Committee on Security and Defence Ordinary meeting

Name: Committee on Security and Defence Ordinary meeting
Uploaded: 2026-05-06T14:00:00+00:00

04:23 - 04:28

So colleagues, we are a little bit, we have to be really speed up.

04:30 - 04:31

But you can just start.

04:32 - 05:11

So dear colleagues, yes, here it is. Yes. So our next item is a consideration of the draft opinion of the Commission's proposal regarding the European Fund of Economic, Social and Territorial cohesion, agriculture and rural fisheries, and maritime prosperity and security for the period 2028 till 2034. CDE will provide its opinion to Badge, Reggie, and AGRI, the lead committees for this file. Before giving the floor to the rapporteur, Anna Katharina Mendes, let me remind you of the timetable for the adoption of this opinion.

05:12 - 05:32

The deadline for amendments is tomorrow, the 1st of May at noon. A shadow's meeting will take place on the 21st May in Strasbourg. The opinion will be adopted in CDE on the 22nd and 23rd June. And now I give the floor to the rapporteur, Anna Katarina, for 5 minutes. The floor is yours.

05:33 - 05:45

Thank you, and dear President. I'm sorry for the delay. And I will speak in Portuguese, if you don't mind. Thank.

05:47 - 06:17

Thank you very much. I'm gonna give you a brief overview of the SEDI opinion on this fund under the next MFF period. This is one of the largest financial blocs. We're in a time of uncertainty, and we're going to be covering agriculture to defense. 90% of the fund will be implemented by means of the NRPPs.

06:26 - 07:21

I was saying that this is one of the largest financial blocks because it includes cohesion, agriculture, defense, and about 90% of the fund will be implemented by means of the NRPs, the national plans, which makes it extremely important to see how we're going to direct these investments, but we also must ensure coordination. Because in spite of the fact that they are national plans, we must not forget that there must be coordination at the European level. In terms of our committee, SEDI, we've been quite clear in our approach. This is not a defense instrument, but it includes specific objectives of supporting security and defense in the Union. Well, it will have an impact on how Europe invests in its preparedness and resilience.

07:21 - 08:30

That is why we try to include some elements to clarify and ensure consistency in the text. Particularly, we worked on aligning it with preexisting European instruments such as the competitiveness fund and the Connecting Europe Facility, and also the main planning instruments for defense at the union level to prevent any duplication or fragmentation. We paid special attention to the issue of military mobility, dual-use infrastructure, cybersecurity, and protecting critical infrastructure, ensuring that there is a clear distinction between what is for defense and what is for internal security. There is a clear concern here. We must ensure that this fund supports relevant investments for security and defense, and that it is done so in a coherent, consistent way so that we can ensure added value for the union.

08:33 - 09:53

Now tomorrow is the deadline for amendments, and we are looking forward to continue working with all of the shadow rapporteurs to ensure that we have a solid opinion. The main challenge that we have here, politically speaking, is to know how in such a wide-reaching instrument where defense and security sit and how we can ensure that we meet the objectives that we have in this term. Now Ukraine is clearly a priority of strategic autonomy. Violation of international law by the United States has also shown how important the need to have strategic autonomy is at the European level, especially in the area of security and defense. And that is why this tool, this instrument must bolster industry capacities, the European preference, production in Europe, and we also must ensure that there is coordination between member states.

09:54 - 10:27

And I'd also like to make one last point. When it comes to investment in defense, we must also approach this as a way of defending our own democracies, because we need to produce tanks, etc., and protect ourselves from cyber attacks to defend our own democracies. We must be innovative, and we must bolster our response capacities at the European level. So thank you once again. I would apologize for my arriving late.

10:27 - 10:35

Thank you very much, Anna. I will now give the floor to the shadow reporters for a maximum of two minutes, and we start with Christophe Gomard from EPP.

10:36 - 10:42

Thank you, madam chair. Thank you for the delay, because I was late too. So thank you, Anna.

10:44 - 10:48

Definitely international, yes. International.

10:48 - 11:43

So, madam chair, colleagues, first of all, I would like to thank our reporter, miss Anna Katarina Mendez, for her excellent work on the draft opinion of the SEDA committee on the future pillar one for the multinational, multi-annual, sorry, financial framework. I was pleasantly surprised to find that our proposals, Missus Vendes and mine, were in line in many aspects, particularly regarding the defense of the union's strategic autonomy. However, I would like to add a few comments on reservations, which I hope will be constructive in order to strengthen attacks that must rise to the challenges at hand. The PP's work will focus on five priorities. The first priority is, of course, to clarify the firm's objectives regarding defense spending to limit industrial fragmentation and ensure its consistency with the union's strategic priorities.

11:43 - 12:18

We must not turn Pillar one into a new competitiveness fund. National and regional partnerships plan must remain funding tools that are local and easily accessible to SMEs, and consistent with existing strategic documents and sectoral tools for defense. I will also ensure that the space sector is added to the firm's funding priorities. The second priority is to ensure that audit and procurement procedures are adapted to preserve defense secrecy. The third priority is to ring-fence the minimum budget for defense without prejudice for the union's other priorities.

12:18 - 12:48

We must be consistent. We require member states to allocate 5% of their GDP to defense. The union's budget must reflect this minimum. Our fourth priority is to clarify the list of eligible entities to limit access to the fund for third countries and foreign companies. Finally, the last of the priorities, which is not directly linked to defense, but which I believe is important, is to ensure a transparent governance model of the firm that respects the principle of subsidiarity.

12:48 - 12:49

Thank you.

12:49 - 12:53

Thank you very much, and we continue with renew. And, again, the floor is yours.

12:55 - 13:45

I'd also like to congratulate the rapporteur. It's important that we do proceed in this way in the MFS because threats are acute, and we should avoid any problems and make sure that when money is invested under the next MFF that it is invested effectively, it can be used for defense. We're concentrating on two main points. First of all, military mobility. Now there's no point building bridges that can't be used for military transport, after all.

13:45 - 14:52

And another important point when it comes to actually carrying out defense is that we need to ensure we don't have any dependencies on third countries. The defense industry must be in a situation to ramp up production quickly, and that involves the whole supply chain, which means that we need to spend to either maintain or increase capacity there. And we all hope this won't happen, but if we do have to defend ourselves, then we need to involve local authorities because it's the local authorities that are responsible for crisis response, which means that money needs to be provided under the MFS. Given the progress made in discussion so far, I think we can be optimistic we'll achieve a good solution.

14:52 - 15:00

Thanks. From the Greens? No? Okay. Now I give the floor to any other members who would like to speak for one minute each.

15:00 - 15:12

Is there somebody you would okay? Then finally, I return the floor to the rapporteur if she wants to for her final comments. Anna. Thank.

15:13 - 16:14

You, chair. I think it's quite easy to see in the committee that this is a balanced approach, and that the rapporteur and the shadow rapporteurs, in general terms, are quite aligned. I'd like to draw attention to the fact that we shouldn't or that we should focus on what falls within our remit and not focus on things that fall within the remit of other committees, because this is not a defense instrument. But given how flexible it is as an instrument, well, it's, of course, going to impact defense and security. So once again, just want to highlight the importance of this fund being seen not in isolation, but alongside the other financial entrants that we have at our disposal and that member states have at their disposal when it comes to meeting the security and defense needs in the European Union.

16:15 - 16:42

And I know that sometimes we don't see all the work that is done in this committee, but the committee has done a lot of important work when it comes to kind of missions to see what's happening on the ground and how the instruments are being implemented with that safe EDIP. And I think that it is important to ensure this is reflected when it comes to the exercise of the new MFF and all the work that is done. So, thank you.

16:42 - 17:01

Thank you very much, Anna. So, yes, thank you. And now one minute break because then we will continue. But this item takes place in camera. So please, all electronic devices must be left outside this new meeting room.

17:01 - 17:05

You could do it outside, and in 5 minutes, we will start.