Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection 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
IMCO European Parliament
Follow its sittingsAnna-Maja Henriksson
On intra-EU transfers, it regards the precise scope of the Commission's empowerment, which remains a key political point for the co-legislators. And regarding defense procurement, it regards the introduction of a fast-track procedure for joint procurement and scope of a European preference linked to it. And in the last trilogue, I think I said March, but I think it was April. Yes, we have to check the date because, yeah, we have to check that it was in April. So in the last trilogue, despite of the efforts from the Parliament's side to come with compromise proposals strongly supported by the Commission, the Council chose to maintain its original position with no flexibility, meaning that the negotiations did not yet lead to any result.
And the trilogue process will now continue. We have a lot of work in front of us in the days to come now. And work needs to be done in order to facilitate an agreement on the political points and on the file as a whole. And as we have stressed repeatedly from our side, from the Parliament, it will require flexibility from both co-legislators. So we have to do a lot of work still, and I will come back to this file.
But I see it also very important that we can get some kind of compromise because this is a package, and the other files, the one that colleague Henrik Dahl here reported on, it's also connected to this file. So we will do our best so that we can get a solution, but it also means that also the Council have to be more constructive. Thank you.
Anna Cavazzini
Yes, thank you so much. Good luck and success for this important file, and stay strong vis-à-vis the Council. This concludes the reporting back, and we come to agenda item six. We have today the exchange of views with Teresa Ribera, our Executive Vice-President for Clean, Just and Competitive Transition. So probably we have a one-minute technical break, and then we start.
So we start now with our agenda item six. I'm very happy to welcome Teresa Ribera here. I announced her already, Executive Vice-President for Clean, Just and Competitive Transition, and of course also especially responsible for the Digital Markets Act and our committee, as we negotiated the DMA last term and are very proud of what we have achieved, what the DMA has achieved. We are very eager to discuss with you, especially two years after implementation and the review that you just published, how the state of the implementation of the DMA is in order to make sure that we have a fair competition in the digital market as well. So thanks for being here.
You have the floor for ten minutes, and then we have two rounds of MEPs.
Speaker 4
Thank you. Thank you so much, Chair, and thank you so much, honorable members of this IMCO committee. I think that on this very concrete topic, we feel quite close. I think that we are doing a good job trying to identify together how we can even improve the way we are handling this challenging context in the digital markets. So thanks a lot for the opportunity to discuss further the enforcement of the Digital Markets Act, and as I said, I take this opportunity also to reaffirm once again, to insist on our commitment as European Commission to implement, enforce the DMA.
It is a priority for us. But as I did in the plenary session in Strasbourg a few weeks ago, I would also like to welcome the IMCO committee's recent resolution on the impact and the enforcement of the DMA. It shows to what extent we share the commitment to ensure a level playing field in the digital economy, something that is very much part of our day-to-day life. Because the goal of the DMA is quite clear: large digital platforms benefit significantly from the EU single market's 450 million high-medium income consumers.
From this market, there is a substantial share of their global revenue towards these big platforms. So operators have a relevant economic power, and this economic power could allow them to shape the conditions under which competitors can access digital products and services. With this in mind, the Digital Markets Act's objective is to ensure fair and contestable digital markets so that all businesses operating at the EU level get equal opportunities to compete and innovate, and to ensure that users, European citizens, have control over their data and more choice of digital services. In two years of application, the DMA has begun delivering tangible positive results. Let me list some of them that can be understood by any average citizen.
For instance, switching from an iPhone to an Android phone has become much easier, or choosing your preferred browser and search engine is now a norm. The ability for anyone to refuse data combination across gatekeepers' different services is a fact. The seamless connection between our phones and smartwatches or earbuds is a new reality. And there is no need to have a Gmail account to access YouTube. Also very recently, a Latvian company, Beeper Chat, launched a new messaging platform that interoperates with WhatsApp.
All this is thanks to the opportunities opened by the DMA. Many of these positive changes are highlighted in our first DMA annual report, published two weeks ago, the 22nd of May. This very same month, in May 2026, a report from the browser company Mozilla underlines the positive effect of choice screens on mobile browser usage thanks to the DMA. And I welcome the report's findings, which show that the DMA has already started delivering concrete changes for people in some key areas such as browser choice. It found that Mozilla's Firefox browser, Firefox, is selected through a DMA browser choice screen every 10 seconds in Europe.
This has added more than 6 million Firefox selections. Firefox daily active users were 113% higher in the European Union than without the DMA when comparing the 15th March before and after browser choice screens roll out on iPhones to comply with the DMA. The DMA is still a relatively new instrument, and the opportunities it creates need time to translate into tangible market outcomes as the ones I have listed right now. As I said in my remarks in Strasbourg last 28th of April, on the day the report was published, our first DMA review found that the DMA is fit for purpose, but there is still more progress to be made to ensure it fully delivers on its potential. The review also found that it is too early for major legislative changes.
For now, the dominant feedback is that the DMA needs to continue being robustly enforced so that business and users have access to new opportunities and more choice. And to ensure this, the Commission has already started to address the issues raised in the public consultation, such as cloud services and AI.
These two sectors, vital for the EU's economy and also for the EU's economic security, are a clear priority. On AI, we recently adopted preliminary findings in two sets of specification proceedings to provide guidance to Google on how to ensure that competing online search engines and AI providers have fair access to Google search data and comparable access features in the Android operating system to the access enjoyed by Google's own AI tools. We currently have public consultations ongoing on proposed solutions in both cases. On cloud, we are investigating whether Amazon and Microsoft should also be designated as gatekeepers under the DMA for their cloud services, Amazon Web Services and Microsoft Azure respectively. Together, they account for over half of the global cloud market.
We hope to have further updates on these investigations soon. Tomorrow, Wednesday 3rd June, the Commission will announce the much-anticipated tech sovereignty package, which will set out our ambitious plans to triple cloud and data center capacity in the European Union in the next five to seven years. Boosting our homegrown cloud capacity will be complemented and reinforced by the investigations into the cloud market, where customers can easily switch cloud providers, transfer their data from one cloud to another, or use several cloud providers are to be a first port of call for engaging with gatekeepers. As I have been saying for nearly a year and a half, the aim is to create a culture of compliance rather than to issue fines for the sake of fines. We care about citizens, we care about business.
We think that complying with the DMA is the best way forward. But this doesn't mean that we will shy away in case there is a need to take decisive enforcement action when dialogue fails. On the contrary. We will not accept pressure into any course of action that for geopolitical reasons. It is about respect of our rules and protecting our market and our citizens.
Let me conclude with this: the DMA has already delivered a lot, but it has much more potential to deliver. And this means for me and my team in the DG Competition that there is much more work to be done on promoting a fair, competitive and innovative digital economy in Europe. Our goal is to continue with our strong enforcement of the DMA to keep opportunities open in our digital markets in Europe so that innovation can thrive and so that these markets can serve our citizens and business across the European Union. And I know that this is also your goal and the way you work in this committee. Thanks a lot and I look forward to our exchange.
Anna Cavazzini
Thank you so much, Ms Ribera, for keeping us updated on the state of the DMA implementation. And now I open the floor for the members. We have first the round of coordinators. We start with Pablo Arias Echeverría, sorry, and it's like one and a half minutes more or less if you can.
Pablo Arias Echeverría
More or less. Thank you very much, Chair. Muchas gracias, vicepresidenta, por estar y comparecer hoy aquí en esta Comisión de Mercado Interior. Y gracias por la intervención que ha hecho.
Yo me voy a ir un poco por otra parte que tiene que ver y está relacionado por supuesto con la cuestión digital y con el desarrollo de la inteligencia artificial y los centros de datos que es la energía. Desde la revolución digital, bueno pues Europa no ha logrado desarrollar un ecosistema tecnológico propio comparable al de otras grandes potencias. Mientras otros actores globales realizaron inversiones estratégicas y sostenidas en innovación, la Unión Europea ha perdido terreno en un sector que hoy constituye uno de los principales motores de crecimiento económico y competitividad. Hasta aquí lo sabemos. La irrupción de la inteligencia artificial representa una nueva oportunidad para reforzar la soberanía tecnológica europea y aumentar la productividad de nuestra economía y ser por fin competitivos en el ámbito digital tal y como venimos defendiendo desde hace años.
Sin embargo, el desarrollo y despliegue de sistemas avanzados de la inteligencia artificial requieren importantes inversiones no solo en financiación y capital humano sino también en infraestructuras digitales y capacidad energética. Los centros de datos y las instalaciones de computación de alto rendimiento asociadas a la IA presentan una demanda creciente de electricidad y exigen un suministro energético estable, asequible y sostenible. A la luz de las iniciativas anunciadas por la Comisión para impulsar el desarrollo de capacidades europeas en inteligencia artificial y computación en la nube así como de las inversiones previstas en el ámbito digital me gustaría hacerle dos preguntas. ¿Cómo prevé la Comisión Europea conciliar su objetivo de situar a la Unión Europea en una posición competitiva frente a Estados Unidos y China en materia de inteligencia artificial con los compromisos europeos de reducción de emisiones, sostenibilidad energética teniendo en cuenta el incremento sustancial de la cadena de la demanda eléctrica derivada del despliegue de centros de datos y otras infraestructuras digitales? Y ya termino.
Por otro lado, la actual y esto no tiene nada que ver con la situación de la IA pero sí con la energía, la actual situación geopolítica sigue generando incertidumbre y presión sobre los precios de la energía. Creo que esto es importante, le voy a pedir un poquito más de tiempo. Pero ya tiene 30 segundos de más. Especiales dependientes de los combustibles como el turismo que como saben es fundamental para la economía de mi país. De cara a la campaña de verano ¿qué medidas concretas prevé adoptar la Comisión para proteger a empresas y consumidores frente a posibles aumentos de los costes energéticos y qué plazos podrían ponerlos en marcha?
Muchas gracias.
Speaker 4
Yes, now I make it sure. Thank you. No, thanks, thanks a lot for the question. I think that this address a very relevant issue, the one dealing with energy which is not necessarily related to the main topic today on the implementation of the DMA. I think that yes, we know that the digital economy needs electricity and that we need to develop our own strategy to transition from the fossil fuels dependent from abroad energy model towards a much more clean homegrown electricity and efficient use of the electricity context in Europe.
And this is part of what we are trying to develop. Our capacity to combine digital and energy and efficient use of energy in the deployment of the digital service and the data centers so that we can also be competitive on that ground together with the different commissioners and services involved. As far as for the impact of the current crisis and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz and so the availability of energy, the fuels and related products, we have adopted already several measures according to the strategy and the approach that we presented a couple of months ago learning from the experience.
We knew that we had to boost homegrown clean solutions, as I said, as a matter of principle, as a strategic view on how to be competitive in Europe. And in the middle of that, we had this impact of the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. So we drove the lessons from the past, allowing fast, dedicated measures there where the governments, national governments, wanted to come to support the most affected sectors. And at the very same time, we work on the acceleration of the strategic changes on course. So I think that this is what we need to cover, including this understanding that when thinking about tech sovereignty, we need to think on energy sovereignty, so to combine the smart use of clean energy in Europe.
Thank you very much. I had in my list Laura Ballarín, but I think she's not here, so from Social Democrats. Is it... oh yeah, I don't know Maria, but then you can come in the second round, okay? Yeah.
Maria Grapini
Thank you very much. O să fiu foarte scurtă. În primul rând, mulțumesc, doamna comisar. Okay. Mulțumesc că sunteți aici și ne-ați prezentat.
Am foarte scurt două întrebări. Au fost niște sancțiuni asupra și amenzi, dumneavoastră spuneați că nu le dați de dragul amenzii. Întrebarea mea este: poate Comisia să demonstreze deja că gatekeeperii și-au schimbat în mod fundamental comportamentul ca urmare a DMA-ei sau observăm în continuare o tendință prin care companiile contestă deciziile și întârzie conformarea prin litigii și strategii de amânare? Și a doua e legată de ce dovezi concrete are Comisia că consumatorii și IMM-urile beneficiază deja de DMA? Ați făcut o analiză?
Există indicatori măsurabili privind creșterea concurenței, reducerea costurilor, sporirea opțiunilor pentru consumatori sau oportunități noi pentru întreprinderile europene? Pentru că așa se prezintă raportul DMA, că ar aduce beneficii consumatorilor și întreprinderilor. Însă oferă puține date concrete privind impactul economic și efectele măsurabile. Și pentru a convinge, noi trebuie să arătăm aceste efecte măsurabile asupra pieței. Vă mulțumesc.
Speaker 4
Thank you, thank you so much for the question. I think that as in any other sector, but in this case counting on a regulation that is much more recent, of course, platforms, operators may challenge, may learn. They have started to change their attitude and to introduce these changes and try to comply with the rules. In certain occasions they contest and even they go for litigation process. But as I said, I think that taking into consideration that the enforcement of the law has been a little bit more than two years, we have made great improvements and what they formally say, broadly speaking, is that they want to comply.
Then there may be different views when we engage on what it means complying. Yes, we have taken very important step forward. So I think that it has been quite a successful approach. But as I also said, I think that we cannot think that take this for granted. We need to keep on focusing on where there are still things to identify, new challenges that can come and keep this dialogue and eventually these interim measures there where there may be a need to adopt quick measures to prevent further harm or final decisions that could be challenged.
So I would say that from that perspective is normal. On your second comment, I think that it is so key to explain to the people.
There are many things that are not so obvious and make people happy. For instance, I bought an iPhone and I had to switch from my previous Android system. And it was one of my daughters who said, no, that's not possible. And I said, yes, of course it is possible. Now I can bring all my data.
And it worked. It worked very well. And then she laughed and she said, oh mom, you're performing well at the European Commission level. I said, yes, that's our task. So I think that it is important to explain to the people that all these improvements, all this easier going interoperability or control of our own data are very much linked to the efforts to enforce something that we adopted together in the previous mandate and that has improved the quality of the functioning of the market and is inspiring other jurisdictions to take similar measures.
Thank you.
Thank you very much, also for this hands-on example. It was not publicity, sorry. PfE is not here, so I give the floor to Sandro Gozi for Renew.
Sandro Gozi
Thank you, thank you Chair and thanks Commissioner. Two questions linked to your experience in the implementation of DMA. First of all, we consider that the enforcement is still slow and this slowness risks to undermine the deterrent effect of DMA. So I mean, what do you intend to do to accelerate the ongoing investigations and to ensure that the remedies are imposed quickly enough to have this deterrent effect? And the second, still also in your experience, do you think that the DMA covers few but very important, very large actors?
Do you think that in the future there would be the need to cover other players and other practices? Thank you.
Speaker 4
No, thank you, thank you so much for the two questions. What we have identified is that the speed of the deployment, improvements and construction of the digital reality is not comparable to any other revolution before. So speed is also very important in the implementation, in the enforcement of the obligations and the enforcement to ensure compliance to the operators. Of course, we are used to enforce our laws according to all the rights being recognized to any operator. So this takes long.
We need to develop and identify and work on robust evidence to take fair decisions according to the law. And it takes, as I say, time to open for comments coming from the operators under any infringement procedure, building the evidence and coming up. What this means is that independently on the normal procedures being enforced with full respect of all the rights in the due process, in many occasions in this context we may need to activate interim measures. And that's an approach that we are identifying as increasingly important to be effective to prevent the harm happening.
That's on one side. That doesn't mean changing the law, but working on the existing premises and according to the normal way the Commission does work and the law in place. When thinking about the definition of other gatekeepers, what we consider is that it was important to work on the cloud services and AI. That's something that we can consider being covered by the DMA with qualitative approaches, not so much thinking on the different quantitative thresholds that were identified in the DMA when adopted two years ago, very precisely because things are happening very fast and if we want to be effective, we need to take into consideration these qualitative references. And that's again something that we have open.
So to say that what we are trying to do is to be very proactive, fair but proactive, to ensure that it is effective, that it works and that the goals that are behind this regulation are fully preserved in our continent. And as I said in my introductory comments, for the time being we think that it is preferable not to change the DMA, but to keep it as it is, making full use of all the eventual developments and interpretations that according to this directive can help into the compliance system in the digital markets in Europe.
Reinier Van Lanschot
Thank you. Good morning. Thank you, Commissioner, for being with us today. You mentioned earlier in your opening statement that complying with the DMA is the best way forward, and I agree. And you also published in your first review that it's a useful tool to open markets.
I also see that DG COMP and DG CONNECT are full of talented people working every day on enforcing the DMA. At the same time, we cannot deny that the Commission has been under pressure from the US government. You mentioned that you will not give in to that pressure, but that pressure is certainly there. And that the size of the staff at the Commission is small in comparison to the legal departments of the gatekeepers. Also, the cost of non-compliance and pushing back is lower than the cost of compliance and cooperation.
So all the fines imposed to Google by the European Commission for competition law violation combined were equal to the profit of two to three weeks. It's not that impressive for them. So I have two questions. Firstly, an independent European digital enforcement agency with more staff could enforce our digital laws faster, better, and is better protected against external pressure. What do you think of creating such an agency?
Secondly, how can the Commission make sure that non-compliance becomes more costly than compliance? And if I still have the time, I would also like to ask something about the Cloud and AI Development Act, because tomorrow we will finally see the tech sovereignty package. It will come out and it will include a proposal on the Cloud and AI Development Act. I think it's a great start and a chance for us to building a European tech ecosystem on two key technologies in the coming years. You already mentioned briefly in your introductory speech, but I would like to know more on how exactly do you expect that the enforcement of the DMA plays a role in contributing to the objectives of the Cloud and AI Development Act.
Thank you very much.
Speaker 4
Thank you, thank you so much for the three questions that I appreciate.
I have to say that I admire the way my team works, and this is also the case for the team in DG Connect. I think that they are very smart, very professional, very fair, and that they develop an excellent work. So independently on whether they work in a DG or in an agency, they work in a very independent, fair, and professional manner. And yes, it is true that it is a combination of different skills, including some technical skills, and we have technical people working with the team, testing into the market the solutions that may be proposed by the gatekeepers when being confronted to the fact that according to our own specifications, they are not fulfilling their obligations. But I could not say that the fact that it takes time is because the team is not performing.
It is because it is on one side, as I said, complicated, but we are bound by the rule of law, we want to be predictable, and we want to respect the rights of anyone. And I think that that's part of the reasons why we feel proud when being Europeans, is not that we think that this is unfair and we go straight to punish someone, but trying to to to respect the due process. So yes, good to reinforce the teams, but I I could not associate the time that it takes to build one of these cases of infringement with with the quality or the fact that it is an agency or a DG. Non-compliance, and you were commenting on non-compliance, I'm sorry...
And the height of the fines.
Speaker 4
Yes, and the fines, yes, and the on the fines. Well, I I have to say that at the very beginning there was this attitude of, oh, you Europeans do not like American companies, which was very childish. It was quite shocking to me to have this type of reactions coming from some very wealthy CEOs of big digital platforms. My sense is that this is not the case anymore. They understand that working and making profits out of a market means complying with these rules.
And they have also understood that it is not because they have a certain nationality that they are going to say what other jurisdictions need to do, need to read, or need to allow. And I think that this is good, and we need to remain firm on that. Any misunderstanding, happy to clarify. Any learning process that requires more time, happy to talk and to identify how they can do better. But of course, with the due respect to the sovereign institutions defining how to protect the level playing field, so the market and the consumers, and ensuring that there could be new players that could challenge the traditional incumbents.
The way we identify the amounts if any fine has to be placed for a non-compliance case is also very well defined. And in this case, because the regulation is so recent, the amount of time being taken into consideration when thinking what is the global turnover and how we identify the quantities is proportional to the amount of time where they have been in this infringement situation, so that non-compliance situation.
So that's also a way to show that we stick to the rule and it is much better to comply than to stay too much long in a non-compliance situation. And third comment on that, we could keep on applying the most adequate regulation for any given case. And in certain cases, it goes through antitrust regulation, even if it is a digital company. So I think that this shows that well, we try to scrutinize. As I said, our main goal is to develop a culture of compliance, not to fine companies, but if there is a kind of persistence in a non-compliance situation, of course we need to fine.
On AI and cloud developments, yes, what we have done was to open these files to see if we can define with qualitative references that these two companies are very relevant gatekeepers already and that the very same rules with the obligations to do and not to do should apply in this case. And at the very same time, connecting back to the tech sovereignty package that we will be adopting tomorrow, it is not only complying with existing rules for those companies that are already operating in the market, but being sure that we Europeans, for very primary basic reasons of competitiveness and security, are able to develop our own capacities. So the tech package covers different aspects including this intention to boost our capacities in terms of cloud and in terms of AI skills and instruments. Thanks.
Maria Grapini
Thank you very much, Commissioner. Now I have a second round and start with Dora David, EPP. Thank you.
Dóra Dávid
Thank you, Madam Chair, and welcome, Commissioner. You've already touched on my DMA-related question on the tangible impacts and effectiveness of enforcement, so I have a different question on fair competition in the digital economy from the state aid angle. I'd like to ask you about two complaints from Hungarian media companies from 2019 and 2025. They alleged that the prior Hungarian government under Orbán spent taxpayer funds, about 1.1 billion euros, on buying advertising slots from media outlets that were politically aligned with the Orbán government. These selective subsidies were not based on objective market criteria because the audience of these media outlets or the viewership of these media outlets was relatively low.
So as you can imagine, this very much looked like a political reward system financed through Hungarian taxpayer money. It distorted competition, weakened independent media outlets, and therefore undermined media pluralism. So my question is, is this what I think this is? State advertising allocated on political grounds looks very much like illegal state aid to me. Hungarian taxpayer money should serve the public interest and not party propaganda.
And my second question is, I'd just like a status update on this, on when the Commission is expected to adopt a formal decision in these complaints. Thank you very much.
Speaker 4
Thank you very much. Now, Commissioner, you have two and 50 minutes.
I take note of that and I will and I will check. Yes, it is true we are aware of complaints being referred from the media from Hungary. I cannot comment on ongoing cases whether there is an infringement of the contents and freedoms or whether there may be non-legal state aid being involved, but I have taken note of your comments and questions and I hope we can solve it sooner than later.
Okay. So 20 seconds.
Laura Ballarín Cereza
Buenos días, Vicepresidenta, querida Teresa, gracias por venir a IMCO hoy. Tengo dos preguntas. En primer lugar, en relación evidentemente a la DMA, una obligación importante de esta ley es la obligación de Google de compartir los datos de búsqueda en condiciones justas y razonables con otros proveedores de servicios de búsqueda online, incluidos los proveedores de IA. Esto tiene un enorme potencial para poder reducir el control casi monopolístico que Google ha ejercido durante décadas sobre el mercado mundial de búsquedas, permitiendo la aparición de nuevos actores, aportando la tan necesaria competencia a este mercado y ofreciendo opciones más asequibles a los ciudadanos. Sé que la Comisión tiene actualmente en curso un procedimiento de especificación en virtud de la DMA sobre esta cuestión y que recientemente ha abierto una consulta pública sobre la propuesta.
Sin embargo, Google parece estar orquestando una campaña basada en tácticas de intimidación y alarmismo, argumentando que esta medida socavará la privacidad de los ciudadanos europeos. ¿Cómo responde usted a estas afirmaciones? ¿No está la Comisión trabajando estrechamente con el Comité Europeo de Protección de Datos para elaborar directrices conjuntas que garanticen las salvaguardas adecuadas? Y en segundo lugar, otro de los aspectos claves de la DMA es la obligación de interoperabilidad. Durante los últimos 15 años, prácticamente todos los teléfonos en Europa han sido iPhones o Androids, y cualquier empresa europea que quiera ofrecer un servicio a los ciudadanos de la Unión tiene que desarrollar los softwares de estas empresas.
La interoperabilidad que permite a los desarrolladores de aplicaciones y fabricantes de hardware para competir en igualdad de condiciones con los mismos servicios ofrecidos por las grandes compañías. Sin embargo, estas compañías afirman que la interoperabilidad comprometerá la privacidad y la seguridad de los ciudadanos, además de perjudicar la innovación. ¿Cuál es su posición al respecto de estas afirmaciones? Muchas gracias.
Speaker 4
Okay, on on Google, I think that yes, this is a very critical issue and we are strong on that point. I think that of course we need to ensure privacy and we need to pay attention to the recommendations and follow the advice of the European Data Protection Board, but this means that we need to ensure that they comply with the need to anonymize while maintaining significantly more utility effect to other competitors. So not only having access to Google and not to other competitors. Our proposed measures follows strictly the recommendations of this guidance coming from the European Data Protection Board and we have been trying to develop the specifications and the demands following these leading privacy experts. So I could say that it cannot be used as an excuse.
Interoperability and access to data is key to ensure that others can thrive and using this dominant position coming from the past as a means to ensure the exclusivity of the new developments in the time to come is of course something that is pretty harmful for the digital markets and we will be fighting against.
Andreas Schwab
Thank you so much, chairwoman, commissioner. You have now been answering to my colleague van Lanschot that you have full trust in DG COMP to enforce the DMA. And now you have said on the request of Laura that you are strong. But all the questions that I hear are done in a context of unclarity why the DMA as it stands is not enforced as has been foreseen within the two-year frame. So may I kindly ask you to clarify what you wanted to say with that you have full trust even though into the into the services even though we know that the DMA is foreseeing a two-year period.
Thank you very much.
Speaker 4
Well, I think yes, I think that that the teams work very well, based on evidence, taking their decisions on how to proceed. And we we have this work to ensure that the full enforcement takes place. And I don't think that there is any type of how to say risk on thinking that we are going to forget about the enforcement of of the law. On the contrary, I think that it has been quite clear that independently on what it could be the interest from any given company or any given foreign government, I would say that not only the European institutions, which is obviously the case, but even national competition authorities, even the public opinion, if we may quote it this way, understand the importance of full enforcement and full deployment of these instruments in our market.
Maria Grapini
Thank you very much, commissioner. Now come back for first round for Virginie because it's here now.
Virginie Joron
Merci beaucoup Madame la Présidente, Madame la Vice-Présidente de la Commission. Vous venez nous présenter le premier rapport intermédiaire sur la mise en place du règlement sur les marchés numériques, le DMA, et je souhaite vous interroger sur une disposition de ce texte qui secoue fort le monde de la tech ces dernières semaines. Le 16 avril 2026, la Commission a publié ses conclusions préliminaires concernant une infraction de Google. Vous lui reprochez notamment de ne pas assez partager ses données comme les clics, les requêtes, les classements avec ses concurrents. C'est le fameux article 6, paragraphe 11 du DMA et cette obligation donc interroge.
Dans un article de Politico, le porte-parole de Google, Monsieur MacPhillips, affirme : "Cette affaire semble être motivée au moins en partie par OpenAI qui cherche à tirer parti du DMA pour collecter des données auprès de Google." Quand on regarde le registre de transparence, on découvre en effet que deux membres de votre cabinet ont rencontré OpenAI le 24 septembre 2025 pour parler du DMA. Madame la Vice-Présidente, quel était le contenu exact de cette réunion ? OpenAI n'est pas un contrôleur d'accès, l'entreprise n'est même pas visée par le DMA. Pourquoi un tel intérêt ?
Au-delà de ces soupçons de lobbying, c'est une question de sécurité majeure. De nombreux experts alertent sur les risques massifs de ce partage des données, en particulier pour la vie privée. Je vous donnerai au final une conclusion un exemple très concret. Je cite : "Mettent en garde contre le fait que même les ensembles de données de requêtes anonymisées comportent des risques de fingerprinting car la combinaison de termes de recherche rares, de métadonnées, de géolocalisation et de schémas comportementaux peut permettre de réidentifier des individus." Il y a enfin un risque d'espionnage pur et simple.
Le chercheur Lukasz Olejnik a démontré sur son blog à quel point il serait facile de détourner ce système. Il explique que un service de renseignement hostile pourrait créer ou financer une société écran en apparence conforme, telle qu'un service de recherche basé sur l'IA ou un produit de recherche régional.
Une fois admise, cette entité disposerait d'un canal légitime et fiable pour surveiller les requêtes concernant des personnes, des objets ou des institutions et serait notamment en mesure de cibler les victimes spécifiques. Je vous donne un exemple concret. À Strasbourg, une personne a été mise en garde à vue parce que le FBI, grâce à OpenAI ou à cause d'OpenAI, a alerté la police française et s'est retrouvé donc en mise en garde à vue pendant deux jours. Donc ma question, c'est face à ces failles de sécurité concrètes, comment comptez-vous garantir la protection des données et de la vie privée des citoyens européens ? Je vous remercie.
Speaker 4
Okay, thank you. And what I get from your comments is that you consider that it is important to pay respect to privacy and that we agree that's what we try to ensure. That there are cases where you could think that there may be breaches on that, so I think that in that case we should investigate if this is the case. But as a matter of principle, as I have just answered to your colleague, we insist, we are guided and we demand and we enforce what the European Data Protection Board insists as the leading principles to ensure that it takes place. So to ensure that the development of the market can take place in a fair context respecting the level playing field and the new options with full respect of the privacy of the data of the users, which is absolutely key.
Maria Grapini
Thank you very much. Now come back in first round, Mr. Pipera. One minute, yeah.
Gheorghe Piperea
Am să vorbesc în limba română. Este bine că ne aflăm în prezența doamnei Ribera aici. Este vorba despre o chestiune pe care am mai pus-o în discuție de mai multe ori în cadrul acestor dezbateri. Cred că trebuie să ne recentrăm atenția asupra protecției consumatorilor și să reluăm niște teme care au fost uitate în ultima vreme, cum ar fi dezinformarea în materie de consumatori și respectiv responsabilitatea pentru produsele cu defecte și să abandonăm concentrarea excesivă pe ideea de dezinformare politică și ideologică.
Speaker 4
Well, I think that one of the key aspects in the development of this digital economy is that there are big players that have the capacity to identify, prioritize or develop contents. And we are increasingly into a society that we do not click anymore, it comes up in the screen and that's the way we identify and read the reality. So being sure that what it is being expressed is something that we can track and responds to facts and reality and not opinions is also important. Developing the governance of this new reality is something that needs to be built at a high speed to ensure that citizens' realities, opinions, facts are protected. But that those that may be using these means to express things that are not real or messages that are forbidden in the factual life as pornography, abuse of minors, illegal behaviors can also be tracked and those behind those behaviors could be claimed and being forced to respond for that.
So misinformation and accountability is a key aspect. Protection of creation, art, real development of contents are key aspects. Ethics in the way we set the whole setting of this new governance is key. And cooperation with the different national jurisdictions in this field and with the experts that have experience on that is absolutely critical. What you are referring to is mainly connected to the Digital Services Act and AI developments more than to the Digital Markets Act, but we try to act together, coordinated, so to ensure that the full deployment is consistent.
Teresa Ribera Rodriguez
Thank you very much. Very quickly, Mr. Gozi, you are one minute.
Sandro Gozi
Yeah, I would like to come back to two answers of the Commissioner, thank you. You answered, Commissioner, that you think that the DMA should already be applied to AI power search tool, to artificial intelligence and to cloud services for qualitative reasons, and I agree. I wonder whether you have in your services sufficient technical expertise and resources to apply DMA to AI, while being agreeing with you. The second, you answered to our colleague about the relation with US. According to our information, the US is still lobbying very heavily against our digital legislation.
Can you confirm this or do you see any improvement in the relation on this issue with EU and US? Thank you very much.
Speaker 4
Thank you very much. Commissioner, very quickly.
I don't know anyone that when is proposed to enhance the teams to work says no, so I would be very okay, but that's a discussion dealing with the budget and things like that. So I think that we have a great team, as I say, very professional, and I don't think that any of the decisions that we are supporting are not well-based. This is very important, and I think that they work with the full understanding of what it is behind. On the lobbying, I would say is that it is, we read, we hear, but I think that what it is important is the official way we express our attitudes and we respond. And I would say that there is not a single comment coming from any official in the Commission or in national governments that does not understand the importance to stand firm and to respond so to clarify any type of misunderstanding if this is the case or to say no if we need to say no.
At the very same time, I have to add that what we have tried to keep is a technical cooperation with our counterparts dealing with antitrust cases in the United States, in the Department of Justice and the Department of Trade. And this is helpful because in many occasions the concerns of any average American family may be very similar to the concerns of any average European family, same for business, even if the system may differ on how they enforce the laws. So I have to say that it is good to hear from you that you are also committed to defend, to support and to explain because it is important.
Elisabeth Grossmann
Thank you very much. Very short, now we have on KDI Elisabeth, one minute.
Danke Frau Kommissarin, dass Sie so intensiv auf europäische auf digitale auf Souveränität hinarbeiten.
Eine Frage: Wie schaffen wir es, dass europäische Unternehmen höhere Marktanteile im Bereich der künstlichen Intelligenz erreichen? Es wurde gestern verlautbart, dass der US-Konzern Anthropic, so quasi Entwickler des Chatbot Claude, einen Marktgang, einen Börsegang vorbereite. Das sämtliche Marktwesen wird von US-Konzernen dominiert. Fachleute, Fachkräfte, die auf europäischen Universitäten ausgebildet wurden, werden von US-Konzernen abgeworben. Wie schaffen wir hier einen Turnaround?
Speaker 4
Well, I think that this is something that we need to think in a very strategic approach, so to ensure that our first developers can grow up. And we have seen compared to similar situations in the past in digital service that very good European startups, such as WhatsApp, Skype, Booking, ended being owned by American funds. So to a certain extent, it's a question of scale, how the financial system does work and provide the resources not to kill innovation, but to thrive in Europe. And we are still quite fragmented, so developing an European capital union, capitals union is key. At the very same time, I think that we need to act in the different layers, what it means in terms of the raw materials, the first developments, the infrastructures, the capacities, the research, the grow-up and the connected related aspects, such as we were commenting before on the technical support for this infrastructure.
So I think that what we are trying to develop is the whole set of layers to ensure that this counts on the adequate level of de-risking and facilitating the blending, the incentives to grow in Europe. I don't think that because it has been the case in the past that they have been growing much more in the American market, we need to renounce. On the contrary, we need to be sure that these capacities can be deployed, can be developed in Europe. There are some companies that are still present, still with a very relatively small share, but they can grow up. And there maybe others coming up in the time to come.
I think that it is quite active this ecosystem and the goal is to refer to 2030 with certain targets, with certain ideas that can be identified for investors and developers and researchers as key support coming from their institutions.
Maria Grapini
Thank you very much, Commissioner. Thank you for debate. Thank you, my dear colleagues. And now very short because we have vote. One minute conclusion.
Thank you for your disponibility. Thank you very much.
Teresa Ribera Rodriguez
Conclusion is thanks a lot to you all. I think that we are together in this and it is quite important to stay together doing our best to boost these capacities in Europe. Thanks.
So, dear colleagues, thanks so much to our Vice-Chair Ms. Grapini for taking over, but there's several votes happening at the same time in different committees. So now we start our IMCO voting session on two files.
Anna Cavazzini
Before we do that, we do a test vote. I open the vote. Okay, could you all take part at the test voting, because then we can make sure that we have the right number of people in the room. Also Andreas Schwab, thank you. Vote.
Yeah. Vote. Okay. Does it look good? Yeah.
Okay, so I think we have the right amount of MEPs in the room. Perfect. Thank you so much. Now we start with the vote on agenda item seven, the opinion of the interim report in review of the consent procedure on a broad package of agreements to consolidate, deepen and expand the bilateral relations with Swiss Confederation. Before I give we vote, I give the floor to the rapporteur Andreas Schwab.
Andreas Schwab
Thank you very much, chairwoman. I will be very short. I would like to thank all my colleagues for their constructive contributions to this. With the secretariat and with the advisors we were able to make a lot of compromises and we have also been integrating now concerns of other committees that didn't do a contribution, so we have been enlarging a bit our contribution and I think it should go well. Thank you very much.
Anna Cavazzini
Thank you very much, dear Andreas. And with that we start our voting procedure by show of hand. Compromise one, who's in favor? Who's against? Abstentions?
Adopted. Compromise two, who's in favor? Who's against? Abstentions? Adopted.
Compromise three, who's in favor? Who's against? Abstentions? Adopted. We go to the final vote by roll call vote.
I open the vote. I close the vote. Forty people in favor, two against and two abstentions. Congratulations, Andreas. Now we come to the second vote on our opinion for the establishment of European business wallets.
The rapporteur for the opinion is Ms. Veronika Cifrová. I don't know if she's in the room. No. Does anybody of you want to speak on her behalf? Otherwise we go directly to the vote.
So let's start with the voting procedure, also here by show of hand. Compromise one, who's in favor? Who's against? Abstentions? Adopted.
Compromise seven, who's in favor? Who's against? Abstentions? Adopted. Compromise two, who's in favor?
Who's against? Abstentions? Adopted. We go to compromise three, who's in favor? Who's against?
Abstentions? Adopted. Compromise four, who's in favor?
Who's against? Abstentions? Adopted. Compromise four. Who's in favor?
Who's against? Abstentions? Adopted. Compromise five. Who is in favor?
Who's against? Abstentions? Adopted. Compromise six. Who's in favor?
Who's against? Abstentions? Adopted. We go to the final vote by roll call vote. I open the vote.
I close the vote. 41 in favor, four against and zero abstentions. So congratulations to Ms. Sifrova. So now we continue. That was the voting session.
Thank you so much. You're all welcome to stay in the room, but probably we take one minute so that everyone who doesn't want to stay for the next agenda item can leave the room. And then we continue with institutional aspects of artificial intelligence, where our rapporteur is Mr. Pîrvu. We start in one minute. Okay, dear colleagues, let's restart with our agenda item nine.
We are doing an opinion on AFCO's INI report on institutional aspects of artificial intelligence in the context of European integration. So 76 amendments were tabled by IMCO members and the vote on the IMCO opinion is scheduled for the 25th of June. In AFCO, I think the vote is scheduled for September. So as I said, the rapporteur for our opinion is Mr. George Pîrvu. So I will give him the floor at the beginning and then we do a round of shadows.
So the floor is yours.
Gheorghe Piperea
Thank you, Chair. I'm gonna speak Romanian, so if you please put your casque. Stimați colegi, în urma evaluării amendamentelor depuse la opinia IMCO privind inteligența artificială, doresc să mulțumesc în primul rând tuturor grupurilor politice pentru contribuțiile constructive și pentru implicarea în acest dosar.
După analiza amendamentelor, nu am identificat propuneri care să contrazică în mod fundamental principiile și obiectivele pe care am construit acest proiect de aviz împreună cu echipa mea. Majoritatea amendamentelor completează, consolidează și dezvoltă draftul meu inițial. Obiectivul nostru comun este să ne asigurăm că inteligența artificială servește cetățenilor, consumatorilor, lucrătorilor și mediului de afaceri și consolidează în același timp competitivitatea Uniunii Europene și protecția consumatorilor. Voi începe cu amendamentele depuse de grupul ECR, amendamente care întăresc dimensiunea protecției consumatorului și subliniază faptul că încrederea consumatorilor este esențială pentru adoptarea soluțiilor bazate pe inteligență artificială. Aceste amendamente evidențiază importanța unor reguli clare, predictibile și proporționale care să ofere siguranță juridică întreprinderilor și să permită consumatorilor să ia decizii informate.
Amendamentele ECR au introdus referiri importante la întreprinderi mici și mijlocii și startup-uri, fără fragmentare și bariere administrative inutile, aspecte esențiale pentru companiile care doresc să se extindă la nivel european. Colegii din grupul S&D au adăugat mai multe elemente care se regăseau deja în textul meu. Ei au subliniat în mod fericit că sistemele de inteligență artificială trebuie să respecte pe deplin legislația europeană privind protecția consumatorilor, siguranța produselor, accesibilitatea, protecția datelor, nediscriminarea și concurența. Totodată, au atras atenția aceste amendamente asupra riscurilor asociate inteligenței artificiale, precum fraudele, atacurile cibernetice, posibilele efecte ale prejudecăților algoritmice asupra procesului democratic și legislativ. Aceste contribuții întăresc mesajul central al avizului: inteligența artificială trebuie să sprijine instituțiile democratice, nu să înlocuiască judecata umană.
Salut în mod special amendamentele care întăresc acordarea, scuzați-mă, rectific, abordarea centrată pe factorul uman, pentru ca supravegherea umană să fie în continuare importantă, esențială atunci când deciziile afectează cetățenii, consumatorii sau întreprinderile. Tot colegii de la S&D au evidențiat disparitățile existente între statele membre în ceea ce privește infrastructura digitală, capacitățile de date și resursele administrative. Aici sunt de acord că este nevoie de sprijin și cooperare la nivel european pentru a evita fragmentarea pieței unice și pentru a asigura condiții egale pe piață între est și vest. Per ansamblu, amendamentele depuse demonstrează existența unui consens larg între grupurile politice cu privire la direcția acestui dosar. Aș dori să mă refer la unele propuneri formulate de colegii din Renew.
Sunt de acord cu obiectivul de consolidare a suveranității digitale europene prin dezvoltarea unor infrastructuri cloud și centre de date sigure europene. Dar trebuie să ne asigurăm că investițiile în astfel de infrastructuri trebuie distribuite echilibrat între statele membre și că se bazează pe criterii obiective privind expertiza, resursa umană și potențialul de dezvoltare. În același timp, am rezerve față de două amendamente, 53 și respectiv 54. Nu consider că evaluarea sau procesarea cererilor de finanțare europeană poate să fie, pot să fie lăsate nici măcar parțial în seama unor sisteme automatizate. Inteligența artificială poate sprijini analiza administrativă, dar deciziile privind abordarea, scuzați-mă, acordarea fondurilor trebuie să rămână în responsabilitatea oamenilor.
Există riscul unor evaluări standardizate insuficient adaptate contextului specific al fiecărui proiect. Și mai periculos este articolul 54, amendamentul 54. Se propune ca inteligența artificială nu doar să asiste în elaborarea legislației și pregătirea negocierilor, ci să se implice, să fie implicate în așa ceva.
Această poziție este în deplină concordanță cu principiul de bază al avizului meu. Inteligența artificială trebuie să sprijine instituțiile, nu să le înlocuiască. Ea trebuie să rămână un instrument aflat în serviciul oamenilor și al democrației, nu un substitut pentru responsabilitatea umană. În concluzie, vă mulțumesc și vreau să vă informez că echipa mea și advisorul de la ECR lucrează în prezent la amendamentele de compromis. Acestea vor fi transmise secretariatului IMCO până la finalul acestei săptămâni, urmând a fi revizuite la începutul săptămânii viitoare și ulterior distribuite tuturor colegilor care au depus amendamente.
În funcție de feedback-ul primit, vom decide dacă sunt necesare reuniuni tehnice sau dacă procesul poate continua prin comentarii scrise.
Thank you so much. As I said, now we have the round of shadows and start with EPP with Henrik Dahl for two minutes.
Henrik Dahl
Thank you, Chair, and thanks to our rapporteur. The need for artificial intelligence arises from the underwhelming experiences with natural intelligence. I believe we should be careful not to approach AI primarily from the mindset of fear. I think it's important to address risks and ensure appropriate safeguards, but it is equally important to recognize the opportunities that AI presents. AI can strengthen innovation and competitiveness, it can support better policy making, improve the efficiency of public administration, and help Parliament in its scrutiny and oversight work.
For those reasons, I have tabled amendments that seek to bring greater balance to the report by highlighting not only the challenges but also the positive potential of AI. And I hope we can find a balanced and forward-looking text that allows Europe to embrace innovation while upholding democratic accountability and human oversight. Thank you.
Maria Grapini
Mulțumesc, doamna președintă. Așa cum a spus deja domnul raportor, grupul S&D, raportor din partea grupului S&D, am căutat să punem aici amendamente pentru a garanta dezvoltarea și guvernanța inteligenței artificiale, sigur, rămânând aliniate valorilor europene, protecției consumatorilor și buna funcționare a pieței interne. În primul rând, în amendamentele noastre am vrut să subliniem că trebuie să se respecte pe deplin legislația Uniunii privind protecția consumatorului, siguranța produselor, protecția datelor, viața privată, accesibilitatea, nediscriminarea și concurența, pentru a nu avea o piață fragmentată. De asemenea, în al doilea rând, am dorit să punem un accent puternic pe implementare, aplicare și cooperare. Dacă cele trei lucruri nu se vor întâmpla, cu siguranță inteligența artificială va fragmenta piața în loc să o unească.
Avem nevoie de o coordonare eficientă între autoritățile naționale, autoritățile pentru protecția consumatorilor, pentru protecția datelor și autoritățile din domeniul concurenței, precum și resurse adecvate. Până la urmă, orice reglementăm, dacă nu avem și resurse, nu putem să implementăm. În al treilea rând, amendamentele reafirmă faptul că utilizarea inteligenței artificiale în administrația publică și instituții europene trebuie să rămână centrată pe factorul uman și să contribuie la consolidarea suveranității digitale europene. Inteligența artificială trebuie să sprijine expertiza umană, nu să înlocuiască responsabilitatea democratică sau judecata umană.
Din acest motiv amendamentele consolidează garanții importante precum supravegherea umană, transparența, responsabilitatea, nediscriminarea, mecanisme eficiente de reparare a prejudiciilor. Amendamentele evidențiază de asemenea importanța investițiilor în competențe digitale, formare, perfecționare și recalificare pentru a putea să scădem nivelul de alfabetizare în digitalizare. În final, deși inteligența artificială poate contribui pozitiv la eficiență și competitivitatea pieței interne și poate aduce beneficii importante consumatorilor, trebuie să rămânem atenți și la posibilitățile de efecte negative, în special asupra lucrătorilor. Și închei spunând că nu inteligența artificială, nu de inteligența artificială trebuie să ne temem, ci de oamenii care o aplică. Mulțumesc.
Elisabeth Dieringer
Thank you, I will talk in German. Frau Vorsitzende, geschätzte Kollegen, lassen Sie mich kurz darlegen, von welchen Grundsätzen wir uns bei diesem Dossier leiten lassen. Für uns gilt vor allem eines: Künstliche Intelligenz darf das menschliche Urteilsvermögen nicht ersetzen, weder in der Gesetzgebung noch in der Rechtsprechung, noch in der Verwaltung, die Bürgerinnen und Bürger unmittelbar betreffen. KI ist ein Werkzeug und kann dementsprechend keine Verantwortung tragen, sie muss beim Menschen bleiben. Wenn das Parlament seine analytische Kapazität in diesem Feld stärken will, tragen wir das mit, solange es mit Augenmaß geschieht, auf bestehende Strukturen aufbauen, keine neuen Apparate, keine Doppelungen.
Das Parlament soll handlungsfähig sein, es soll dafür aber keine neue Bürokratie geschaffen werden. Wogegen wir uns klarstellen, ist jede Tendenz, dieses Thema zum Anlass für neue Finanzierungs- und Transfermechanismen zu nehmen. Bevor nach neuen Instrumenten gerufen wird, sollten wir prüfen, warum die zahlreichen bereits bestehenden ihren Zweck nicht erfüllen. Genauso halten wir es bei den Online-Plattformen: Pflichten, die längst gelten, gehören durchgesetzt, nicht ein weiteres Mal verdoppelt. Und wo es um Verantwortung in der Wertschöpfungskette geht, muss diese abgestuft sein, nach der Rolle des jeweiligen Akteurs, nicht pauschal und über alle hinweg.
Das ist die Linie, an der wir uns bei unserer weiteren Arbeit orientieren werden. Dankeschön.
Sandro Gozi
Vielen herzlichen Dank. Now for Renew, Sandro Gozi.
Thank you, Chair, and thanks to the rapporteur. I think that's certainly a very good working basis. Our amendment and our position would like to emphasize five aspects: the aspect of the extension, of the opportunity, of the protection, of the reform, and of the global governance. Extension: we would like to focus on the dimension of EU digital sovereignty, strategic autonomy, and insist on the need to develop European AI capabilities and infrastructure. We want to also underline the opportunity, so we would like to encourage the institutions to make a wider use of AI opportunities and tools.
We would like to encourage the institutions to better protect themselves because AI is also used for bias, disinformation, foreign interference, and other harmful activities. So we have to insist on the transparency, accountability, cybersecurity, and protection against risks. We need to link also the institutional approach to AI to other ongoing discussions in the Union, such as institutional and electoral reforms. We think that the AI dimension should be included in this aspect. And also we think that we should consider at least the possibility of having a new global governance and notably pushing for an international treaty on governing high-risk AI systems.
So I mean, I'm sure that in the light of what rapporteur told us today, we can find useful compromises on all these points.
Brando Benifei
I followed this dossier and I'm particularly interested in it as a member of IMCO but also of AFCO and as co-chair of the IMCO-LIBE AI Act working group and the former co-rapporteur of the AI Act. I particularly welcome the strong focus of the draft opinion on meaningful human oversight, the risks of fragmentation in the single market and the need for clearer accountability across the AI value chain. I also welcome the amendments tabled by our S&D shadow rapporteur Grapini, which I co-signed, as they further strengthen the focus on effective enforcement and EU digital sovereignty. I would also like to raise one point regarding the proposed European Parliament AI Observatory. I think this proposal could be problematic, but in the end I believe it should not be opposed, but the key point is to clearly define its mandate and limits, ensuring that it remains a technical and administrative support structure without overlapping with existing parliamentary entities, such as the AI working group, because otherwise we risk fragmentation and confusion.
And on the same line I want to spend one final moment to mention one idea that has been floating around, which is the standing committee on AI. AI already cuts across several committee competences and a permanent committee could therefore create fragmentation and institutional tensions rather than improve coordination, and its precise role would remain unclear, unfortunately. Parliament already has an experience that I think proved efficient with more flexible and cross-committee structures, such as the former AIDA committee and the current working group between IMCO and LIBE on AI Act implementation. Thank you very much again and I look forward to contributing in a constructive cooperation on this file. Thank you.
Thank you so much. Any other member wants to come in? If this is not the case, then I would welcome the Commission, also a well-known guest here in this committee, Irina Orssich from DG CONNECT. Sorry, I hope I pronounced your name correctly, but...
Irina Orssich
Thank you very much, that was a very kind welcome. So thank you very much also for the opportunity to comment on this opinion and the amendments. We do agree indeed that it is important to respect all the existing rules and we would just like to recall that the AI Act enters into application in a staged approach, which means that some of the points mentioned, also the law is there, but it will be enforced as of soon and that indeed might also already approach some of the issues mentioned. We very much agree, you know that, to the opportunities of AI and this is also a policy the Commission is actively pursuing. You might know that the AI Office we are building up consists now of six units and four of them are really focusing on the opportunities of the AI and trying to build up the structures for Europe.
There are also a number of other units in DG Connect and in the Commission and sovereignty is currently also for us one very important topic that we are tackling and hopefully we will continue tackling it together with you. In that context and also in the legal context indeed coordination is absolutely key and the other thing which I always find key is literacy you mentioned. So it is clear that everybody needs to have the opportunity to get the necessary skills but indeed also the necessary understanding of AI and what is happening to us, to our societies, to our democracies. Last point very quick, you are and we are also working on international governance. We know that the exchanges are key and we did have a very close cooperation with the safety institutes.
We are very active in a number of multilateral fora. We have many bilateral contacts and indeed we hope to be able to intensify all this further. Thank you very much.
Thank you so much for being here and for commenting. I now give the floor back to the rapporteur for concluding remarks.
Gheorghe Piperea
Thank you chair and also thank all the other intervenients in this debate. As I said we're going to fix if necessary a calendar for consultation and technical debates but I assume that from the point of view of those amendments we could in principle have an understanding on a written procedure. But of course at the end of this week you will have my proposal including a proposed potential calendar for the debates. Thank you.
Okay thank you so much so everyone who is working on the file a lot of success and this concludes agenda item nine. You know that we have scheduled at 11:00 the joint meeting also with our commissioner to present the Industrial Accelerator Act together with INTA and ITRE in the same room. But that means we finish a little bit early so we do a short break and reconvene here at 11:00.
Héctor Gómez Hernández
Good morning, everyone. I would like to welcome you to this IMCO meeting. I would like to ask you to take your seats so that we can start. I would like to inform you that the meeting is being webstreamed and that interpretation is available in the following languages: German, English, French, Italian, Dutch, Danish, Greek, Spanish, Portuguese, Finnish, Swedish, Czech, Estonian, Latvian, Lithuanian, Hungarian, Maltese, Polish, Slovak, Slovenian, Bulgarian, Romanian, and Croatian. I would like to ask you to use your microphone when you speak.
We will start with the adoption of the agenda. The draft agenda was circulated to you. Are there any comments or objections to the agenda? I see none. The agenda is adopted.
We move to the next item, which is the Chair's announcements. I would like to inform you that the coordinators met on the 12th of July and took several decisions. The minutes of the meeting were circulated to you. Are there any comments or objections to the minutes? I see none.
The minutes are approved. I would also like to inform you that the next IMCO meeting will take place on the 4th and 5th of September. We move to the next item, which is the approval of the minutes of the meetings of the 22nd and 23rd of May and the 28th and 29th of June. Are there any comments or objections to these minutes? I see none.
The minutes are approved. We move to the next item, which is the report on ongoing interinstitutional negotiations. I would like to give the floor to the rapporteur for the proposal for a regulation on the internal market emergency instrument, Mr. Andreas Schwab.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I would like to report on the first trilogue that took place on the 13th of July. It was a very constructive meeting. We had a first exchange of views on the main issues, such as the scope of the instrument, the definition of a crisis, and the role of the Commission and the Member States. We also discussed the governance structure and the involvement of the European Parliament.
There is a broad agreement on the need for such an instrument, but there are still some differences on the details. We have scheduled several technical meetings in the coming weeks to work on the text. The next trilogue is planned for the end of September. I will keep you informed of the progress. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Schwab. Are there any questions or comments on this report? I see none. We move to the next item, which is the presentation of the Council Presidency's programme by Mr. Héctor Gómez Hernández, Minister for Industry, Trade and Tourism of Spain. Welcome, Minister.
You have the floor.
Héctor Gómez Hernández
Thank you very much, Madam Chair. It is a pleasure for me to be here today to present the priorities of the Spanish Presidency in the field of the internal market and consumer protection. The Spanish Presidency comes at a crucial time for the European Union. We are facing many challenges, such as the green and digital transitions, the recovery from the pandemic, and the consequences of the war in Ukraine. In this context, the internal market is our most powerful tool to ensure the prosperity and the resilience of our economy.
Our main objective is to strengthen the internal market and to make it more integrated, more competitive, and more sustainable. We will focus on several key areas. First, we want to advance the digital single market. We will work on the implementation of the Digital Markets Act and the Digital Services Act. We will also push for the adoption of the Data Act and the AI Act.
Second, we want to promote a more sustainable internal market. We will work on the proposal for a regulation on ecodesign for sustainable products and on the proposal for a directive on empowering consumers for the green transition. Third, we want to ensure a high level of consumer protection. We will work on the proposal for a regulation on general product safety and on the proposal for a directive on consumer credits. Fourth, we want to improve the functioning of the internal market for services.
We will work on the proposal for a regulation on short-term rentals and on the proposal for a directive on the recognition of professional qualifications. Finally, we want to strengthen the resilience of the internal market. We will work on the internal market emergency instrument, as Mr. Schwab just mentioned. We are committed to working closely with the European Parliament and the Commission to achieve these goals. I am looking forward to our discussion.
Thank you very much.
Thank you very much, Minister, for this comprehensive presentation. I now open the floor for questions and comments from the members.
Ask anything about this video — I analyse its transcript to answer.