Committee on Public Health Ordinary meeting Joint meeting Committee on Employment and Social Affairs
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
Offset
Transcript offset
Export
Replay
Versions of this video
Transcripts may differ slightly from one version to another.
SANT European Parliament
Follow its sittingsRuggero Razza
Grazie presidente, anch'io sarò telegrafico per ringraziare anzitutto il collega correlatore Loucas Fourlas per il lavoro che abbiamo svolto insieme, per ringraziare tutti i relatori ombra che hanno contribuito a rendere il testo con le loro proposte molto più aderente a una visione attuale della situazione in tutti gli Stati membri dell'Unione europea, ma desidero ringraziare anche tutti i colleghi, prima il presidente parlava di oltre 800 emendamenti. Questo è stato un file al quale ciascuno ha sentito di potere dare il proprio contributo proprio perché il tema coinvolge la vita di tutti. Un ringraziamento ovviamente che sento di rivolgere a tutti gli staff tecnici di tutti i gruppi politici perché le riunioni tecniche sono state particolarmente intense e particolarmente produttive, così come al segretariato di entrambe le commissioni sia EMPL che SANT perché oggi elaboriamo una proposta di risoluzione dalla quale ci si attende molto anche dalla Commissione nel caso dovesse essere approvata. Grazie a tutti.
Adam Jarubas
Thank you Ruggero.
Dear colleagues, short info about replacement before we start the vote. From Patriots, Herman Tertsch replaces Margarita de la Pisa and MEP Dieringer will replace MEP Hauser. From Renew, Lukas Sippel replaces Stine Bosse and ECR Marcos Quarta will vote for the ECR Sant Quarta. Please.
Li Andersson
Okay, and from EMPL side, Mrs. Abadía Jover is replaced by Mrs. Montserrat, EPP. Mrs. Mendía is replaced by Mrs. Sancho Murillo from S&D. Mrs. Dochy replaces Mrs. Deloche from Patriots. Mr. Hauser is replaced by Mrs. Steger, Patriots. Mrs. Donazzan is replaced by Mr. Crosetto, ECR.
Mrs. Malong is replaced by Mr. Ciccioli, ECR. And Mrs. Peter-Hansen is replaced by Mr. Søndergaard, Greens. Mrs. Langensiepen is replaced by Mr. Marquardt, Greens. And Mr. Radtke is replaced by Mr. Beleris, EPP. That is correct, no?
One here?
Adam Jarubas
Okay, dear colleagues, we've got an information about replacement. Before we start our regular vote, let's do a testing electronic vote. I open the vote. It's probably doesn't work. I'd like to ask our technical...
Oh, okay. It's working. I close the vote. Okay. Thank you so much.
So let's do vote. We start with voting by raising hands. Compromise amendment one, who is in favor? Against? Abstention?
Adopted. Compromise amendment two, who is in favor? Sorry. Sorry, sorry, sorry. Amendment 832, who is in favor?
Against?
Abstention? Adopted. Okay, let's check if you want. I open the vote. I close the vote.
Adopted. Compromise amendment two, who's in favor? Against? Abstention? Adopted.
Compromise amendment three, who's in favor? Against? Abstention? Adopted. We have 367 part two.
Who's in favor? Against? Abstention? Adopted. Compromise amendment four, who's in favor?
Against? Abstention? Adopted. Amendment 353, who's in favor? Against?
Abstention? Adopted. Amendment 356, who's in favor? Against? Abstention?
Adopted. Compromise amendment five, who's in favor? Against? Abstention? Adopted.
Compromise amendment six, who's in favor? Against? Abstention? Adopted. Amendment 395, who's in favor?
Against? Abstention? Rejected. Compromise amendment seven, who's in favor? Against?
Abstention? Adopted. Amendment 420, who's in favor? Against? Abstention?
Adopted. Amendment 422, who's in favor? Against? Abstention? Rejected.
Amendment 431, who's in favor? Against? Abstention? Rejected. 432, who's in favor?
Against? Abstention, we should check it, I think so. I open the vote. I close the vote. Adopted.
Amendment 334, who's in favor? Against? Abstention? Adopted. Compromise amendment eight.
Against? Abstention? Adopted. Compromise amendment nine, who's in favor? Against?
Abstention. Adopted. Compromise amendment nine. Who is in favor? Against?
Abstention. Adopted. Compromise amendment ten. Who is in favor? Against?
Abstention. Adopted. Compromise amendment eleven. Who is in favor? Against?
Abstention. Adopted. Compromise amendment twelve. Who is in favor? Against?
Abstention. Adopted. Compromise amendment thirteen. Who is in favor? Against?
Abstention. Adopted. Amendment five four two. Who is in favor? Against?
Abstention. We should check it. I open the vote. I close the vote. Adopted.
Compromise amendment fourteen. Who is in favor? Against? Abstention. Adopted.
Amendment five six two. Who is in favor? Against? Abstention. Adopted.
Compromise amendment fifteen. Who is in favor? Against? Abstention. Adopted.
Amendment five seven one. Who is in favor? Against? Abstention. Adopted.
Amendment five seven two. Who is in favor? Against? Abstention. Rejected.
Amendment five seven three. Who is in favor? Against? Abstention. Rejected.
Okay, if you want, let's check. I open the vote. I close the vote. Adopted. Compromise amendment sixteen.
Who is in favor? Against? Abstention. Adopted. Amendment four two one.
Who is in favor? Against? Abstention. Rejected. Compromise amendment seventeen.
Who is in favor? Against? Abstention. Adopted. Compromise amendment eighteen.
Who is in favor? Against? Abstention. Adopted. Amendment six one four.
Who is in favor? Against? Abstention. Rejected. Six one six.
Who is in favor? Against? Abstention. Rejected. Compromise amendment nineteen.
Who is in favor? Against? Abstention. Adopted. Compromise amendment twenty.
Who is in favor? Against? Abstention. Adopted. Compromise amendment twenty-one.
Who is in favor? Against? Abstention. Adopted. Amendment six six four.
Who is in favor? Against? Abstention. We should check it, please. I open the vote.
I close the vote. Rejected by one. Okay, amendment six seven zero. Who is in favor? Against?
Abstention. Let's do the same, let's check, please. I open the vote. I close the vote. Adopted.
Amendment six seven four. Who is in favor? Against? Abstention.
Adopted. Amendment 674. Who is in favor? Against? Abstention?
Adopted. Amendment 675. Who is in favor? Against? Abstention?
Adopted. Compromise amendment 22. Who is in favor? Against? Abstention?
Adopted. Compromise amendment 23. Who is in favor? Against? Abstention?
Adopted. Compromise amendment 24. Who is in favor? Against? Abstention?
Adopted. Compromise amendment 25. Who is in favor? Against? Abstention?
Adopted. Compromise amendment 26. Who is in favor? Against? Abstention?
Adopted. Amendment 822 part 1. Who is in favor? Against? Abstention?
Let's check. I open the vote. I close the vote. Adopted. Compromise amendment 27.
In favor? Against? Abstention? Adopted. Compromise amendment 28.
In favor? Against? Abstention? Adopted. Compromise amendment 29.
Who is in favor? Against? Abstention? Adopted. Compromise amendment 30.
Who is in favor? Against? Abstention? Adopted. Amendment 831 part 1.
Who is in favor? Against? Abstention? Let's check it. I open the vote.
I close the vote. Adopted. Compromise amendment 31. Who is in favor? Against?
Abstention? Adopted. Compromise amendment 32. Who is in favor? Against?
Abstention? Adopted. Compromise amendment A. Who is in favor? Against?
Abstention? Adopted. Amendment 94. Who is in favor? Against?
Abstention? Adopted. Compromise amendment B. Who is in favor? Whoa, okay, okay, okay.
One moment, many pages to look, check. Are you ready? Okay. Compromise amendment B. Who is in favor?
Against? Abstention? Adopted. Let's move on to the final vote by roll call vote. I open the vote.
I close the vote.
Okay, congratulations, report is adopted. So a strong majority. Thank you so much. Especially to our colleagues from employment, but we continue our SANT committee in a moment. Thank you so much.
Okay, colleagues, please take your seat. We will continue in a moment. Okay, let's move on to the point four, vote to challenge the coordinator's decision not to act on petitions 2287/2025. Dear colleagues, on May the secretariat has received a message from Christine Anderson on behalf of the ESN group, contesting the coordinator's decision of 6 May on item 10, petitions for information, petitions 202287/2025.
You have received the voting list by email. A vote in favor means approval of the coordinator's decision of 6 May 2026, thus the rejection of the contestation. A vote against means rejection of the coordinator's decision of 6 May 2026 and therefore the approval of the contestation. I know that Ms. Anderson wants to take the floor, but there is no such opportunity according to rules 22 duties, rules of procedure. I conduct this meeting.
This is a contestation of a decision of coordinators. There was no request to debate this, so I propose to move directly to the vote.
Christine Anderson
Chair, I have a point of order. I would like to raise a point of order, please.
Christine Anderson
Yes, Chair, I'm basing on rule 202. I'm contesting the decision that was taken by the coordinators and that is up for a vote now. What we are looking at is a petition where a participant in the Pfizer trial participated and he was severely injured by the mRNA injection.
Adam Jarubas
Ms. Anderson, you break the rules now, so please stop. Please stop. We're going to the next.
Christine Anderson
And we should take a look at this at least. This is the subcommittee public health. And if we sweep it under the rug, with all due respect, if we keep it under the sweep it under the rug, then we actually confirm what the people are thinking about us anyway, that we are trying to hide stuff. We should at least take a look at this petition. Thank you.
Erik Marquardt
Mr. Chair, just a replacement that I just wanted to say that I'm not a SANT member and my name is Mr. Marquardt and I'm replacing Mr. Marino now on this vote.
Adam Jarubas
Okay. We took note. Dear colleagues, let's proceed the vote. First, we let's do a testing vote because it is roll call. I open the vote.
Testing vote. I close the vote. Okay, so we're moving to the regular roll call. I open the vote. I close the vote.
It is adopted. Thank you so much. Point five, laying a framework for strengthening the availability and security of supply of critical medicines product, as well as the availability of and accessibility of medicinal products of common interest. Okay, let's have a very, very short break. Dear colleagues, as you know, on the 11th of May, the third and final trilogue on the CMA file took place in the Parliament, during which we reached a provisional agreement with the Council.
This deal should ensure a high level of public health protection for EU citizens by reducing dependency on non-EU countries and boosting the competitiveness of the EU pharmaceutical sector. I would like to thank the rapporteur Tomislav Sokol and shadow rapporteurs for an excellent cooperation in this file. I will give the floor to Tomislav, our rapporteur on the file, to report back on the political discussion of the trilogue. Tomislav, could you take the floor, please?
Thank you very much.
Tomislav Sokol
Thank you chair for giving me the floor. I'll go straight to the point. So the agreement on the Critical Medicines Act demonstrates that when Europe's health security and strategic autonomy are at stake, EU can act decisively and deliver concrete results. The Parliament entered these negotiations with a clear objective. The CMA had to become more than a symbolic response to shortages.
It had to provide practical tools to strengthen security of supply, reinforce European manufacturing capacities, and reduce our dependencies on third countries. And I would also like to add to that, also achieving or facilitating equal access to medicines, because it is unacceptable that innovative medicines get to some markets, some national markets, two or three years after some other markets in the EU, which is unacceptable and CMA also try to tackle that to a significant extent. I would like to highlight three key achievements secured by the Parliament during the negotiations. So first on the scope. Parliament successfully secured the inclusion of all orphan drugs, orphan medicines, in key provisions of this act.
Patients suffering from rare diseases are often among the most vulnerable and thus it was essential that they were not left behind. And I would like to mention that here specifically that 95% of patients suffering from rare diseases do not have a treatment. So facilitating and incentivizing development of new medicines for rare diseases in Europe should be one of the main strategic priorities of the EU. So as a result, orphan medicinal products will be eligible for collaborative procurement at European level, allowing member states to join forces and improve access to these medicines. We also ensure that orphan medicinal products can benefit from the streamlined permitting procedures established under the act.
Strategic projects involving these products will therefore have access to faster and more predictable authorization procedures, helping to attract investment and strengthen production capacity within the EU. So essentially this means that development of new orphan drugs will be much easier, simpler and faster than before, and through collaborative procurement will strengthen the negotiating position of member states, which should make it easier for them to acquire these medicines faster and at a lower cost, which is extremely important in terms of ensuring equality of access for patients. Second, on procurement and the Buy European approach. For too long procurement of medicines has been driven almost exclusively by the lowest price. While this may have reduced costs in the short term, it also contributed to the relocation of production outside Europe and increased our dependence on fragile global supply chains, especially in combination with having only one winner in a tender.
Tomislav Sokol
So combination of one winner tenders and the lowest price resulted in increased dependency on imports, especially of generic medicines from India and China, which for us from a point of view of security of supply is unacceptable. So the agreement fundamentally changes this approach. For critical medicines where there is a high level of dependency on a single or a limited number of third countries, preference should be given to production based in the European Union.
Price will no longer be the sole or dominant criterion in public procurement. Instead, contracting authorities will be able to favor suppliers of critical medicines and their active substances manufactured in the EU by applying a scoring system that proportionately rewards the share of manufacturing taking place within the EU. In this context, contracting authorities may allocate additional points to manufacturers that offer 50% or more of the medicinal products and their active substances manufactured in the Union. This creates a strong incentive for companies to invest in European production capacities and supply chains. This is not about protectionism.
It is about resilience, reliability and security of supply. Europe cannot continue outsourcing the production of critical medicines while expecting guaranteed access during crisis. Strategic autonomy in healthcare is no longer optional, but a necessity. The same principles will also apply to collaborative procurement conducted at European level, helping to strengthen supply security across the EU. And third, on solidarity and contingency stocks.
So Parliament insisted that measures introduced in one member state must not create shortages in another, which unfortunately sometimes takes place. We therefore secured a clear safeguard stating that contingency stock requirements applied in one member state must not have a negative impact on the availability of medicines in other member states. But we went further than that. Member states will be required to inform the Critical Medicines Coordination Group of their intention to introduce or significantly modify contingency stock requirements. This will increase transparency and allow exchanges based on the principles of proportionality and solidarity.
We also strengthened the link with the European Voluntary Solidarity Mechanism. When the mechanism is activated, member states will provide information on available stocks of critical medicines that can be relocated to countries facing shortages. And where voluntary measures are not sufficient, recommendations may be issued inviting member states to adapt contingency stock requirements in order to facilitate the supply of medicines to member states who are experiencing shortages and ensure optimal allocation of critical medicines across the EU. So on this, this is like I would say the only part where the Parliament was not able to achieve all of its objectives from the mandate in a sense of adopting a mandatory redistribution mechanism, but definitely when taking into account everything that I mentioned in terms of solidarity, transparency on the European level, I think that we achieved a major, major, major improvement when compared to what we have today. So overall, this agreement strengthens Europe's ability to prevent shortages, supports investment in pharmaceutical manufacturing, modernizes procurement rules and reinforces the competitiveness of our pharmaceutical sector.
So in the end, I would like to thank shadow rapporteurs, the Council Presidency and the Commission for their constructive cooperation throughout the negotiations. The result is I think balanced and ambitious agreement that puts European patients, European resilience and European competitiveness at its center. Thank you.
Thank you so much, Tomislav, thank you for your report.
Ask anything about this video — I analyse its transcript to answer.