system, which allow all children to develop their capacities to the maximum, which is particularly pressing when it comes to children with special educational needs. It is important to realize that every child, every family, every situation is unique. And it is absolutely essential that there are real free alternatives, such as the necessary flexibility to be able to choose in the light of the interest of the child and their family. And this should be done through public education, concerted education, or cooperation between public and private specialized bodies.
Whether we're talking about special education or inclusive education, very often they're necessary, complementary. And both should be made available and should guarantee a high level of assistance depending on the specific needs of each pupil. If inclusive education is the most relevant solution, then obviously there has to be the measures that would cover all the specific needs of the child. So we do understand the concerns of the petitioner when it comes to the lack of human and financial resources, which would guarantee the child assistance education to cover their needs. In June 2025, VOXX submitted a nonlegislative proposal to guarantee professional assistance in the public sector to children with special needs, in particular, children in Andalusia.
The idea being to look at the rates, the ratios, and to provide the necessary resources to guarantee this. We should always think of the good of the child and make sure that everything is adapted to their specific circumstances to guarantee their full development. So we feel it's absolutely essential that funds targeting education from the European Union should be used effectively and transparently in Andalusia, as well as in any other part of Spain. So we feel that it would be useful to gather information as to how these funds have been managed. For public education or concerted education within the context of parents being able to choose the best option for their children.
So we would like this petition to remain open. And we also feel that the commission should address the authorities of the autonomous institutions to get more information to find a solution for this situation problem.
Thank.
Isabel Serra Sánchez
You, Mayor Eugenia, and thank you for being here. Thank you for bringing something so important to the European institutions. Thank you to the association media, and thank you to all of the families that are fighting for public education, all of the educational community, and all of the movements that have been fighting for many years for public education and for inclusive education. Because this isn't just something for your children. It's also for the rights of all society.
And as you said, rights can't be negotiated. We're talking about the right to education. The right to education can only be guaranteed through public education, and this is a condition that we need to live in a democratic society. So thank you again for that. I think it's important to point out that if this is happening, it's because it's a strategy being done by some governments, particularly by the People's Party, you saw in Madrid or the same in Andalusia, who are trying to make people more in favor of private schools.
400 classrooms are being closed down in Andalucia. That's a deterioration of education. This is a destruction of public education. This leads to include exclusion, and this affects the European public funds. The taxes of citizens in Andalusia and all of those in Spain are being used for more segregation, more indoctrination, and for more inequality.
This is a project in which freedom is only for those who can pay. We're going to support you. The fundamental rights and universal rights are not being fulfilled here, and also the rules of our country. And I hope that this petition stays open. We'll also send a letter to the authorities and the government of Andalusia, the government of Spain, in order to deal with what is happening.
And there will also be a court committee report on what is happening in the member states when it comes to education.
Alvise Pérez
Thank you, Mr. President. I'm going to speak in Spanish. Mario Genia.
Thank you, Mario Genia Palomina, for coming here today. I can speak from my own experience because I am Andalusian. I was educated in the public education of Andalusia. I remember exactly how it works, how they treat gen students in general, but also those who have special educational needs. Have you have someone has been tied to the seat in school.
I'm 36 years old. But when my European colleagues hear my experience in school, they wonder about what happened when where no attention was being given. They don't remember they think about how we were extremely they think that we were extremely poor, that people went to England to work, or people were taking other people's food in order to survive. This was the case for many Angelusians. But there's also an issue with ignorance using good people three months before the Andalusian elections, a topic that people are not interested in at all.
This doesn't concern your children because what Marie Henia is doing is very necessary. We're going to give her the voice that her people needs. We will support all of the civil society when it comes to her legitimate demands for protecting her child, and we hope that this petition stays open despite what the party, what the people's party is doing and the bias and the ideology of the less left in my country. And the three months before the election, children are being used to create problems. What an embarrassment.
Thank you.
Speaker 2
Sorry. Thank.
you. I am a mother. I don't have the percentages. I don't have statistics because my children are not numbers. There are so look at the complaints of all of the mothers in courts, in youth courts.
This is what we need to have. I don't have anything else, because I'm not a politician. I'm a mother. I haven't brought the numbers. I have brought the reality that I'm living every day.
I live with a child who needs the support in the classroom in order to be able to progress, to be able to have a good life like, with dignity like the rest of his classmates. This is not happening in Andalusia. Juan Moreno, whatever he says, whatever his government says, I don't know what planet or reality you live in, but we are not. This is the reality that we experience. Excuse me. But I'm getting so emotional because these are my children, and I see that my children and many children are suffering.
They don't have transport. They don't have assistance in the classroom. They don't, they can't move around. They don't have a communicator. They don't have a wheelchair.
They don't have a lot of the resources they need. Because as you know, disabilities cost a lot of money, and I'm tired of hearing about all these different arguments in pre campaign pre election campaigns. I am a parent, and this is I want my children to have a future. Please allow this petition to continue. There I don't see this happening for my children.
Bogdan Rzońca
Yes. Thank you very much, madam. The petition is going to be kept open, and we will wait for the written reply of the European Commission. So thank you very much, madam, and good luck. The petition is being kept open.
So this brings us on to Item five, Petition 1532-25. And this was submitted by Alexandre Albu on alleged anticompetitive practices by Amazon harming independent sellers. The petitioner is not present, so I shall give the floor straight away to the commission, the direct representative of the commission from the Director General and Competition, DG Comp.
Speaker 11
Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, honorable members, for having us here today. I would like to start by giving a short summary of the complaint. So the petitioner alleges that Amazon is engaging in anticompetitive practices that disadvantage sellers on its marketplace.
And in particular, he alleges that this is done by Amazon controlling the visibility of sellers' offers on the marketplace through the mechanism which is called the featured offer. This is something which used to be called the Buy Box, which some of you may know. So featured offer is a selection mechanism that prominently shows the offer of one single seller for a chosen product on the Amazon marketplace. And the customer has the possibility to immediately buy the product. Amazon selects this featured offer for a product by evaluating all offers for the product and then selecting the one which it considers the most suitable for the customer.
The petitioner here is alleging that Amazon is harming sellers on Amazon Marketplace by not showing the featured offer for the sellers' products. When there is no featured offer shown, the petitioner claims that customers are less likely to see the offer and, therefore, less likely to buy his product. He also alleges that the algorithm, which decides on whether to show the featured offer or not, is arbitrary and malfunctions to the detriment of sellers. As a consequence, sellers are losing sales and are financially damaged. The petitioner states that he has tried to also reach a resolution with Amazon directly, but failed and only received generic replies.
The petitioner further asks the European Commission to investigate the use of its algorithm for determining the featured offer, and to ban Amazon from removing the featured offer without clear justification and prior notice. He also calls for more transparency in general when it comes to Amazon's decision making, which affects sellers. So in reply to this petition, we would like to note that the commission is very closely monitoring Amazon's criteria for the featured offer mechanisms under two different instruments. The first instrument is the competition rules and, more specifically, Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU, which prevents abuses of dominant position. In 2020, the Commission opened an investigation specifically targeting Amazon's featured offer mechanism.
And it raised concerns about Amazon self-preferencing its own offers on the Amazon marketplace compared to the offers of third-party sellers when it comes to the selection of this featured offer on the platform. After the commission raised its concerns, Amazon offered and the commission accepted the commitments in December 2022. According to these commitments, Amazon has to apply nondiscriminatory criteria when it's selecting the winner of this featured offer. These objective and nondiscriminatory criteria also apply to the eligibility of the offers to become featured offers. This is the part which the petitioner seems to take issue with.
These commitments are valid for a period of 5 years. And at the moment, the Commission is monitoring Amazon's compliance with these commitments together with the monitoring trustee, which Amazon appointed specifically for this purpose. And for the purpose of this monitoring, this monitoring trustee also set up a specific complaint mechanism, which is open to all citizens, including independent sellers.
as the
Speaker 11
Petitioner, through which they can file individual complaints. And the monitoring trustee has the power as well as the resources to investigate each individual complaint, and the obligation to report back to the Commission on the findings of those complaints. The second instrument through which the Commission is currently monitoring Amazon's featured offer mechanism is the Digital Markets Act. The Digital Markets Act aims at making digital markets more fair and contestable by designating gatekeeping platforms who have to comply with a predefined set of obligations. Amazon is one such designated gatekeeper who was designated for its marketplace in September, 2023.
And since March 2024, Amazon has to comply with all the obligations under the Digital Markets Act, including the one contained in Article 6-5 of the Digital Markets Act. This obligation prohibits gatekeepers from giving more favorable treatment in ranking to their own offers or services compared to those of their business users. In this case, this means that under the Digital Markets Act, Amazon has to refrain from giving more favorable treatment to its own offers on the marketplace compared to those of third-party sellers when it's ranking offers for the selection of the featured offer. Therefore, in this context as well, the commission is closely monitoring the feature offer mechanism. With respect to the transparency concerns, which the petitioner also raised, I would like to make two points.
First, Amazon publishes the criteria which it takes into account for the selection, but also for the display of the featured offer on the Amazon website. It's called Amazon Seller Central. And this information is publicly accessible. We have also provided links in our written reply about this. And the second part of Article six-five of the Digital Markets Act is also relevant in the context of transparency.
This is because this part obliges gatekeepers to apply transparent, fair, and non-discriminatory conditions for the ranking on their platforms. This means that in the context of Amazon compliance with Article 6-5 of Digital Markets Act, the commission is monitoring Amazon's transparency with respect to the featured offer mechanism too. One final point that I would like to make is that the commission highly encourages affected parties, such as this independent seller, who suspects noncompliance of Amazon with the commitments, with the antitrust commitments, to contact directly the monitoring trustee, who can investigate thoroughly and inform the commission of its findings. The Commission also strongly encourages citizens who suspect noncompliance with the Digital Markets Act to contact the Commission directly and report the suspicions, because we consider this type of information highly valuable when we are doing our monitoring and ensuring compliance with the Digital Markets Act. So to summarize, the Commission closely monitors the featured offer mechanism through its competition rules and the antitrust commitments, as well as in the context of the Digital Markets Act, and highly encourages us to receive this kind of complaints directly so that we can assess them on an individual basis if needed.
Thank you very much for your attention.
Now.
Bogdan Rzońca
Moving on to the political group, CPP. I can't see anybody. S and D? Mr. Vincent?
Vasile Dîncu
Thank you, chair. I speak Romanian. Thank.
you. We are talking about Petition 1532 on alleged practices by Amazon harming independent sellers. This is not an isolated case. This is an example of the way in which power is being wielded in the digital economy. The commission representative talked about the investigation that was carried out on Amazon because of the mechanism they have featured offer in Vivo.
And, indeed, this investigation led to some commitments from Amazon. But let's be honest, these solutions treat the effects, not the causes. The buyback is not a mere technical instrument. It is a point of access to the market. In many cases, it determines 90% of the sales.
And if you're not there, then you don't exist. This means that the algorithm doesn't merely organize information. It decides the result. The problem is the problem, arises when the same actor, same stakeholder controls the platform and is also an actor on the market. Amazon has a high level of trust from the public, and it also establishes the rules for the other participants.
It has access to data that nobody else has access to, such as data on consumer behavior, and the commission has already showed that this data can be used to adjust their own offers so that they can become more attractive. So we're not only talking about efficiency, we're talking about the structural advantage. The Google Shopping case showed that self-preference can cause distortions on the market. But this situation is going even further because this isn't only ranking. It is a full ecosystem that is being controlled by the platform.
Not to speak, we are not speaking of companies that are under similar competition. We are talking about a platform that decides on the criteria, that collects data, and does everything in real time. So this creates deep asymmetry because search sellers depend on the platform for their sales and visibility. This is why we need to handle these practices, and we need to keep regulating. Our classic model means that we need to have an objective arbiter.
And in the digital economy, we don't have this. It is true that the DMA is an essential step. Article six, point two, is very important. It handles the use of data, and this is a very good instrument, but it depends on the well, its functioning. It depends on the way in which it is applied.
We need to support the commission in monitoring this situation so that abuse can be prevented. And the stakes are not only economic. They are also stakes that have to do with economic policy. This has to do with European companies because European producers compete with platforms from the United States or from other countries, and we should protect our European producers as far as we can through our laws, be they small or medium sized. So I suggest that these petitions stay open.
Thank you.
ECR the
Bogdan Rzońca
ECR the same. Renew. Green to the left. Missus Sarah Sanchez.
No. Okay. The Finnish petition will be open. Yes.
So the commission. And we'll await their reply. So we move on to 6. This is 140 120 24 by a Romanian citizen on regulating social media influence in elections. The petitioner is not present, so I hand the floor to the commission, a representative from the commission from the director general for communications, network content and technology.
Speaker 15
Yes. Thank you very much. Good afternoon. So thank you, Chair, honorable members of the European Parliament. Let me maybe summarize also briefly just the petition.
You mentioned it already, but indeed, the petitioner calls for immediate regulation of social media platforms, including specifically TikTok and Facebook, during election cycles to safeguard democratic processes. According to the claims of the petitioner, Russia has interfered in the elections in multiple European countries, including Romania's 2024 presidential election. And he states that social media platforms are being used to spread misinformation, manipulate public opinion, and undermine fair elections. To counter this, the petitioner calls for strict oversight and transparency measures against this external interference and influence. So let me maybe start by saying that the elections are fully within the competence of member states.
So there are electoral laws in each member state. The kind of piece of the puzzle that I can address today comes from the angle of the Digital Services Act, which imposes certain obligations on the platform. So what are they required to do more generally, but then more specifically during the election processes? So the Digital Services Act is a regulation that came into force in November 2022, and it aims creating a safe, predictable, and trusted online environment. It has different kind of categories of obligations, which depend a little bit also on the size of the platforms.
But to say already concretely that it does apply to TikTok, which was specifically mentioned by the petitioner and Facebook as well. So the obligations that these platforms need to comply with are numerous. But in this specific case, what is important to mention is that they need to assess the systemic risk that the illegal content is disseminated through their services. So the fact whether something is illegal or not is determined in another legislation, so in national legislation, which can say which content is illegal or not, or in another, EU legislation, but not in the digital services act. So that's one risk that they have to look into whether their services disseminate illegal content.
And then they also need to assess the risk, the systemic risk that their services can pose to civic discourse and elections. So that kind of precisely is relevant precisely for the design of their recommender systems and other relevant algorithmic systems, which kind of determine which content the users see. When it comes more concretely to TikTok and the 2024 Romanian elections, we have sent multiple requests for information to TikTok and have then, in December 2024, opened an investigation, specifically on this. So we have opened a formal proceedings against TikTok for a suspected breach of the Digital Services Act, specifically in relation to this obligation to assess and mitigate systemic risks. So concretely, there are two main counts, let's say, which we are looking into now.
One is the intentional manipulation of TikTok services and its related systems, including its recommender systems. So this concretely means whether there were cases of coordinated inauthentic behavior that happened on the platform. And then the second part is the amplification and potentially rapid and wide dissemination of political advertisement and paid for political content, which also covers, if I can call it, politic hidden political ads from influencers, for example, which is not disclosed as political advertising. And this type of content is actually also incompatible, with TikTok's own terms and conditions. So we have opened this case.
I think we are very much aware, some time ago. This investigation is still ongoing. We are gathering and analyzing evidence. We really need to do an in-depth investigation into this. We need to give TikTok and other platforms, as always in the different cases, the possibility to exercise their rights of defense.
I would like to, so that's as far as our enforcement actions go in this area. I would just like to mention a couple of other points. First of all, we have now almost two years. We have also published guidelines on recommended measures. So these are guidelines for the big platforms on how to mitigate systemic risks related specifically to electoral processes.
So here, very concretely, we have recommendations which range from provisions to giving access to official information on the electoral processes so that users can be pointed towards reliable sources, but also more generally media literacy initiatives so that users can detect by on their own misinformation and disinformation, and also that users can make meaningful choices and have control over their feed. More in general, we also kind of recommend platforms to provide users with more transparency on what they are doing, for example, to discover some deceptive accounts, etcetera, etcetera, so that users themselves are more empowered and can know what the platform is putting into place. As I said in the beginning, elections are a national competence. So what the commission is also doing is supporting the work of the national digital services coordinators, which sometimes organize roundtables in the context of elections where the platforms are invited, sometimes also representatives of civil society. And when the commission is invited, we attend to it.
So here, there are also stress tests which are organized, to kind of see how the platforms would react in real life scenarios. Such a stress test, for example, was organized with TikTok in March 2025 ahead of the presidential elections, which took place on May 4, 2025. And maybe just as a last point, to point out the fact that, in November 2025, the commission launched also the European Democracy Shield initiative, which is a broader initiative, but is definitely also aimed at safeguarding information integrity, promoting free and fair elections, and boosting societal resilience and citizens engagement. So also from that Democracy Shield, we have some follow-up actions that the commission will deliver on. Thank you very much for your attention.
Vasile Dîncu
Thank you, chair. Grupo S and D, Socini.
Thank you. S and D fully support the preoccupations expressed in this petition on the influence of social networks. What is described here is not abstract worries. This is a fact. The social networks are not mere spaces for communication.
They form the public opinion. The algorithms are not neutral. They prioritize, amplify, and share content depending on commercial practices. Unfortunately, the commission's answer talks about the systemic risk on platforms, and this is only an abstract expression because we're not only talking about false information, we are talking about algorithmic governance and amplification and who decides what is amplified and what is going to affect democracy. Unfortunately, both the AI Act and the DNA failed to capture these elements.
This information is more dangerous when it is amplified. The EU has taken important steps. The DSA has introduced important obligations for the larger platforms. But for SND, it is not enough to manage the content. We have to approach the way in which it is amplified.
We need transparency on the recommendation systems. We need independent audits of algorithms during election periods. We need real access for researchers to the data on content sharing. And one thing that is very important is that during election campaigns, we need quick interventions when there are coordinated campaigns that are amplified by artificial bots. This is very important because the algorithm amplification is not regulated right now.
I'd like to remind the commission that they just set up the European Centre for Democratic Resilience, which is an essential instrument to protect the laws and strengthen the EU's capacity of response to hybrid threats. And I can come up with some suggestions for new regulations. The stock market, for example, has a few mechanisms to stop with these artificial amplifications. They have circuit breakers, which stop transactions when there is a rise in prices of over 15%, for example. The stock market also has a sort of volatility interruption mechanism.
This is, the transactions are stopped when things seem artificial. So the commission should strengthen the European instruments that we have, such as the democracy shield, because these amplifications threaten democracy. Romania's case was generated by these types of amplification. We suggest that this petition stay open.
Bogdan Rzońca
Thank you. Does anyone else want to speak? No? Thank you. Mister President.
Alvise Pérez
Mister president. President. Sorry. Thank you, Mr. President. Sorry.
I forgot to push the button. I
have great concerns about the regulation here and the implications for TikTok and Instagram and so forth. Absolutely it's absolutely the case as the commissioner said that we're not familiar with all the ins and outs of the algorithms and the social media platforms, but it is certainly the case that whatever criticism we are hearing from the commission regarding these platforms, most of them are incidentally based in America, they could at least be suspected of peddling disinformation. Miss Van der Leyen said some time back that we shouldn't be using nuclear energy because it was a danger for the future of Europe. Well, was that disinformation, or was it not? And she was it has been said that she was wrong.
Has she changed her position? What is the definition of disinformation? It is something which can actually be supranational. You might be Romanian. You might be Spanish, or you might be another nationality, but it's very difficult to identify what is actually the truth and what is fact throughout the whole of Europe.
So I am quite concerned about this, and I'm concerned about the impact it has on the European Union. And I'm concerned more widely. I'm a bit fearful looking back at history and seeing what the implications are in policy, in terms of policy and society, and how the citizen actually obtains information. How do they get access to information? And so this European Commission aspires to exert control over the social media platforms.
It's trying to regulate, legislate, and control something which it essentially fails to understand. I know that it is not possible for me to finance any of this in my own country. The costs are huge, and it is impossible for me to do anything about TikTok myself. As to the political parties, well, they might be able to make some impact on this because they do have access to funds the same way the parliament and the commission do. And, of course, they have engaged with Meta and Instagram, but we don't have enough of an electorate to be considered a value, legitimate interlocutor by the European Commission.
So we have no input into this discussion. As my Romanian colleague has suggested, we do need to try to exert more control over what is going on. We need to get a grip on these algorithms and the software, because they are actually causing a great deal of fear in the minds of many citizens.
Bogdan Rzońca
Thank you very much. The petition will be kept open, and we will await a reply from the Commission. So now let's move on to seven, Petition 14 0 125, submitted by a Spanish citizen on the alleged incorrect transposition of directive 2019-1158, and this on the right to paid parental leave. The petitioner, I believe, is connected remotely. If that is the case, please may the technical experts allow the connection.
And the petitioner has five minutes to present their petition.
Speaker 20
Thank you very much, members of the committee, for allowing me to present today on behalf of my client, who happens to be my wife, and, more importantly, on behalf of thousands of Spanish parents. And thank you very much, interpreters, for allowing me to do this in Spanish.
Speaker 23
Directive provides for eight weeks of parental leave and up to the age of eight, and Spain has not actually implemented or transposed this legislation properly. It is actually resorting to inappropriate legislative methods and is failing to actually transpose the spirit of the directive. What has Spain actually done in terms of providing for these 8 weeks of parental leave? Six weeks are actually effectively being treated as paternity or maternity leave at the time of the birth. And this therefore cannot be used later on in the child's life, which leaves only nine or fewer weeks which can be taken later.
Speaker 22
And this applies particularly to children born after August 24. The next slide shows that here, parental leave is being almost completely swallowed up by this other type of leave through the use of this passerelle clause, which enables other types of leave or similar to be calculated, and factored into the overall calculation of the time of work. And it leads to a situation where leave, which is paternity leave, is granted, but it is also deemed to be at the same time the part of the overall parental leave, should extend way beyond the first year of life. Because the idea of parental leave is that up until eight years of age, the parents should be able to take some leave in order to facilitate work-life balance. It is, of course, a case that when the child is first born, the parents would be taking paternity or maternity leave, but the child needs to be cared for.
And therefore, 75% of the parental leave, which should kick in later on, is actually swallowed up in the first few months of the child's life. There is no work-life balance up to the age of eight. And the aim of the directive, which is to provide for work life balance, is therefore completely undermined. The
Speaker 22
The director mentions the date of 08/02/2024. What does this mean? It is the date from which there is paid leave, irrespective of when the child was born. If they have, if they're less than five, of course, they're going to need more care over a number of years before this trigger date is hit. Therefore, it is absolutely ridiculous that you could have a three-year-old child.
You want to have some work life balance and spend some time with your child, but you can invoke the legislation if they were born in August, but not if they were born on August 1. So this means that many children are deprived of the opportunity of spending this time with their parents. It is only if the child is born after 2024, and only if the leave is applied for after that, that it can be granted. And this runs contrary to the provisions of the directive, which say that it has to be granted up to the age of eight. And, therefore, the Spanish government is actually flying in the face of the directive when it's not applying this to children who were born prior to the cutoff date.
Here's an example. You have a petitioner with two children born in 2019 and 2021. They'd be entitled to 8 weeks of parental leave. But in Spain, they are told that they had three when the child was born, and they can have three after the birth. But they can't have those either, because the legislation wasn't enforced.
And then they can also run the risk of losing the last two weeks because this is only available to parents whose children were born after 08/02/2024. And so what we are saying to the petitions committee is that you've already looked at a similar petition last in 2024, and you concluded that the legislation was not acceptable because it was an inadequate transposition of the directive. And, therefore, if the petitioner committee has already looked at this and found that the legislation is adequate, then the conclusion is clear, and the legislation in Spain should be amended. Thank you.
Thank.
Bogdan Rzońca
thank you very much. So now moving on to the commission representative from the Directorate General for Justice and Consumers, DG Just.
Speaker 24
Yes. Go ahead. Thank you very much, dear chair. Thank you, honorable members. Thank you, dear petitioner.
I would first like to thank you for such a detailed and clear presentation, and also for approaching us with this important question, as the correct transposition and implementation of European legislation, including this directive, is one of the priorities of the commission. The European Commission is dedicated to ensuring that this directive is implemented correctly and that citizens have the possibility to use all the rights guaranteed. And issues like this one raised here also give us valuable information to use when monitoring implementation. At the moment, we are in the process of compliance check of the national legislation of all member states with the provisions of this directive. So all potential issues of compliance are being verified by the commission at the moment.
I would just first like to say a few words on the process because the European Commission has already identified issues concerning the transposition of parental leave provision concerning mothers employed in the private sector in Spain after the deadline for the transposition of this directive expired in August 2022, as the provision transposing this minimal duration of the parental leave for this group of mothers has not been notified to the commission. And this was one of the reasons why the infringement procedure was initiated against Spain that led to the case before the Court of Justice. And the court of justice reached a decision in August 2025, and found that indeed Spain failed to comply with its obligation concerning the transposition. The European Commission is now assessing if Spain notified all the legislation and if the infringement could be closed. And in parallel, the commission is assessing the substance of the notified measure.
And this compliance check covers then the entire implementation of the directive in all the member states. And if the commission considers that a member state legislation does not comply with the requirements of the directive, it may open infringement proceedings. And in this process of compliance check, the commission is cooperating with the member states, raising the potential transposition implementation issues. When it comes to substance, there are a couple of points that I would like to mention and clarify here. First, the petitioner raises here the issue of Spain using existing maternity leave provisions to comply with the minimal requirements of directive concerning parental leave provisions.
And, basically, work life balance directive allows such approach in its article 20, which allows member states that for the purpose of complying with the provisions on paternity, parental, and carers leave, member states may take into account periods of family related leaves if they, basically, go above the minimum standards provided for in the directive and provided that the minimal requirements for such leaves are met and the general protection of workers is not reduced. Therefore, using existing leave to comply with the requirements concerning parental leave might be compliant with directive provided that these conditions are met. And that's something that we are checking at the moment, during this compliance check. Second, when it comes to the uptake of parental leave and the age of children until which the parental leave should be basically available for parents to use. Directive basically says specifies the age. So directive says that national provision should allow that parental leave is being used until the specified age of the child, up to age 8, and this age can be specified by each member state or by collective agreement.
And, the way how this should be decided is basically with the view to ensuring that each parent is able to exercise their right to parental leave effectively and on an equal basis. And when it comes to this limitation, the petitioner mentioned that the uptake of leave is basically limited to those that have children or adopt children after a certain date. That's the limitation that does not exist as such in the directive. However, what we are notified what we are basically assessing at the moment is if the notified provisions by Spain require go beyond the minimal requirements of the directive, or if this limitation actually also applies to the minimal duration of parental leave that is guaranteed by the directive. Because if this is for just top up of the existing duration, the minimal duration, their member states have the freedom to decide on some potential limitations.
However, if it comes to that, this is a limitation that also applies to the minimal duration of the parental leave, their member states have to stay within the limits, and they have to respect the directive. Therefore, in conclusion, as regards compliance with the directive in substance, including the compliance of the provisions on parental leave and those of this royal decree nine from 2025 that the petitioner refers to. The commission is at the moment in the process of assessment of the national legislation and verifying if the provisions are actually in line with the directive. Thank you very much.
Bogdan Rzońca
Thank you so much. We have a problem. Seven speakers want to speak. Okay. Everyone should have only two minutes.
Okay? Okay. Accept it. Yes. The first, madam Nevada Campo.
Elena Nevado del Campo
Thank you so much, President.
You. I'm going to speak Spanish as I habitually do. First of all, thank you to the petitioner for speaking and for bringing this petition to us, because we are pleased to try to encourage Spain to do what they should be doing vis a vis families, because birth rates are declining in our family in Spain, and therefore, we need to have every piece of assistance that's provided for under European legislation available. This is leave for parents, for mothers, for fathers who want to take time off work to spend with their children. And the Spanish government should be doing its utmost to ensure that it complies with the spirit and the letter of the European directive.
So this is a right which is precisely intended to help families who have children under the age of 8 years. Parental leave is recognized as paid leave at the European level, and it is available to families with children up to the age of eight. So obstacles should not be put in the path of these families. The petitioner has raised some interesting points and has been quite articulate in saying that this legislation as it is came along rather late in the day. And in 2024, Spain introduced it.
It should have been introduced two years before that. So that also is a breach of the legal provisions of the European Union, and also means that there's policy injustice vis-à-vis the families in Spain who would be entitled to this. So this is an injustice that's being perpetrated against families in general, but also those who are not eligible because of the date of birth of their children, because the legislation didn't come into force until 2024. So for all these reasons, we think the petition should be kept open. Thank you.
Idoia Mendia
Thank you, Ter. I will speak in Spanish. The
Spanish government has been doing everything it can to promote work-life balance and family policy, and has been doing so consistently. 2029, this directive goes beyond the minimum standards which member states are required to implement. Over and above the minimum, they're allowed to go past the legislation and use the passerall clause if they so wish. The changes which have been introduced by directive five, by the decree 05/3033, introduce modifications to this, which means that you can have the eight weeks up to the age of eight either as a block or in blocks of less number of weeks. This, therefore, implements the legislation that was introduced at the European level.
There's also leave at the time of birth, which is not transferable. This is allocated from the birth onwards. So we then have the question of the three additional weeks, two of which are available up to the age of 8 years. The eight year eight weeks, which is provided for under the directive, has been introduced into Spanish legislation, and Spain wants to keep the leave available and have a reasonable level of pay ensured. But the directive seeking to try to approximate legislation across a number of different countries has actually led to a situation where there's differential rights across the various member states for parents of children under eight.
Of course, the idea is that they could be able to work part time or shorter days, and be treated properly in their workplace despite taking shorter hours. The directive provides for remunerated parental leave. Excuse me, chairman. I wanted to ask a question to the commission. No.
It was a question about the fact that it appears that there has been a breach of the provisions in some parts of the Spanish private sector. So I would like to know a bit more from the commission about that, please.
Missus De la Pisa Carreon.
Thank.
Margarita de la Pisa Carrión
you. The directive on work-life balance and right to parental leave provides an obligation to provide paid parental leave, which is different from leave at birth. It is intended to facilitate work-life balance in the longer term. Spain is not complying with its obligations of transposing these provisions within the specified term, and therefore has been fined €7,000,000 by the court for breach of legislation, and all the Spanish taxpayers are going to have to pay this. These provisions on work-life balance have got to be implemented, and it is in a temporal way as well as in terms of the actual specific provisions that the Spanish government of Pedro Sanchez is actually violating the provisions of the directive.
This is holding back social progress, and therefore, my group feels strongly that we've got to be able to support parents so that they can spend time with their children, not just when they're born, but later on down the line, too. It's very important that parents are there to support children in physical, psychological, and cognitive development. And we therefore need to support them in every way we can to ensure that they can spend more time with their children. This is just another example of the way that the Spanish government is mistreating children and families and is simply putting financial burdens on them rather than respecting the rights which have been put in place and voted through parliament to support them. And this is not an isolated case either.
There has been a problem also with the directive eleven fifty one on VAT for independent workers. And so, overall, we would like to request that this petition be kept open.
Thank.
Two minutes.
Diego Solier
Thank you. Well, we've been given a lot of context and background here by both our colleague from the Patriots and the EPP. So I can just take a bit of time and say we want the petition to be left open. Thank you.
Isabel Serra Sánchez
Thank you. It's even more difficult to have children in our country. This is self-evident, and it's so difficult. We're struggling to find jobs, public sector services, work-life balance, access to services and support, school, assistance in school. I mean, the mothers in particular are absolutely drowning in problems, as many studies show.
So we have parental leave as decreed by Europe, and this is for our purpose. And the Spanish government must recognize this. It's actually violating the fundamental rights which have been entrenched at the European level that parents can take eight weeks of parental leave up to the age of eight. I've got plenty of friends who are trying to do this, and they just can't seem to get this 8 weeks of paid leave in place. Although they have this right, as soon as they try to take it, it is impossible for them.
They're told that it will not be paid if they do take it because they've already had parental or paternity or maternity leave at the time of the birth of the child. And we're talking about a lot of children who were born before 2024, plenty of children who are being discriminated against completely because of the improper way in which the Spanish government is applying this. And we're, of course, in the situation now where it's costing tens of thousands a day to pay this fine, which the Spanish government has incurred from breaching the legislation and being sued before the Court of Justice. So I think that it is absolutely vital that we get our government to modify the legislation. And I'd also just like to say to her spokesman from Foxwood, it's not really right for you to be complaining about what the government is doing, because you always vote against extension of any sort of leave.
You've been doing so quite consistently since 2018. Every time we've tried to improve work-life balance, you simply vote against the provisions that would actually enhance family life and protect family life and make it easier for parents to spend time with their children. So you can't have it both ways. Thank you.
Alvise Pérez
Thank you very much. I too would like this petition to be kept open. But what I'd like to add is that it is important that we have legitimate arguments behind our position, and it is absolutely vital that we recognize this, and there's no point in trying to play party politics here and scoring points off our political opponents. What is important is that we put in make a reality of the provisions that are actually there in law already. Thank you.
Maria Zacharia
Fully support this petitioner because it is. It promotes the incorrect transposition of European directive for the work-life balance. This directive establishes the right of all citizens to work, and have flexibility, and not to be absorbed by their employment right after birth. Well, in this case, we didn't have an independent right, but it was actually established through a bridge clause. A separate parental leave was only established as a paid separate leave.
And of course, we have families with children below the age of 8 that are left out of this measure. And the commission itself initiated a process against this. So this discussion refers to all member states, Greece as well, where access to parental leave depends to a great extent on whether a family can support the person who won't be working. However, this is not what should happen. We should have the right not on paper.
We should have the ability to exercise this right in practice. So it's not the formal part of the directive, but the essence that should be examined, and we should direct this petition to the relevant committee.
Speaker 20
Thank you very much. I'm here. Won't take two minutes, and I'll do this in English to make sure that I don't speak too fast, and apologies for that again. I will just refer this committee to Petition 865-20 24. There is a saying, and I'm literally translating now, but if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it must be a duck.
Well, in this case, if the current outcome of the Spanish implementation for this example, for this petitioner exactly matches what this committee on petitions already deemed insufficient in 2024, the conclusion is that the transposition must have been incorrect. And that's why we ask this committee to keep this open and progress it as appropriate. Thank you very much.
Tac Giacobello?
Bogdan Rzońca
Yes. Thank you very much. And that will be the case. The petition stays open, and we'll await the reply from the commission. This brings us on to item eight, Petition 1569-25 by a Spanish citizen on behalf of the Grouponidas por laihuada de Linguistica, the group united for linguistic quality on the language requirements imposed by the Basque Health Service on health care professionals.
The petitioners are not here, so I shall hand the floor to a representative from the Commission from the DG for Justice and Consumers.
Yes, please.
Speaker 35
Thank you very much. As regards the petition, the commission would like to state that it ensures that fundamental rights and, in particular, the right to nondiscrimination on the grounds of language as enshrined in article 21 of the charter of fundamental rights are respected when implementing EU law. And it has to be recalled, though, that the charter applies in accordance with article 51(1), which is that rights of the charter are addressed to member states when they are in the field of implementation of EU law. In that matter, pursuant to article four two of the treaty of the European Union, the union shall respect the national identities of the member states inherited in their fundamental structures, political and constitutional, inclusive of regional and local self government. The regime of co-official languages to be used by and before national public bodies pertains to those fundamental structures, and it is for the national law to determine such regime in accordance with the constitutional order of that member state and their obligations under international law.
Speaker 36
Therefore, in the opinion of the commission, the question remains a matter of national law, and it's directly related to the member states' autonomy in defining their linguistic and administrative systems. Thank you very much.
Elena Nevado del Campo
We now move on to the political groups. Go ahead. Yes. Thank you, Chairman, Mr. Navarro del Campo.
I would like to highlight the fact that the petitioners have submitted this petition to the European Parliament. But I'd like to stress the fact that the petitioners are not questioning protection of the linguistic rights, language rights of citizens or of their patients. What they are questioning is that a linguistic policy can turn into an obstacle, a barrier. And this is what we're discussing here today. There's a disproportionate obstacle for these people to be able to work in the public health sector and ensuring that the patients get the best care possible.
Very many doctors, nurses, health care staff who've been working for many years in the Basque public health system are asking for proportionality when it comes to them being able to provide their services. 80% of the workplaces in the Basque country include this aspect in their linguistic profile, when only 5% of the patients ask to be attended in Nuuskeda in the Basque language. So what should have been a merit, as it were, has been turned into an obstacle. And we know that there is a lack of doctors and health care professionals and labor in general in hospitals. And we've seen that in Spain at the moment, doctors, health care professionals on strike in hospitals elsewhere because there's a lack of recognition for them to have their own statute, as it were.
So we can't put more obstacles in their path. If you go to the hospital, you don't ask what language you're going to be addressed in. You just want to make sure that there's a doctor there who can look after you. What we also find surprising is that the socialist party in Uvskad in the Basque country won in 2016 in the autonomous elections. They had the election information saying that if you don't know Basque, then you won't be able to come into public administration.
And this is an unfair situation that we want to do away with. They're now in power with the vast national party, the PNV, and no changes have been made. So we feel that this discrimination should mean that the petition remains open. Thank you. S and D, Mrs.
Idoia Mendia
Mendia. Yes. Thank you, Chairman. First of all, I would like to thank the group of nurses that have got in touch with our committee so that we are aware of their situation. I am familiar with the problem, and we are trying to help them.
We as socialists have been calling for some time now that the linguistic policy in the Basque country be changed, setting different linguistic requirements for different zones, etc., in line with the needs of the citizens and adapting the knowledge of Basque, the Basque language, to each specific job or sector. And we arrived at an agreement last year with a new linguistic decree. The administration has to make the most of the human resources it has, rather than undermine the potential because of the linguistic policy. So with these principles at the back of our minds, then the Basque laws are based on three principles: freedom of choice for the patients when they get in touch with the administration, the obligation of the public authorities to guarantee that right, and then linguistic freedom. And we have built up the language policy in the Basque country for decades on the basis of these three principles.
And we have to try and make sure that it's applied effectively and not hinder people's access to the public authorities, the administration. We're talking about staff who have many years of experience, years of working in the administration. And this is an experience that we cannot ignore when there is a scarcity of certain types of jobs in this sector. And obviously, we insist or suggest that there be a facilitation for learning the language among all staff. But at the same time, we have to take account of the plural nature of a vast country.
I'd like to make the most of this opportunity to say something about some of the disputes over the past few weeks. I would like to express our support and solidarity with this particular group of people because they've been the target of comments in the press, the social media, by certain lobby groups, other groups, which reminds us some of the darkest times of Spanish history. So here is all our support and solidarity. Thank you. Patriots of Europe.
Juan Carlos Girauta Vidal
Thank you. If you're talking about the darkest times in Spanish history or Basque history, you're talking about the time when assassinations were happening all the time. Obviously, there's always discussion about language in those parts of Spain where you have two co-official languages, two or three co-official languages. This is something that's been happening now for decades. Obviously, this issue is disproportionate.
You can describe it as you wish, but it's disproportionate, especially bearing in mind the following. If you want to get a job as a civil servant, then knowing OSCARA, Basque language, is worth almost twice as much as having a PhD. Do you feel that is reasonable? And I say twice as much. I'm talking about 18 points for having good knowledge of the Basque language and 10 points for having a PhD.
We're not asking for preferential treatment. Others have preferential treatment. We're just asking for fairness and justice, nor are we asking for people to get a job if they can only speak Spanish because these people have shown that they're willing to learn Auschetta. But we can't do something that is nonsensical and runs counter to the interest of the patients and that you place knowledge of the co-official languages above medical knowledge and expertise, because that is a barrier, an obstacle to access, especially in places like Catalonia. I am Catalan myself.
And I'm very familiar with how protectionism, internal protectionism, not vis-à-vis those from outside, but internal protectionism against those people who are deemed to be less Catalan or less Basque in the case that we're discussing now. So racialist ethnocist approach, which has absolutely nothing to do with our understanding of the concept of democracy. So ultimately, this results in an undermining of the services. Qualified staff looks elsewhere or goes elsewhere, and I, therefore, would like this petition to remain open. Thank you.
ECR ?
Diego Solier
Soulier, thank you, Chairman. This petition raises a very sensitive issue. I. E, a balance between the respective linguistic diversity and, at the same time, a guarantee of nondiscrimination. Nobody questions the existence of co-official languages. I come from a part of Spain where there is a Valencian.
But there are certain linguistic registers that are being applied in a disproportionate way, which means that some health staff members are unable to continue to work in certain parts of Spain. And this isn't good for either the health care staff or the patients because they can't access health service. And then I think what is more important for citizens, if there is a scarcity of health care personnel, which is the case in Spain, this represents an obstacle to the sector. So obviously, any linguistic policy has to be proportionate. And at no time should it be seen as an element of exclusion and be valued more than knowledge and expertise, because ultimately, we want to guarantee the rights of the professionals but not undermine the right of patients and citizens to having good quality health care.
Alvise Pérez
Not attached. Merci. Much. Thank you very much, Mr. President. Yes.
We'll be brief. On social media, we've managed to talk to a couple of people who haven't been able to come to the meeting today. They want to remain anonymous because they don't really want, they were really afraid of the media impact of this particular issue. The lady who talked about domestic terrorism, we know, of course, we've got PNEV, Bill do. They're in the government.
There are about 30 members of these parties who've got blood on their hands, who are responsible now for this linguistic apartheid. So it's not only the separatist regionalist parties in the Basque Country that are applying this, but also the Partido Popular in Valencia or in Catalonia. So this is an endemic evil in my country, Spain. And this is why we would ask the committee and the chair to keep the petition open, so that we can solve it as soon as possible. Thank you.
Bogdan Rzońca
The petition will remain open in the light of your comments, and obviously, we'll wait for the written reply from the Commission. Item nine, Petition 16-35-25, which has been submitted by Fotzios Patzios from Greece on the alleged incompatibility of a draft employment law in Greece with EU law on workers' rights and protections. The petitioner is connected remotely. So if I could turn to our technical services to make sure that the petitioner is connected.
Good afternoon.
Speaker 41
Good afternoon, chairman, dear MEPs, ladies and gentlemen. My petition refers to the compatibility of a recent Greek law regarding working time and its compatibility with the EU law and more specifically directive 2000 and 388 EC. This legislation introduces the possibility to have daily work up to 13 hours within the same employer. And of course, in practice, this creates a system whereby the duration of work reaches a level that raises important questions as regards compatibility with European law. The directive has set some minimum standards as regards working time and rest time, as well as weekly working limits.
And the purpose is to protect health and safety. The European Court of Justice has repeatedly stressed that these rules are fundamental measures of protection of workers' health and safety. Furthermore, this is an expression of the fundamental right enshrined in Article 31 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights. According to this article, each worker has the right to safe and just working conditions, to a certain limit of working hours, and, of course, enough rest time. For that reason, this is not only a technical or legislative issue.
It has to do with fundamental social rights because excessive working time is connected with burnout. Burnout is a syndrome resulting from chronic workplace stress that has not been successfully managed, according to the WHO. For that reason, the protection of workers' rights does not only have to do with health, but also with mental welfare. Of course, it also has to do with Directive 89/391, which has to do with the prevention of risks related to work. And, of course, I would also like to stress that an employee's individual consent does not always constitute a genuinely free choice.
There is an imbalance of power between employer and employee. And under the Greek law, the so-called managerial prerogative of the employer applies. For that reason, EU law provides minimum limits of protection that do not depend on individual consent. And this also has to do with the European pillar of social rights, according to which workers in the EU have to have high levels of protection of their health and safety at work and a better work-life balance. Ladies and gentlemen, the main issue in this petition is that the introduction of a provision allowing for a 13-hour working day raises serious questions as regards the implementation of European rules on workers' health and safety.
For that reason, I would like to ask the petitions committee to carefully examine the compatibility of these Greek provisions with EU law, and ask for clarifications by the European Commission about the implementation of the working time directive. Please keep my petition open until the whole issue is clarified. Thank you for your attention.
Bogdan Rzońca
Thank you. And I'd now like to give the floor to the commission from the DG for Employment, Social Affairs, and Inclusion. DG Empel. Go ahead, please.
Speaker 42
Thank you, Chair, and thank you also to the petitioner for presenting his petition. As he has said, he asks basically to check compliance of a law that has recently been adopted with, in particular, the working time directive. And he has stressed that, in particular, he is concerned that the law introduces the possibility of daily working time of 13 hours. But in his written petition, he has added a few other aspects that also he says have been introduced by this law. Namely, on the working time, he says there is a problem with the average weekly working time of 48 hours and, with the recording of working time, which is being relaxed.
He also raises an issue with Social Security because he says overtime is exempt from Social Security contributions. And finally, he says it introduces a possibility for an accelerated procedure for dismissals without offering proper protection. Now this petition concerns a law that was adopted in October, and it is called Fair Work for All. It's not specific on working time, but it actually addresses or makes amendments to various laws on different topics. Actually, it's a very long law of 103 articles.
They include working hours and management of working time, but completely other aspects as well, like parental benefits and flexibility. So it's a very wide law. On the working time itself, I think the petitioner had already briefly referred to it. It lays down minimum safety and health requirements. And in general terms, it sets limits on the working time and minimum required rest.
More specifically, and in somehow in relation to what the petitioner has raised in his specific points in the written petition, the directive requires eleven hours of daily rest per twenty four hour period, and it gives a right to a weekly rest period of twenty four hours, then it determines that the average working time per week may not be more than forty eight hours calculated over a four month reference period. These reference periods may, under certain conditions, also be extended up to one year, but then only if it's a collective agreement between an employer and, well, between the social partners. And finally, it is also correct that the court has held to ensure all these rights, that there must be a recording of the working time. Now, what does this mean? In short, it means that the working time does not prohibit thirteen hours per daily work, but, and that's very important, there are further limits, namely, especially the 48 hours per week that may not be exceeded.
Therefore, the working time directive does indeed not allow for every workday to be 13 hours. Insofar as the petitioner had mentioned social security, that is not at least the aspect that he raises, is not a matter of EU law because EU law does not harmonize social security, so it's left for each member state to determine from what benefits will we or from what payments will we deduct benefits. Similar for the individual dismissals, there is no general EU law on individual dismissals. They may be prohibited for certain reasons of discrimination, but individual dismissals, the procedure, the reasons, this is all left to national law. So this means, in conclusion, that we are still assessing this petition, in particular, whether the amendments comply with the working time directive.
And because I've said it's such a big law, we are currently consulting our academic network to be able to match the points that the petitioner has raised with actually specific articles in the law. And we are still waiting for the final response from our experts. Once this is there, then we will assess the petition against this information and provide a written reply. And depending on the outcome, the commission is, of course, the guardian of the treaty and may decide to take action on this. Thank you.
Bogdan Rzońca
Yes. Thank you very much. We now move on to the political groups. Pelaris.
Fredis Beleris
Thank you, Chair. I would like to start by thanking the petitioner for the opportunity he has given us to discuss a very important issue and make a distinction between reality and impressions that are created by some people. As regards the new draft of the new law on working time in Greece, there are a few things that we should make clear. Eight hours are, of course, protected, and eleven hours of daily rest are also fully protected. It is not a generalized measure to have thirteen working hours per day, but it has to do with the express employees' consent, who is also protected from adverse treatment in case of refusal.
Indicatively, I should say that only 0.14% of people and enterprises in Greece have used this measure. The draft law does not include only one provision. It has to do with a four-day week, social benefits, introduces stricter rules on health and safety. Actually, the opposition parties voted in favor of this law. With the digital work card, we record real working time, and thus we have effective and targeted controls.
The labor inspectorate has been strengthened in terms of human resources and frequency of controls, thus ensuring that the immediate identification and tackling of infringements. And, of course, we know that this matter has to do with the man of the state's competence, so I believe that this petition should be closed.
Thank you.
Mister Solier.
No. Okay.
Konstantinos Arvanitis
Thank you, chair. First of all, I've heard both the petitioner and the commission who said that they are assessing, they are evaluating. I would like to help you with your evaluation. The Greek government falsely calls on the EU to justify thirteen hours in the twentieth century and says that thirteen hours of work are imposed by the EU. In reality, the recent law violates Article 31 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which specifies that each worker has a right to a maximum duration of working time and proper working conditions.
Chris is a protagonist of accidents at work, occupational accidents, by far. So trade unions have no longer the competence to regulate working conditions and working time or weekly work as it was the case in the past. And it is the managerial prerogative to regulate working time threshold. And this means that workers have a burnout. We have several occupational accidents, and work-life balance is not taken care of.
So we have psychosocial consequences for the whole population. So the community law that has to do with working time set some minimal minimum protection limits and have to be applied cumulatively on each worker. I would like to finish by saying that this petition has to remain open and be referred to the employment committee, where I am a member. Thank you.
Madame Zakaria.
Maria Zacharia
This petition on working time in Greece is not a theoretical draft law. It's backsliding on working rights in Greece. I would like to thank the petitioner for bringing this to the European Parliament. I had submitted a written question. I said that the Greek law is incompatible with the relevant directive of the European Union.
And, of course, it does not guarantee the real right of workers to rest. The European Commission said that thirteen hours are applied only if we have the eleven daily rest hours, twenty-four hours per week, and forty-eight hours per week, and forty hours of rest per week. However, this draft became a law, and it now expands the working hours to 13 with the same employer. If some people want to say that this is social progress, no. It is not.
It is a way to justify burnout, especially now that working rights are regulated through individual agreements. And, of course, we have some new exceptions to the digital card, and this makes the recording of daily working time even more difficult. How do we ensure in practice workers' health, safety, and rest when we have more working hours, less collective protections, and more precarity? At the same time, the European Court of Justice requires that we have an objective and accessible system for working time recording. So I would propose the commission, when they want to have real data about whether directives are implemented in Greece, they should, first of all, check with the labor inspectorate.
It's nowhere. There is nothing like that. We only have the managerial prerogative, and the employees cannot contradict their employer, because they will lose their job. So, yeah, I ask you that you keep this petition open, and we want the commission to give an updated evaluation on the previous framework, on the existing framework, and to ask for an opinion from the employment committee. Thank you.
This is excellent.
Thank you.
Speaker 41
I will not use my 2 minutes. Thank you very much, if it's the petitioner. The only thing I would like to stress is that the February 8 directive specifies minimum standards, but in practice workers' consent is not always free because there is this imbalance in the working relationship. And this is why the European law has set minimum limits. And this should not depend on individual consent exclusively.
Thank you very much, and goodbye.
Bogdan Rzońca
Thank you very much. The petition remains open, and we wait for the written reply of the European Commission. Right. We move on to item 10, petition number 182925.
Yes, please.
Konstantinos Arvanitis
I apologize for the interruption. The letter has asked you to refer this petition to the employment committee. Can I have an answer to that? It's a very specific question.
Bogdan Rzońca
So 10/2025, which has been submitted by Jose Miguel Abraila San Juan from Spain on behalf of the association, Onco Vierto. The petition is about inequality and access to essential public health services in rural areas. I think the petitioner is in the room. Is that right? Yes?
Okay.
Speaker 51
Members of Parliament, today, I'm here representing a region in Spain, El Bierzo, a territory in Europe, which is suffering from inequality when it comes to the public health sector. We don't come for privileges. We have come for equality because the European community is built on protecting the dignity of the people who live in its rural areas. This initiative began in civil society. We are oncological patients.
We are looking for equality and minimum public services, especially in oncology in our area, something that is not being fulfilled. We have a lack of personnel, and there are delays in treatment and diagnosis. This leads to a lack of health care and problems in our public health sector. Public health cannot just depend on where you live. We everyone in Europe needs to be guaranteed the same public health care.
We're here today because in our community and in many remote areas in Europe, the same thing is happening. There is a lack of specialists or lack of resources who are there to guarantee something so basic as diagnosis, treatment, and dignity in treatment. We have experienced this firsthand in our own hospital. We didn't have an oncologist. We were getting a different oncologist in every single visit, but there was also a lack of cardiologists, radiologists, pediatricians, surgeons, and so on.
And when this happens, the consequences are not just statistics. They are people with names and families. One medical appointment delayed is one more day of being sick. A delayed diagnosis can be fatal. I have spent nights waiting for calls from the hospital.
Speaker 52
For us, for the patients, this waiting is a lot of time. That's why the citizens decided not to put up with this anymore. I will continue. We are looking for equality in health care. It's unjust that that the patients are not having this.
Your postal code should not determine the level of health care you receive. The fact that there should this is something so simple that should reach all European citizens, and this is why we brought this petition to the European Union. This is a structural European problem, and we are looking for measures to correct it. We want professional professionals to be brought to these areas. We want investment into remote areas with different geographic factors and aging.
This should not depend on your postal code. Rural communities all around Europe are demanding high quality public health, and this involves protecting the European project because health is laid down in the charter of fundamental rights of the European Union. And these fundamental rights should not be determined by how far away you live from the capital. Members of parliament, we need equality in the healthcare system. This is something so simple.
We cannot fail. We cannot fail the patients. We cannot fail those who are fighting against an illness, against those with cancer. We are failing the people in remote areas. When a person, when a sick, when an ill person feels alone, Europe is failing them.
But when we help them, we are defending the European project. This goes beyond political borders. Health has to be protected. Thank you.
Bogdan Rzońca
Thank you. DiGi Santé. Is there somebody from DiGi Santé? From the European Commissioner? Yes.
Go ahead.
Speaker 53
Thank you very much, chair. The commission would like to thank the petitioner for bringing to its attention the challenges faced by patients in Castilla León, for highlighting that these issues are not isolated, but that they affect other regions across Europe as well. Your message helps keep these important concerns visible and part of the broader European discussion on health systems. The European Commission fully recognizes the seriousness of these challenges and reflects them in the evidence gathered through the state of health knowledge-brokering process. This process helps bring together data analysis and insights from across the EU to better understand the pressures facing health systems.
At the same time, it is important to recall that under the treaty on the functioning of the European Union, health policy is primarily a national competence. Member states are responsible for organizing and delivering health services and medical care, and the European Commission cannot intervene directly in decisions taken by national authorities regarding the delivery of health care. Nevertheless, the commission plays an active role in supporting member states in addressing health system challenges, and Spain benefits from several of these efforts. For example, issues related to shortages of health professionals and regional disparities in the allocation of resources were highlighted in the European semester country report for Spain in the '25 cycle, helping guide policy discussions and reforms. In addition, Spain benefits from EU financial support aimed at helping to strengthen its health system.
For instance, through the Spanish recovery and resilience plan, around €2,400,000,000 has been earmarked to reinforce the health system and improve the quality of care. These investments include the renovation of infrastructure and equipment, with particular attention to addressing regional disparities. Also, under the 21-27 cohesion policy program, Spain receives around €1,600,000,000 in complementary investments. In particular, the autonomous community of Castilla Leon benefits from projects co-funded by the European Regional Development Fund, supporting the deployment of technological solutions and the renewal and acquisition of high-technology equipment in regional hospitals. The European Social Fund Plus also contributes by supporting actions that improve access to health care for vulnerable groups.
Also, Spain is engaged in several EU initiatives addressing health workforce shortages, including the joint action HEROES on health workforce planning, the nursing action, and training programs that strengthen digital skills among health professionals. In conclusion, while the European Commission cannot directly intervene in the organization of Spain's health system, it remains strongly committed to supporting member states and tackling health system challenges. Through policy coordination, evidence sharing, and substantial financial investment, the EU continues to work alongside Spain to strengthen health care systems and improve outcomes for patients. I thank you, Chair.
Bogdan Rzońca
Six speakers are registered. Two minutes for every speaker. Monsieur madame Gonzalez Lopez, please.
Speaker 55
Apologies, chair. There was apologies. On behalf of the European Commission, we also had the contribution of the colleagues. Apologies if that was not clear. I'm sorry.
For that.
Speaker 57
So the commission is also active in supporting member states and regions, including Spain, in building capacity and exchanges good practices as well on the delivery of health services in rural areas, primarily because this is a national competence, in fact. And in June 2021, the commission adopted the long-term vision for the use of rural areas, which offered a comprehensive European approach towards stronger, connected, resilient, and prosperous rural areas by 2040. And one of the main objectives of the vision was exactly to promote access to basic services, and health and medical care is one of them. As part of the rule action plan, we had one specific action in cooperation with DG Connect to support broadband coverage in rural areas that is one of the ways also to access e services such as e health. And as part of the Rural Pact, the commission and the World Health Organization organized a webinar to exchange practices and enhance, in fact, access to health services in rural areas.
Speaker 56
This is perhaps the outcome of it, are perhaps relevant as well to the very important issue that the petitioner raised. And the European Commission remains strongly committed to supporting member states and regions in exchanging practices and building their capacity in relation to the health care system. Thank you very much.
Sandra Gómez López
You, chair. Firstly, I'd like to thank the petitioners for bringing this petition and the effort that they have made to come to the European Parliament today. This brings a question that my group would like to speak about, which is the fact that public health is a fundamental right. What is happening in the LBRSO hospital is not just a technical problem. It is a political problem.
And the Castile Leon government is responsible for this because there is a problem behind it. If there's a lack of oncologists for years and diagnosis are delayed, when treatment is interrupted and when the patients have to travel kilometers from their home in order to receive treatment, this is not a coincidence. It is happening because there is a problem behind it. This has to do with the management for decades and the planning for decades in Castile and León. There aren't enough places.
There's not enough initiatives for rural areas. Hospitals and health centers are not being kept or maintained. I understand what is happening with the petitioners. There is a constant lack of specialists. Patients are suffering in their treatment.
This is the people that are suffering from cancer have a particularly great problem here. I hope that the government of Castilla can give a response to this. This has to be done. People need to be treated properly. People who are suffering from cancer, these people are not even being guaranteed high-quality treatment simply because they live in a rural area.
And this is why this goes beyond LBR. So people that there has to be the same health care for people that live in a city and that live in rural areas. If we want to protect rural areas in all of the European territory and at the same time, we're fighting against depopulation, we have to guarantee a basic health care for these people. And that's why it's important that this petition remains open. The socialist group would like to propose that this goes to the Sante Committee.
I will also send a letter to the government of Castilla and Leon to bring in urgent structural measures to guarantee the correct functioning of the hospital in El Bierso and for all of the hospitals in the rural areas of its territory.
Juan Carlos Girauta Vidal
You, chair. Of course, Alberso doesn't have a lack of oncologists and other specialists, but it's very concerning in the case of cancer because you need more proximity and continuity in the treatment. You can't interrupt the treatment. It's the part the People's Party is not represented here today. But only recently, I denounced this situation in the media, and the people from the EPP were very hostile.
They were saying that I was lying. No. We were not lying. There is a problem, which is the typical lack of provisions, the health care in a very low population area. This is not just a Spanish problem, but in this case, it refers to Spain.
There are many signatures and other colleagues who may not be Spanish who may not be Spanish can think of the problem here. The problems that we're facing as a society that wants equality in services, that does not want citizens to be discriminated against. And it doesn't, we have areas where are very depopulated in areas with lots of people. But in these areas, people are getting older, and there's a lack of infrastructure. The people that are responsible for health in this area deny the problem.
In Spain, health is decentralized. It is a competency of the autonomous governments, and the government of Castile and León denies the existence of this problem. This is a double problem, a triple problem. Because if you don't recognize that not just the fact that there are many days there aren't oncologists, sometimes you have to go from your home to other places, and they say it's not attractive for doctors to go there. Well, if you don't recognize that there's a problem, you're not going to begin to create incentives to encourage specialists to go there.
You won't design a financing model, an adequate model that keeps in mind the circumstances of these areas. I'd just like to add that this problem will be resolved soon because the government in Castilla Leon will not be able to form itself without VOXX.
Thank.
Diego Solier
You, chair. This is not an ideological debate. It goes beyond that. It's not left versus right. It's a question of basic justice.
What is happening in El Bierzo is not an anomaly. It's a clear structural problem. There this problem cannot exist. When it comes to accessing a specialist depends on your postal code, health care becomes a privilege, and this is unacceptable. There are no statistics.
These are not statistics. There are lives at risk. There is uncertainty. And this is why we need we're opening keeping open these hospitals is a democratic obligation. We need to guarantee that equality is a reality.
It should not depend on where you live. Thank you.
Vicent Marzà Ibáñez
You, Chair, and thank you to the petitioners, not just for being here today, but also for fighting every day for a right that should not just be recognized, but also guaranteed for every European citizen no matter where you live. I think this is a key issue. It's key to the existence of the European Union, but it goes beyond the debates of the competencies for different administrations. But these rights should be guaranteed for all citizens, and that's why I insist on some of the previous interventions that we should guarantee this. But there shouldn't be any questioning about this in the parliament.
There are MEPs that question granting health equality within the European Union, whether it's a rural area or an urban area. And this is what is happening. It happens every day. It happens every day in El Bierzo. It happens with cancer patients, but it also happens with other patients and in other specialties because there is a financing model that instead of guaranteeing, sir, public services well wealths that are well financed with good working conditions for the professionals, the public health system is being degraded in favor of the private health care system.
So it's very clear that we need a consensus that goes beyond political discourse. All people need to be able to access services, no matter what. That's why the public health system should be guaranteed good financing. The petitioners are we agree 100% what these petitioners are asking for. We give them all our support.
I think, as has been said before, that this committee should be sending a letter to the competent government, the government of Castile and Leon, so that they ask them to guarantee equality in the access of publics of public health services. With its new governments, we'll see whether they comply or not. But this needs to be guaranteed now. We need to take action. The commission said for the new MFF, MFF that they will comply with its duty to finance these regions.
We need to make sure that these funds reach the rural areas. The commission needs to comply with the financing that follows the rights of all of the citizens. This applies to the area of health care. And it's thanks to groups like the colleagues from El Vierso who have been fighting for years for something essential. People should be treated not depending on their postal code, but based on a just health care system.
Missus Saro?
Isabel Serra Sánchez
You, chair. We are continuously listening to speeches that say there is a problem that we hear people saying people from the right saying that migrants are the problem. They create insecurity. The access to the health care system is not guaranteed. Health care is not guaranteed.
You could have cancer and not be treated when you need to be treated by professionals in the moment that it is needed to be. Sometimes you have something that is preventative, ends up becoming incurable, and becomes fatal. Thank you to the petitioners for bringing this petition today, because it's key that the institutions listen to what's happening in LBRSO and not just in LBRSO. I am grateful that they have done this, because this involves the rights of all citizens. It's not just about El Beerso.
We need to protect health and public health care. This goes much beyond LBR. So this is a critical situation, but it's not just a single case. It shows the lack of access to health care in rural areas and the disequilibrium that our country is expensing and the deterioration of the public health care system. I agree that the cause of all of this is a systematic strategy that is trying to take away the public health care system in order to favor private company, private health care systems, which have external services.
There are many citizens that can only access there are only certain citizens that access this insurance. I hope that people listen to this petition and that in this specific case, the health ministry in Spain will do something, and the government of Castilla Leon should be requesting this help. I hope that this petition stays open, and I will also send a formal letter to the government of Castile and León, to urge them to take action, and also to the government of Spain because that's necessary to deal with the situation. The SANT committee will be writing a report when it comes to the access to health care in rural areas. We also think it's key to organize a joint visit by the health, by the SANT committee to see firsthand what is happening in El Berso and to understand what is, what's happening with all of the people in Spain in rural area.
Mr. Perez.
Alvise Pérez
Thank you, Mr. President. Thank.
you. I'm also very surprised. I was very surprised by the superficiality that comes up when we talk about guarantee rates guaranteeing rights. This is something we've heard about 20 times in the last four speeches. When I was eight years old, I was a better speaker than some of my colleagues.
I don't wanna go too deep into that. Jose de Miguel Arella San Juan, I thank you for visualizing not just something from your own, not just something that happens in my region of Andalusia, but something that also affected my mother who was a victim of cancer and all of the other people that I've been able to get to know over time. Unfortunately, I have to say that what Miss Sarah is asking for is not going to do anything. The only thing that's going to help is that VOXX and PP, when they're sharing power in Castilnion, give a bigger budget, that they give more ambulances. And so I say this from my heart.
Please do not do this. I hope that PP and Vox follow what they've promised and that they form a government there. Thank you, chair.
Speaker 52
First of all, of course, I'd like the petition to remain open. And secondly, just to clarify a few more points, we have been working for some time in this association, and, of course, we've realized that our network has spread way beyond our locality in Spain and across the border as well. And so we welcome the fact that we have this much wider ranging network. We think it's illustrative of what you can do if you take up the challenge. And if you work and you are proactive and you write those letters and you stand up for your rights, we are patients, we're people who are living with and supporting patients, people who are struggling with the way the health services are operating on the ground, and we hope that you're going to help us.
Thank you.
Bogdan Rzońca
Thank you. The petition will remain open. It is going to be referred to the Sand Committee as you have desired. And obviously, the commission is at the stage of preparing a reply to this petition. And they're going to be in touch.
They're going to contact the local authorities. So everybody's desiderata is going to be met. As I said, the petition will remain open, and we await information from the commission that they will have gleaned from the local authorities. Thank you. So this brings us to the next petition.
So this is item 11, petition number 1170 225 by a Maltese citizen on the implementation of EU directive 90 1 271 on urban wastewater treatment in Malta. And the petitioner is in the room. Is the petitioner here? Is the petitioner in the room from Malta? Yes.
Speaker 66
Thank you, Chair and honorable members. I will be speaking in both Maltese and English. Ladies.
And gentlemen, members of the European Parliament, thank you for giving me this opportunity to speak to you today. I am representing the association Flumke and Alambian Dahier. But even as a multi citizen that loves the sea. The sea is not only part of our identity, but it's also a very important resource for the environment, our culture, and our economy. I would like to talk about something that is affecting us every day.
People are going to the beach, and they're finding untreated sewage, and they're putting their lives in danger because they're swimming in seas and waters that are not clean. This is not only an environmental problem, but it is directly affecting the quality of life and the health of Maltese citizens. Last summer, there were 9 beaches that had to be closed because they were contaminated with untreated sewage. I will now switch to English.
Different locations in Malta. These represent what people are experiencing in real, everyday situations. The problem is simple. Malta has exceeded its carrying capacity. Our infrastructure can no longer cope with the scale of development and population pressure, especially our wastewater treatment sew systems.
As a result, untreated sewage is being discharged into our seas, threatening both public health and the local marine environment. This is happening in various locations across Malta, examples of which, but not limited to, Russell Hopps, Tachumnean, Meleha, and Tabarkat in Zabar. What you are seeing in the footage is sewage being discharged directly into the sea. This is a daily reality for swimmers and all those who depend on our coasts and the sea. As someone who studied the marine environment at master's level, I can say that what we are witnessing is a cumulative impact of sustained pressure on a small and vulnerable marine system.
This leads to a plethora of consequences such as deteriorating water quality, damage to marine ecosystems, public health risks, deteriorating quality of life, and loss of trust in environmental governance. And despite existing European directives, despite legal action, despite court rulings, sewage is still pouring into the sea. This raises a serious concern, as enforcement is not working. The Maltese government has already faced legal challenges at the European level, and yet the situation on the ground remains unchanged. This points to a gap not just in an implementation, but in the strength and effectiveness of the framework itself, and in political commitment.
I will be now switching back to Maltese in closing. Alec?
Therefore, we need to be very clear about what we are requesting. We are requesting the European Commission to take a stronger and more effective position. It is not enough to have a directive if this is not implemented in a realistic manner. Therefore, we are requesting that the existing laws are implemented in a better way, that the waters are monitored constantly, and that the governments are addressed, those that are not respecting the international law. Notwithstanding cases in courts, we know that untreated sewage is being discharged into the sea, and this is not acceptable.
RC is our national heritage. Not only for its is it important for the Maltese people, but for everyone in Europe and needs to be protected not only on paper, but in practice. Thank you.
Thank.
Bogdan Rzońca
you. I'll hand the floor now to the commission representative from the director-general for environment. Is there somebody here? Okay. Go ahead.
Speaker 67
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Honorable members, dear petitioner, ladies and gentlemen, due to inadequate wastewater treatment in all three agglomerations of Malta, the commission launched an infringement procedure already in 2016 for breach of the requirements of the Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive. On the basis of information provided by the Maltese authorities, compliance was expected by 2020. As such, compliance was not reached in the end, the commission referred Malta to the court of justice of the European Union in 2022. On 10/17/2024, the Court of Justice of the European Union condemned Malta for failure to fulfill its obligations regarding two agglomerations, Malta South and Malta North.
Following the judgment, the commission services asked the Maltese authorities to provide up-to-date information on the implementation of the judgment. The replies from the Maltese authorities include a list of concluded or planned future measures to address the judgment of the court, that the commission services are currently assessing. These measures encompass the development of treatment capacity at existing plants, and measures targeting agricultural waste, which seem to be a specific case of Malta. Based on data reported by Malta to the European Environment Agency for the reference year of 2022, both Malta North and Malta South urban wastewater agglomerations were deemed noncompliant with articles 4 and 5 of the urban wastewater treatment directive, while Gosselmein was deemed compliant. For 2024, the data will need to be reported by Malta by June.
The commission will not hesitate to proceed with the infringement procedure if Malta fails to ensure the proper collection and treatment of its wastewaters. In the light of the above, the commission acknowledges the concerns raised by the petitioner. The commission services are currently assessing the measures planned for the future or already carried out by the Maltese authorities to implement the judgment. The commission will take all necessary actions to ensure that the Court of Justice of the European Union ruling is fully complied with by Malta. Thank you.
Bogdan Rzońca
Thank you very much. We now move on to the political groups. Miss Agios.
Peter Agius
Thank you, chair. I'll speak in my mother tongue, the Motees language. Petitioner
I would like to thank the petitioner for explaining this petition well. I would like to say that it is very important to guarantee that our beaches are clean. But because of a lack of planning, there is a breach of this directive on a daily basis. In this European Parliament, we often speak about laws. However, law is useless if it doesn't lead to guaranteeing certain rights.
Multi citizens have a right to a clean sea, but they are going to the beach and they find it closed. As the European Commission representative said, and the petitioner also said, the European Court of Justice has analyzed this case, and there is leakage and discharge of untreated sewage in Zabar and Maliha. This is something that is affecting a lot of Maltese citizens. Maltese people love the sea, and they have always hoped that when we join the EU in 2004, we will have higher standards, higher environmental standards that will protect our environment. But we now go to swim in our seas, and we find untreated sewage.
So we are realizing that despite us joining the EU, environmental standards are not being respected. So I would like to really urge the European Commission to take this matter seriously, please. We do have this European Court of Justice judgment. The situation has remained the same, and we have endured a situation where, over the period of 10 years, the seas are not clean. So if we want people to feel that the European Union is indeed effective in its actions, we need to now pass on to action.
We would like to have this statement that has just been put forward by the commission in writing and that it will be put forward in the environmental committee and to send a letter to the Motees authorities. Thank you.
Thank you, chair.
Sandra Gómez López
Thank you very much to the petitioners, first of all, for presenting this petition. These are important questions, water discharge, and the commissioner has followed up on it intensively. It's also very important that it be followed up in Malta. This has clearly taken place too. There is a court judgment in which the court found against Malta, but we would like to, so for all these reasons, we would like to keep the petition open.
Thank you.
Oh, yes, please.
would like
Cristina Guarda
To express my solidarity because I feel that this great theme is one of the most important for people that is dealing with nature, with environment, in particular not only for the economic way, but also for the quality of their life in the places that needs to be taken care in the best way. And for this reason, given Malta's continued violation of the urban wastewater management directive, we call for the petition to remain open. And whereas the petition concerns an ongoing infringement procedure, we call for it to be kept open in line with the petty guidelines. I would also like to share with my colleagues the need to create a strategy in order to have these our European institution laws strictly respected by the member states, because we see in this committee a lot of petitions asking for us to be stronger in our activity in order to have the member states respecting in the best way the law that we take care of during our legislative activities. So I feel that we need to find a way since the normal procedure now is not enough in order to take care deeply of our territories.
So thank you very much.
Bogdan Rzońca
You. Petitioner. Two minutes. Conclusion. For your concluding remarks.
Speaker 70
Thank you for the comments. I have no further comments. I disagree with everything that was said, and I urge that the petition stay open. Thank you.
Bogdan Rzońca
Thank you. The petition will be kept open. It remains open. And obviously, there will also be, well, there was a request that questions may ask of the local authorities. And obviously, we turn to the commission and ask the commission that they get in touch with the local authorities in order to get reliable information pertaining to the situation.
So, thank you. I think we've, yes, the petition remains open. So this brings us on to item 12, Petition 140 420 25 submitted by Valentino Sovereign from Italy, signed by two others on protecting the Tagliamenta River from invasive works. And then we also have petition 5 24 25, which has been submitted by Franca Pradetto Bartel from Italy on behalf of the Assume Perilta Galliamento Association, which has been signed by 12,768 other people. And this on the alleged infringement of European environmental legislation by the Friuli Venezia Giulia region in Italy.
The petitioner of the petition is in the meeting room. Is this the case, 144? You will have five minutes. There's a second person. Which is going to be connected remotely.
Okay. Thank.
Speaker 73
Thank you very much, chairman. I'd like to thank you and the committee for having received our updated petition. It was very important for us to do this. We have submitted you the text. We don't obviously have very long here this afternoon, so I'll try to summarize as much as I can.
I think we've shown that the regional authorities have adopted a project, which was a type of dike, really. It was a project which was supposed to hold back water, but really, it was not an evidence-based design. It was something which was designed without any kind of framework of rules. It infringed the requirement to have environmental impact assessments, cost-benefit assessments, to consider alternative solutions, and to bear in mind the overall meteorological and climate conditions prevailing in the area. Also, there is no way of establishing really secure foundations in the base of this river.
Speaker 74
Therefore, this was not a project that was evidence-based. And as I've just said, there was a problem with the need to construct some kind of foundation. It was quite likely that the cons the structure would just collapse immediately because the water flow in the Taliamento and the currents under the surface are quite strong. Therefore, extremely deep and strong foundations would have been necessary to have any hope of having a viable structure. But this would have been exceptionally invasive and would have caused a great deal of distortion in the water flows and the water course, both of the surface level, but also the deep water.
Speaker 73
This water, of course, is very important for the whole of Friuli. It's a source of water for the citizens and the farmers. And, therefore, the impact when the water was high and in the case of any flooding would have been huge, and it's quite likely that such a structure would not stand up to the river being very high and the current, the flow being very strong when the river was in spate. Therefore, there are a lot of problems with this project. As I've explained to you, probably there would have been a very adverse impact on the deep waters of the Taliamento, and there would have been a very problematic impact for farmers, for citizens, and on industry in the case of the river being in spate and potential flooding.
It might also have meant that saltwater could actually penetrate the Fruili area, and this would, of course, damage the soil permanently. Over and above all these points, there are additional issues which have arisen in the interim. This is a massive project that's being mooted. And during the recent Christmas period, what very often happens is that there's an increase of thefts when police and others' glasses are turned aside. But what happened was that somebody actually started to dig a cave, and they started to remove some of the sediment from the base of the river very deep down.
And this was extremely damaging. No data can be obtained on this. But in the last few weeks, we have gradually got a little more information from the politicians, but we still don't have full information about this criminal act that happened at about Christmas time. So that was an additional problem. We find ourselves now in a situation where there's quite a series of steps that have been taken by the regional authorities and that are planned by the regional authorities.
I think that they have realized that they've run into a bit of a dead end. There has been a lot of opposition. And so they finally conceded that they would call on the services of an expert. The expert was commissioned to do a study, and he completed it at the end of the year. In the interim, the counselors, I think I've now received the copy of the report.
He's a very well known individual, but it took some time to get him to find a day in his diary where he was able to speak to them. And he said it was not appropriate to start carrying out works on the river without proper certification procedures. It would be important to look at the impact on the quantity and the quality of water.
Yes. I
Speaker 73
Shall conclude. I am concluding. So in conclusion, what I would say is that I think we've illustrated to you that there are huge dangers involved here. And given the way the regional authorities are conducting themselves, we would strongly urge you, please, chairman, to keep this petition open. It's very important to us that this be done.
We need to be able to protect our river, and I would therefore request that you update your decision and continue your investigations and take into account all the new information that's come to light, and indeed the reports of the criminal activity, which have been forwarded to the law enforcement agencies. We hope that will be a proper exploratory mission mandated so that we will obtain further evidence to justify our argument that this is an absolutely unique river, and it must not be tampered with in this way. And equally, it is vital to have all these legal issues addressed. Thank you.
Thank.
Bogdan Rzońca
you. If we could now hear from the second petitioner.
We have a second petitioner.
Bye. Yeah.
Speaker 75
Our aim was to draw the commission's attention to the need to protect this river. So we are here today in the most constructive of spirits. We want to make absolutely clear our opposition to these proposed works on the river, which would cause irrevocable damage to the river. But we also want to be proactive in trying to find a constructive solution. We want to make sure that the area's unique assets are protected, that the people can continue to live there, and that we are protected from floods.
So we have, with this in mind, been in contact with the farmers of the area, and the farmers have been extremely constructive in engaging with us. They have been prepared to say that they would actually sell some of their privately owned floodplain lands in order to have a proper floodplain. This would help considerably. Mister Hermino Barna will take the floor just in a moment. He's the chairman of the farmers in the middle area of the Talamento Watercourse, and he'll tell you just briefly about what the farmers' plans are.
They live and work there. They farm there, and they have a proposal as to how floodwaters could be managed in a realistic way. The idea is to have a floodplain that would give the river room to expand when it's in spate, so working together with nature. This river is one of the very last examples in Europe of a river which has many tributaries and branches, where a number of different channels form the river. Some are slower, and some of them actually absorb some of the energy when the river is in spate.
So this is our variable valuable characteristic, which provide a natural defense against floods. We also have over 300 islands in the river, and these two help keep the balance in place. So our proposal is not to replace the system that nature has provided, but rather to strengthen and support it. So we're suggesting an integrated approach. It would consist of two aspects.
First of all, there would actually be floodplains established. And secondly, we would establish the conditions which would enable water from the river to spill over to the floodplains in a managed way when the river was in spate or in case of flooding. It is extremely important to realize that, of course, it is important to have proper banks. They need to be taken care of, so do all the lateral rivers on the edge of the river. It's also important to ensure that the islands are protected, and therefore various steps may need to be taken to achieve this.
But if this is done naturally, then when the river is in Spayton, when there is flooding, the water can be absorbed by the floodplains, and it will be absorbed by the soil. And this soil will form a natural filter. This will therefore be an effective system where the floodplains and the islands and the managed escarpments and riverbanks can work together to protect nature and to maintain the delicate ecological balance of the river. This has been subject to a technical assessment by the council. Number 530 suggested that 51,000,000 cubic meters of water is the volume that we're talking about needing to be taken as the basis for the quantity that a floodplain might need to absorb.
These are calculations, of course, which have to some extent been computed by experts, but we have not yet clearly got all the details of the maps and the areas which will be affected individually. In any event, after our first hearing, the European Commission stressed that any type of intervention that might be carried out had got to be authorized officially and could only be implemented if there were no less invasive arrangements possible. It's absolutely vital to ensure that nature-based solutions are prioritized. This is what is consistent with a nature-based solution and the European Union's legislations, nature protection. So these are very important.
Bogdan Rzońca
Two minutes, and then we need to sum up. And I'm now going to be handing the floor to the representative from the European Commission, from the director general for the environment.
Yes, please. The floor resumes.
Speaker 76
Thank you very much. I'd like to thank all the signatories to the petition very warmly, both those of 0144 and 0524 from last year because they've drawn the attention of the commission and, of course, the committee to the potential adverse effects of this project on the environment, on the river, on these Natura 2000 sites, which are very valuable. And so we thank you very much for your initial action, and also for your updates. You've been very good at keeping us informed over the last few months. I know we met six months ago, but in the interim, you've been very good at giving us updates, so we really appreciate it.
Speaker 77
We've given you three responses in writing because we've received three separate petitions on this. 144524 from last year and 1819 also from last year. So we've written in detail, I'm sorry. The other two were for 2024. So we've responded in detail.
Speaker 76
Our understanding is that the regional authorities are still looking at the various potential options, and therefore, there is no definitive decision in place yet. The regional authorities are still considering what might be the best option to address these issues. And, therefore, we would, first of all, like to ask you whether you've got any up-to-date information that you can give us, whether there are any evaluations that you think have been done by the local authorities that you could pass on to us, anything that you know, or any environmental incidents that have taken place, which would be important to factor into our consideration. So that, first of all. But secondly, we would also say that it is, of course, vital that the local administration, in this case the Friuli Regional Administration, comply with its obligations to respect and enforce European law.
Speaker 77
Annex two of the directive requires that this project be subject to a proper assessment under the requisite legislation. The member states may have some discretion, but they do have to carry out an environmental impact assessment. Therefore, as we said in September 2025, it is extremely important that a proper assessment is carried out because this is a very significant project, and it could actually have a big impact on areas protected by the habitats directive from Natura 2000. And in that case, the European Union, which lays great store by compliance with this legislation, would be very concerned about species and habitats, which might be threatened by any of this work that was proposed. Any potential adverse effects in these areas must be notified to us, because we would therefore be insisting that less invasive solutions had to be found.
Speaker 76
The region already has at its disposal a number of instruments which enable it to implement the habitats directive. It's already transposed the provisions on environmental assessment a few years ago, and therefore, it does have in place the European standards which are required, and it is in a position to evaluate any incidents which may be notified in accordance with Natura 2000. The Water Framework Directive and the other legislation which applies to all these matters must be complied with. And, therefore, we would strongly urge all the petitioners and your supporters to remain involved in all the discussions that are going on, and to be vigilant and to argue the case for alternative, less invasive projects, and certainly to consider seeking judicial review locally and, if necessary, nationally if that appears to be the appropriate course of action. Thank you for your attention.
Thank.
Diego Solier
you. We now move on to the political groups. Diego? Yes. On behalf of my colleagues from Italy, I'd just like to say the following.
If we take a look at the Talia Mendo Rivo project, it's not finalized. It's in the initial stages. And this means there isn't anything specific for us to assess. And so, saying that it violates the European legislation is a bit premature. The commission has said that this has to be dealt with at the national level and no illegal infringements have been detected.
So there is no real reason to continue examining this. So all the technical information, preliminary information, as I said, we're at the early stages. So this is quite premature in the early stages, and it is not the competence of the petitions committee. And at this stage, we feel that the petition is not justified, so we would ask for it to be closed. You.
Missus Guarda?
Cristina Guarda
Thank you very much, chair. I will speak Italian. Thank.
you. These are important petitions. A lot of very heartfelt sentiments underpin these. It is really important that alternatives are looked at, and there haven't been any submitted by the local councils or the political authorities. That is the way forward.
Anyone who's not deeply familiar with the situation will probably not know that we're talking about an area by the Bridge of Dinano, which has to be protected. This is an area where nature is really important, and it's vital that we ensure that all the habitat directive provisions and the water directive are complied with. There's then the whole question of legality. And I'd like to thank the commission representative for what he said about the commissioner's concern about legality and the need to consider having recourse to judicial review. There has been no environmental impact assessment carried out, and therefore, we must keep this petition open.
This planning application has not run its course, and it must be predicated on an environmental impact assessment. Equally, alternatives of a less invasive nature must be considered. Otherwise, the developer is in breach of the habitat directives, but also of overall legal principles of the European Union. This is one of the very few examples of an Alpine river, which is not actually adversely affected by anthropogenic activity, and it has to be protected. The citizens and agriculture will be very adversely impacted, and they've come together to try to argue the case for an alternative approach very strongly.
Their position has got to be taken into account. I'm very sorry if other political groups are not aware enough of the significance of all this to realize that the petition must absolutely remain open. And it absolutely must, chairman. You will agree with me. I'm sure that there are very few political groups represented here now.
And, frankly, in recent months, they've actually been active in this area. I would therefore very much urge you to refer this matter to the coordinators so that they can have a close look at this petition with all the coordinators and then decide on the course of action, and to provide some further updates as and when appropriate and possible. Thank you.
The left, madam.
Valentina Palmisano
Thank you. I would actually echo what Cristina Guerra has said. She comes from this part of Fruhli and knows very well what the petitioners and the citizens in general are talking about and what their concerns are. What the commission said was absolutely fundamental is extremely important, and I would like to add my thanks to those who've already said that the commission has done some excellent work. I think the petitioners appreciate the involvement of the commission.
The Taliamento is of extremely high value in terms of the habitats and the Natura directive. And these are habitats and areas which have got to be protected, and the region has got to be forced to protect them. There are great and grave considerations about the environmental integrity of this region, and therefore, we need to make absolutely sure that any feasible alternative is carefully studied so that we take the minimally invasive environmental way forward. So what we would say is, please, could we ensure that we find a suitable way to provide some protection. It's for this area if it's necessary that this be done.
We have to recognize that there could be absolutely irremediable and irreversible effects on the flora and fauna and habitats if the wrong project solution is adopted. Therefore, it's absolutely vital that this petition remain open. There is clearly a further evaluation going on, and it is also the case that the local and regional authorities have not yet reached their final decision, which, of course, would in itself be subject to judicial review, as has already been said. So what I would say to Miss Guara is that it is really important that the petition remain open. It is unfortunate that a lot of members are not here, but we can't expect that everybody is here every minute of every meeting.
So I think we would be happy also to suggest that the coordinators have a look at this when they next meet. Thank you.
Thank.
Minutes for the petitioner.
Speaker 73
Thank you. I'd like to thank all the Italian members who've been, indeed, all members who've been kind enough to express their understanding for our position and support the initiatives that we've taken. But I also like to thank all those, including the commission, who have mentioned the whole question of legality. It's only about a year ago that the Italian state actually invested 30,700,000 or at least earmarked 30,700,000, earmarked as a down payment on the execution of precisely all these invasive works. Therefore, this fund has been earmarked, and it has, I think, been disbursed.
And could I remind you that we do have a very expert scientist who has said that it would be very unwise to continue without looking at the potential adverse effects on the river basin. It would be vital to bear in mind that there have previously been studies and recommendations done and made looking at how best to maximize the huge environmental capital that exists in this area, the unique morphology of this river basin, and the significance that it has for the whole ecosystem of the area quite widely. So the scientific adviser who was called in by the region to give expert advice and evidence has said this. So I think this has got to be a big focus going forward. We've managed to stop in its tracks the project that the region is trying to implement, but we haven't managed to do this definitively yet.
So we need every support we can get, and we welcome the support that we've had from you today.
Thank.
Speaker 82
you. Good afternoon, everybody. I'm Emilia Varna, and I'm from the Farmers Association in Tagliaminto. And I would just like to add a little to what Franco Pradetto said. I represent a number of farmers, and they are not, of course, against being protected by floods.
They know we need flood defenses, and they need them on occasion. It's very important. We've worked with the association for the Italianate who have taken up the proposals that we have put forward in the regional context in Furio, Levent, Serdulia. And the farmers are prepared to make available some land under European regulation at 2024 2021. Unfortunately, the speaker's microphone has just gone off.
Bogdan Rzońca
Well, it would appear that there is a technical issue. Should we just wait and see whether our excellent technical services can restore the connection?
Bogdan Rzońca
If not, given that there was a request that there are not that many colleagues from the different political groups, and it is an important and interesting petition. Obviously, we can't really take the responsibility here and now. So I'm going to postpone the decision on this petition, and refer it to the coordinators. And in a month, the next coordinators meeting in April, we'll take a look at this, and we'll take the decision when there are representatives of all the political groups actually in the room at the committee. We realize, of course, that it is Monday.
There were 1 or 2 issues with the plane, so some colleagues have not arrived. So we will refer this to the April Coordinators' Meeting. So thank you very much, and thank you very much to the petitioners who have come here in person to present their petition. And as I said, I think the best solution, the best decision is taken when the members are in the room. So as I said, this will be referred to the coordinators.
And so, thank you very much. And this ends our meeting for today. And tomorrow, the actual meeting, committee meeting, will start at 10:30, and there will be a coordinators meeting before that. The chair kindly thanks the interpreters, thanks to all the different services present in the room for their help and support of the meeting. And we have finished about 10 minutes early.
So I think we have managed to conclude our meeting successfully. And have a pleasant evening, and see you tomorrow.
Ask anything about this video — I analyse its transcript to answer.