Committee on Transport and Tourism 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
Offset
Transcript offset
Export
Replay
Versions of this video
Transcripts may differ slightly from one version to another.
TRAN European Parliament
Follow its sittingsJosé Manuel Sanabria
Más Estados miembros están exigiendo cambios para proteger a los puertos europeos frente a esta competencia desigual. Si el ETS provoca que los flujos marítimos se desplacen a puertos africanos, no habremos reducido emisiones, simplemente las habremos reubicado y desplazado y habremos destruido economía y empleo europeo en ese proceso. En segundo lugar, hay una dimensión que a veces se olvida. Las políticas turísticas deben generar valor para los residentes y las pymes locales y no solo para los visitantes. El turismo en las islas ejerce una presión real sobre las comunidades, sobre la vivienda, agravada por los alquileres de corta duración y la segunda residencia, sobre las infraestructuras compartidas, sobre el empleo estacional que dificulta la retención del talento y la resiliencia demográfica.
La cultura y el patrimonio no son para nuestras islas un mero decorado, son activos estratégicos para la cohesión comunitaria y para el aseguramiento de la competitividad del destino. El turismo que no cuida a quien vive en el destino no es sostenible, simplemente se convierte en un sector extractivo. Por eso necesitamos indicadores de calidad del empleo turístico, como la estabilidad, la formación, la brecha salarial, etcétera, en los programas cofinanciados por la Unión Europea e itinerarios de recualificación en competencias verdes y digitales. Y necesitamos que las islas puedan adoptar medidas adaptadas para proteger el acceso a la vivienda y asequible de su población. En tercer lugar, la estacionalidad es uno de los principales desafíos estructurales de todas las islas europeas.
En el caso de Canarias, en 2025, el 49,6% de las llegadas internacionales a Canarias se concentraron en solo dos mercados emisores. Su solución pasa por gestionar los flujos turísticos en función de la capacidad de carga real del territorio, no solo por atraer turistas en temporada baja y acompañar además la gestión del destino a su promoción. Esta planificación exige gobernanza multinivel real. Las autoridades regionales y locales deben participar plenamente en el diseño e implementación de las políticas turísticas europeas. La planificación integrada debe vincular turismo, agua, energía, residuos, pesca y agricultura.
Y los ecosistemas turísticos insulares necesitan apoyo específico de la Agenda Europea para el Turismo 2030 y en la futura Estrategia de Turismo Sostenible de la Unión Europea. En cuanto al modelo, debemos ir más allá de la sostenibilidad hacia el turismo regenerativo. Modelos que restauren activamente los ecosistemas y las comunidades que han sufrido la presión sobre el territorio y la población. La biodiversidad insular, vulnerable por propia definición, se encuentra bajo presión constante. La gestión circular de recursos, la eficiencia hídrica y las soluciones basadas en la naturaleza son necesidades operativas y no solo aspiraciones.
Por todo lo anterior, en nombre de la Comisión de las Islas de la Conferencia de Regiones Marítimas Periféricas y concretamente del Gobierno de Canarias, pedimos tres compromisos concretos. En primer lugar, que se reconozca expresamente la singularidad de las islas y de las RUP del artículo 349 del Tratado Fundacional de la Unión Europea en las normas de ayuda de Estado al transporte aéreo, incluidas las ayudas a las compañías aéreas para nuevas rutas, y que se establezcan y prorroguen las excepciones al ETS para las RUP, porque si el ETS no puede acompañarse de SAF disponible en el territorio, no es una transición justa, es una penalización unilateral a nuestros territorios. En segundo lugar, que se corrija la asimetría del ETS marítimo, es decir, el 100% para rutas intraeuropeas frente al 50% para rutas con terceros países, que está desviando tráfico marítimo hacia puertos africanos y destruyendo actividad de cruceros y conectividad logística en las RUP. Una misma norma no puede generar competencia desleal entre puertos de la Unión Europea y puertos extracomunitarios. Y en tercer lugar, que los ecosistemas turísticos insulares reciban apoyo de la futura estrategia de turismo sostenible de la Unión Europea con gobernanza multinivel real, planificación territorial integrada, instrumentos para proteger a las comunidades locales y financiación que impulse el turismo regenerativo.
Finalizo, señorías, las islas europeas no son la periferia de Europa, son su frontera real, su laboratorio de innovación, su patrimonio natural y cultural más singular. Solo necesitamos que las reglas europeas no nos pongan en desventaja respecto a quienes no las aplican, porque igualdad no es uniformidad y una transición que no es justa para los territorios no es una transición, es una transferencia de desigualdades. Muchas gracias.
Thank you. Thank you for your excellent speech and and and presentation. Now I'll pass the floor to Mr. Mavroyiannis. Mr. Mavroyiannis, please, the floor is yours for five minutes.
Giorgos Mavroyiannis
Thank you, Chair. Honorable members, dear colleagues, thank you for the opportunity to exchange views on regional and island tourism and in particular on structural disadvantages, connectivity gaps and seasonality imbalances. Before I begin, I would like to inform you that the Director General of the Deputy Ministry of Tourism had originally planned to actually travel and participate in today's discussion, but unfortunately, due to unforeseen circumstances, he was ultimately unable to attend and I am therefore here on his behalf. So I speak today both from the perspective of Cyprus as an island member state and of course from the perspective of the current presidency of the Council of the European Union. Under the Cyprus presidency, the Council adopted on 28th of May conclusions on building sustainable and competitive tourism for the future.
The central message of those conclusions is simple, but is really important: sustainability and competitiveness are not opposing objectives. Actually, they are mutually reinforcing. A tourism ecosystem that protects its natural and cultural assets, invests in quality, strengthens resilience and benefits local communities is also a more competitive ecosystem. And this is particularly true for islands. For island destinations, tourism is not only an economic sector.
It is linked to territorial cohesion, employment, air and maritime connectivity, the vitality of local communities, the survival of SMEs and the visibility of Europe's diverse destinations. But island tourism operates under structural conditions that are not comparable to those of mainland destinations. And connectivity is the clearest example.
For Cyprus, air connectivity is not simply one transport option among many. It is the main gateway for tourists, residents, workers, students and businesses. When air connectivity is reduced or becomes more expensive, is limited by seasonality or is disrupted, the consequences are immediate on tourism flows, on business continuity, on labor mobility, on investment decisions and on regional balance. This is why the Council conclusions recognize reliable, affordable, accessible, frequent and year-round links as a key enabler of balanced tourism development. They also underline the specific constraints of island member states and island regions, including their structural dependence on air transport.
From a Cyprus perspective, this is not an abstract policy point. Recent geopolitical instability in our region has shown how quickly tourism demand, aviation schedules and traveler confidence can be affected. Island destinations need crisis preparedness but also connectivity resilience. They need the ability to maintain minimum links, diversify markets, communicate clearly in times of uncertainty and recover quickly when conditions improve. The recently adopted EU strategy for islands by the Commission is therefore an important and timely step.
It recognizes in a dedicated strategic framework that islands face permanent structural disadvantages, including higher transport costs, smaller markets, limited economies of scale, demographic pressures, environmental vulnerability and challenges in access to services. For tourism policy, this means that a one-size-fits-all approach will not work. EU policies should take into account the specific circumstances of islands across a range of policy areas, including transport, state aid, cohesion, digitalization, climate adaptation, housing, skills and of course crisis preparedness. But island tourism should not be seen only through the lens of disadvantage. Islands are also laboratories of sustainable transformation.
They can pioneer renewable energy solutions, circular water and waste systems, blue economy innovation, smart mobility, cultural tourism, slow tourism and data-driven destination management. They can show how Europe can combine competitiveness with environmental responsibility and community well-being. So the key is to build sustainable competitiveness on the following mutually reinforcing pillars. First, we have the local communities and social equity. Tourism must generate value for residents, workers, SMEs and local communities.
It must address both over-tourism and under-tourism and spread benefits more fairly. Second, we have the connectivity and sustainable mobility.
For islands, as I have mentioned before, connectivity is a structural necessity. Air and maritime links are not optional extras. They are essential infrastructure for tourism, territorial cohesion, citizens' mobility, and economic resilience. Third, the green transition and climate resilience. Island destinations are highly exposed to climate change, water stress, coastal pressures, and biodiversity loss.
Investing in resource efficiency, circularity, climate adaptation, water resilience, and sustainable mobility is therefore central to long-term competitiveness. Fourth, we have the digital transformation, data, and innovation. Better tourism data can help all destinations, and perhaps more importantly islands, to understand visitor flows, seasonality, housing pressures, environmental impacts, and community perceptions. Digital tools can support smarter, evidence-based destination management. Fifth, we have the skills and quality employment.
Tourism competitiveness depends on people. Addressing labor and skills shortages, improving career pathways, supporting upskilling and reskilling, and making tourism employment more attractive are especially important for seasonal and island destinations. Sixth, we have the resilience, adaptive management, and crisis preparedness. As I said at the beginning of this intervention, recent geopolitical instability has shown how quickly connectivity, demand, and traveler confidence can be affected. Island destinations need stronger early warning systems, crisis communication, contingency planning, market diversification, and adaptive management tools.
And last but not least, we have the multi-level governance. Tourism is a domain which cuts across transport, cohesion, environment, housing, digital policy, skills, culture, and external relations. A stronger governance model is needed, involving EU institutions, Member States, regional and local authorities, DMOs, businesses, workers, and communities. Taken together, these priorities show that sustainable competitiveness is not built through isolated measures. It requires an integrated approach that recognizes the specific realities of islands and other regions while ensuring that European tourism remains resilient, inclusive, and globally competitive.
Cyprus believes that the forthcoming EU sustainable tourism strategy should build on these priorities. It should recognize the diversity of Europe's destinations, support island and regional specificities, reduce unnecessary administrative burden for SMEs, and ensure that EU funding and policy tools are accessible to the destinations that need them most.
Virginijus Sinkevičius
Okay, thank you very much.
It was five minutes, but it was ten already, so we really appreciate. Thank you. We do think that the presidency has a lot to say, and thank you very much for leading, leading the way. If you don't mind, we also have other speakers in line. And now I'll give the floor to Ms. Taitsu.
The floor is yours for five minutes, please.
Andreas Tziatziou
Thank you, chairs. Good afternoon, honorable members. Perhaps, if possible, to show a couple of slides. First of all, let me thank you for inviting me today to discuss this important topic. We bear witness that islands and coastal communities are at the heart of our policy very recently, as you mentioned before, chair.
The Commission has adopted strategies on islands and coastal communities, and we are also looking forward preparing the EU sustainable tourism strategy. But maybe just a word on the specific challenges. Indeed, it was mentioned before that the islands do face specific structural challenges, in particular when it comes to connectivity, but not only. And this is already enshrined in the treaty. We are talking about 27,000 islands in the EU.
17 million people live on 4,000 such islands. And in terms of tourism and how important tourism is for the islands, we can see that, you know, 45% of the blue economy is actually tourism. So, just to have a few figures in mind. And then many challenges already mentioned before by colleagues. So, of course, connectivity is, is essential here, and it is the main challenge.
It's about, of course, fragmented logistics and, and sometimes lack of multimodal alternatives that limit the development of, of the islands sometimes, and in tourism that may affect us. Of course, climate change is something that islands see sometimes quicker than other regions of Europe. And of course, as the minister said previously, unbalanced tourism and seasonality is something that in over, let's say, areas affected by overtourism can pose certain issues. One other challenge that was perhaps less mentioned is related to preparedness and crisis management. This is essential, I believe, in particular, this is a process that needs to be handled already at destination level in, in the islands.
And then, this is perhaps across the board in our tourism ecosystem, but skilled staff for tourism companies in island destinations, we know that sometimes these skill shortages are even more prominent. Next slide, please. So, I'm going to say a word regarding how we plan to tackle some of these challenges that affect islands and regional tourism. We, as you know, we are preparing at the Commission the sustainable tourism strategy. At the moment, we are envisaging four focus areas, in particular, sustainable competitiveness.
And here I refer to the need to simplify regulation and possibly administrative burdens and obstacles. Then we focus on, on data and work on data and digital skills, in particular with the development of tourism data space, as well as work on skills.
We see that also for islands this is a big challenge. And here I will come to to possible actions in a second. Of course sustainability is something that has come up in our consultations a lot. And in that respect it affects not only connectivity but in general sustainability of tourism companies and in the sector. I mentioned already resilience, the need to improve resilience in the destination.
And then Europe's global outreach on the international stage and to third country visitors as competition from other destinations is becoming more powerful. Next slide please. I have already mentioned very recently Commission has adopted the island strategy and the coastal community strategy on the 10th of June. These two strategies do touch upon tourism. They make clear how important this sector is for the blue economy and also the challenges that it may bring in certain hotspots, in particular when it comes to housing.
And then in terms of of actions, looking at the sustainable tourism strategy, of course we're going to to make the link with this adopted strategies but also we have a number of measures that will be part of the tourism strategy, in particular with respect to multimodality and improving the tourist travel experience. And then of course one important element is the are the tools and best practices for destinations. We want to give destination tools in order to address their issues related to sustainability, crisis preparedness, digitalization and so on. Very important also and just mentioned before, unbalanced tourism is something that we would like to address with guidelines on unbalanced tourism. This will come after the adoption of the strategy.
And of course in order to to help in particular more regional and rural areas, we look at developing alternative routes and possibilities. And finally, and I will end here, one of the actions that we are contemplating to address the skills gaps is European Tourism Academy open to job seekers to fill in these gaps. Thank you.
Thank you very much. Dear colleagues, now the time has come for your interventions. I'll begin by inviting comments and questions from the TTF steering group members. Each of you will have two minutes. Other members wishing to take the floor will have the opportunity to intervene for one minute afterwards.
So I'll kindly ask you all to to remain within the allocated time limits. First we start with EPP, Ms. Nikolina Brnjac.
Nikolina Brnjac
Thank you chair. Thank you dear Mr. Sanabria, Mrs. Taiko, dear Andrea. The economy of many European islands predominantly relies on tourism revenues, while island communities are strongly impacted by the tourism. So in a way island communities often live two different lives, one during the peak season and entirely different life during off-season. Islands are also among the most sensitive destinations when it comes to the negative effects of the tourism, both on environment and quality of life of local communities.
So public services and infrastructure, I mean water supply, electricity grids are under strain and prices of goods and services in peak season tend to rise for locals as well as for tourists. All of this shows that islands must be our priority when developing sustainable tourism. And this is why I would like to draw your attention to the section of our report which we adopted in April on sustainable tourism, which deals with tourism governance and destination management. In my opinion, data collection and appropriate data usage is the foundation for the creating quality public policies as well for strategic planning at the destination level. And this is especially important for the islands.
Finally, I would like to note that the new MFF recognizes the role of sustainable tourism in strengthening regional prosperity and my focus will remain on support to sustainable tourism through the negotiations which are ahead of us. In conclusion, I would like to ask all the honorable guests here the same question, which issue would they highlight as the most important for islands in the framework of the upcoming EU strategy for sustainable tourism? Thank you very much.
Virginijus Sinkevičius
Thank you. I don't see Sofia with us, so I'll move to Mr. Daniel Attard from S&D.
Daniel Attard
Thank you very much. I speak the same language as the deputy minister who addressed this hearing when it comes to the disproportionate financial and administrative burdens which are faced by member states. Our national airline has invested in one of the most modern fleets when it comes to aircraft in the EU, with the least emissions possible, least sound pollution possible. But that investment is totally going to waste with all the excessive airport charges which they are facing. They pay charges, they don't know if they get the SAF or not.
It's a honestly, it's a cartel out there which the EU needs to address. We cannot go on with the situation whereby different airports charge different charges and all the investment is going totally to waste. When it comes to maritime, I spoke about this last week. We are paying 40% more for every trailer which goes out. 60% of our trailers go out empty due to the trade imbalance.
So there is no European sea, there is no European air. It's a global air, it's a global sea. So the EU needs to wake up and smell the coffee and address the issues which need to be addressed. Now I will address also the Commission. I urge the Commission to engage with us as a European Parliament.
We have adopted a report with a strong majority in April and we still had did not have one single meeting with the Commission to discuss the upcoming sustainable tourism strategy. There are common European challenges which require common European solutions. We have a lot of ideas which the European Parliament has backed across the political spectrum when it comes to short-term rentals. We've been we have been clear, we called for a definition between commercial and non-commercial operators to address the the situation which I described as a jungle when it comes to short-term rentals on European scales. I welcome the idea of European Skills Academy.
We have called for a common European tourism skills card. On waste management, we have a lot of ideas on on paper. I will not exceed my time, so let's engage on a constructive discussion to come up with a proper tourism strategy. Thank you.
Vicent Marzà Ibáñez
Thank you very much and thank you for being on time. I don't see Matteo Ricci, so we move to ECR. I don't see anyone from Renew as well. Then Greens, Vicent Marzà.
Sí, gracias, señor presidente, señor Sanabria. Permítame compartir unos números. Usted ha compartido algunos, yo quería compartir otros más. Son de sus propias proyecciones, ¿no? Que Canarias recibirá alrededor de 18 millones, un poco más, 18,4 millones de turistas este año con una territorio de 2,1 millones de residentes.
De hecho, detrás de estos números hay ya una ciudadanía que se manifiesta. No pasa solo en Canarias, pasa en muchos otros territorios, especialmente insulares, y que piden tres cosas muy concretas. Primera, limitar el crecimiento del turismo. Segundo, la ecotasa, o que los turistas contribuyan más con impuestos específicos a los servicios que luego se les prestan en las islas. Y repartir mejor los beneficios sobre el turismo.
Me gustaría saber en concreto sobre estas tres demandas que tiene la ciudadanía, no solo de Canarias, sino de los otros destinos turísticos que sufren esta presión turística masiva, qué opina sobre esto y qué respuesta se le puede dar. Entre otras cosas, porque lo que vemos y es común a todos los territorios europeos que tienen esta masificación turística es que cuando hay una mayor dependencia, una sobredependencia de un único sector, por ejemplo del sector turístico, las desigualdades no solo aumentan, sino las condiciones materiales de las personas que viven, de los residentes que viven en esos territorios empeoran. Y por lo tanto, debemos dar una solución a ese turismo masificado que no está mejorando la vida de las personas que residen. Por eso también quiero hacer una pregunta a la Comisión, y es si la Comisión también acepta esta situación, que existen territorios saturados y que la respuesta no es más turismo en esos territorios, sino probablemente acompañar a esos territorios para que puedan invertir en otros sectores, para generar otro tipo de economía también. Y por lo tanto, que haya alternativas a la dependencia económica sobre un único sector, porque ser dependiente, sea de lo que sea, no es bueno para nadie, tampoco para los territorios.
Gracias.
Okay, thank you very much. And from the left, Elena Kountoura.
Elena Kountoura
Ευχαριστώ πολύ, κύριε Πρόεδρε. Οι νησιωτικές περιοχές εξακολουθούν να επιβαρύνονται από το μόνιμο κόστος της νησιωτικότητας. Αντιμετωπίζουν περιορισμένη συνδεσιμότητα, υψηλότερο κόστος μεταφορών και υπηρεσιών, έλλειμμα ανθεκτικών υποδομών, στεγαστική πίεση, δημογραφικές προκλήσεις, λειψυδρία και αυξανόμενη έκθεση στην κλιματική κρίση και εποχικότητα. Η τρέχουσα συγκυρία είναι ιδιαίτερα κρίσιμη, καθώς εκτός από τις ευρωπαϊκές στρατηγικές για τα νησιά, τις παράκτιες περιοχές και τα λιμάνια, ακολουθεί η στρατηγική για το βιώσιμο τουρισμό και το νέο πολυετές δημοσιονομικό πλαίσιο. Η επόμενη προγραμματική περίοδος αποτελεί κομβική ευκαιρία να περάσουμε από τη γενική αναγνώριση της νησιωτικότητας στη θεσμική και δημοσιονομική της κατοχύρωση και να εξασφαλίσουμε τους πόρους που απαιτούνται.
Στο πλαίσιο αυτό απαιτείται ένα πιο ευέλικτο, αποκεντρωμένο μοντέλο διακυβέρνησης με ενισχυμένη συμμετοχή και ρόλο των νησιωτικών αρχών και κοινωνιών. Η μετάβαση προς ένα βιώσιμο, ανθεκτικό τουριστικό μοντέλο χρειάζεται σαφές σχέδιο υλοποίησης της στρατηγικής, implementation plan, με χρονοδιάγραμμα, επαρκείς πόρους, μηχανισμούς αξιολόγησης και εργαλεία προσαρμοσμένα στις ανάγκες κάθε νησιωτικής περιοχής. Θα ήθελα λοιπόν να ρωτήσω τους ομιλητές. Στηρίζετε την ανάγκη ενσωμάτωσης μίας ρήτρας νησιωτικότητας, island proofing, στη στρατηγική για το βιώσιμο τουρισμό, όπως έγινε ήδη στη στρατηγική για τα νησιά, ώστε οι νησιωτικές περιοχές να μην αντιμετωπίζονται με τα ίδια κριτήρια που ισχύουν για τις ηπειρωτικές περιφέρειες στα ζητήματα μεταφορών, κρατικών ενισχύσεων και χρηματοδότησης υποδομών; Στηρίζετε την ανάγκη ενσωμάτωσης της εδαφικής διάστασης στη στρατηγική με ειδικούς δείκτες και ξεχωριστή αξιολόγηση των επιπτώσεων του τουρισμού και των πολιτικών στις νησιωτικές περιοχές σύμφωνα με την εδαφική συνοχή;
Τρίτον, στηρίζεται την πρόταση του Ευρωκοινοβουλίου για ένα σχέδιο υλοποίησης της στρατηγικής ώστε να αντιμετωπιστούν οι προκλήσεις βιωσιμότητας και οι ειδικές εδαφικές ανάγκες των νησιωτικών περιφερειακών περιοχών. Και τέλος, στηρίζεται τη δημιουργία ειδικών χρηματοδοτικών μηχανισμών στο επόμενο πολυετές δημοσιονομικό πλαίσιο για τις νησιωτικές τουριστικές περιοχές ώστε να αντιμετωπίζουν την έντονη εποχικότητα και τις αυξημένες πιέσεις αλλά και να εκσυγχρονίσουν τις υποδομές τους που θα πρέπει να είναι ασφαλείς, βιώσιμες και ανθεκτικές. Σας ευχαριστώ πολύ.
Okay, thank you very much, dear colleagues. Now I'll give the floor to other members. I have so far four on the list, so those who want to speak please raise your cards. You each have one minute, so please be aware of time. One minute each.
We start with Sergio Gonçalves, S&D.
Sérgio Gonçalves
Thank you, Chair. I will speak in Portuguese. As ilhas e em especial as regiões ultraperiféricas enfrentam constrangimentos estruturais, como já foi referido. Neste contexto, temos atualmente várias estratégias que já foram apresentadas ou que serão apresentadas em breve, como a estratégia europeia para os portos, a estratégia para as ilhas e comunidades costeiras, a estratégia para o turismo sustentável e a estratégia para as regiões ultraperiféricas, da qual eu serei relator na Comissão de Desenvolvimento Regional. Gostaria de vos perguntar de que forma veem a articulação entre todas estas estratégias e, em particular, dirigindo-me à senhora Andrea Staytzu, de que forma está a Comissão a trabalhar para assegurar a coordenação tanto na elaboração como na implementação destas estratégias.
E por falar em implementação, temos de falar também em orçamento e na arquitetura do próximo quadro financeiro plurianual e na centralização em planos nacionais. Como se garante a governação multinível que já foi aqui referida, que envolva autoridades regionais e locais? Como salvaguardar as especificidades destas regiões, inclusivamente com a reestruturação já anunciada na Comissão e com o fim da DG REGIO? Muito obrigado.
Okay, thank you very much. Next from the EPP, Borja Jiménez Lázaro.
Borja Giménez Larraz
Gracias, presidente. Hoy hablamos de una realidad en Europa. Hablamos de manera permanente de la necesidad de impulsar un turismo sostenible, un turismo que huya de la masificación, pero bueno, tenemos que tener claro que la Unión Europea es una potencia turística y esto lo debemos de aprovechar. También es cierto que la gran mayoría de turistas se concentran en los mismos destinos. Y al mismo tiempo que se produce esta situación, hay regiones en Europa con un enorme potencial turístico que tienen problemas para atraer visitantes debido a sus problemas de conectividad.
Lo vemos claramente en regiones de interior, como puede ser mi región, Aragón, en el norte de España, donde contamos con un enorme patrimonio cultural, turismo rural και espacios naturales de gran valor, el Pirineo más salvaje, desiertos, joyas del románico, pero donde la falta de conexiones directas limita nuestra capacidad para competir con otros destinos. Tenemos las infraestructuras, tenemos aeropuertos, pero no tenemos vuelos. Todos se concentran en los mismos hub que al final conducen a una masificación. Por eso me gustaría preguntarle a la Comisión Europea qué medidas considera que podrían impulsarse desde el ámbito europeo para fomentar un mayor uso de aeropuertos regionales y secundarios como herramienta de desarrollo turístico y cohesión territorial. Gracias.
Virginijus Sinkevičius
Okay, thank you very much. Now the next speaker for one minute, Julien Leonardelli from PfE.
Julien Leonardelli
Merci Monsieur le Président. Dans beaucoup de nos îles et territoires périphériques, le tourisme fait vivre des milliers de familles. Pourtant, il est parfois plus simple de partir vers une destination hors de l'Union européenne que de rejoindre certains de nos propres territoires. Et pour les voyageurs, le parcours ressemble parfois à une mauvaise plaisanterie. Vous avez réservé votre vol, payé votre billet, vous êtes à l'heure à l'embarquement et pourtant on vous refuse l'accès à l'avion parce qu'il a été surbooké.
Autrement dit, la même place a été vendue deux fois. Dans n'importe quel autre commerce, ça s'appellerait de l'arnaque. Et si vous avez de la chance d'embarquer, il reste le casse-tête des bagages cabine. Quelques centimètres de différence d'une compagnie à l'autre et voilà des frais supplémentaires qui tombent sans prévenir. Pour nos territoires insulaires, ces difficultés ne sont pas anecdotiques.
Elles découragent les visiteurs, compliquent les déplacements et pénalisent directement l'économie touristique locale. Si nous voulons soutenir ces territoires, commençons par faciliter l'accès et protéger réellement les passagers.
Speaker 16
Ja, vielen Dank, Herr Vorsitzender. Ich würde gerne auf Deutsch sprechen. Vielen Dank auch an alle Gäste hier und für den Vortrag. Wir können uns, glaube ich, alle darüber freuen, dass die Kommission jetzt diesen Schwerpunkt für die Inseln und Küstenregionen eingerichtet hat. Das werden wir alle unterstützen.
Ich komme selbst aus einer Küstenregion im Norden Deutschlands und kenne dort die Probleme. Wir wollen, glaube ich, alle dasselbe. Wir wollen unser Hinterland attraktiver machen. Wir wollen die Besucherströme lenken, damit sie sich nicht so sehr konzentrieren auf wenige Hotspots. Und wir wollen eben auch mehr Zielgruppen ansprechen, sodass wir das ganze Jahr vernünftigen Tourismus haben.
Deswegen sind wir sehr gespannt auf die Strategie für den nachhaltigen Tourismus und hoffen, dass die Blue Economy weiter wächst. Gleichzeitig gibt es natürlich das Problem der Konnektivität, was auch schon angesprochen worden ist von Kollegen und besonders von Herrn Minister Sanabria. Dafür bin ich auch sehr dankbar, denn wir haben ja gemerkt, dass die Fluggesellschaften durch den Green Deal benachteiligt sind und dass auch ETS dringend überholungsbedürftig ist. Deswegen meine Frage an DG MOVE. Sie erkennen ja in Ihrem Papier die Cost of Insularity als strukturellen Wettbewerbsnachteil an.
Und gleichzeitig haben Sie aber die Dekarbonisierungsziele, die zu steigenden Kosten im Luft- und Seeverkehr führen. Und deswegen würde ich gerne von DG MOVE wissen, wie dieser Widerspruch aufgelöst werden soll. Danke.
Virginijus Sinkevičius
Okay, thank you very much. I have two last speakers on my list. We return back to EPP, Estaràs Ferragut.
Rosa Estaràs Ferragut
Sí, gracias, presidente. Provengo de las Islas Baleares, uno de los referentes turísticos a nivel mundial, y me gustaría acoger con satisfacción la estrategia costera de costas y de islas, dos estrategias que ha presentado la Comisión Europea. Qué duda cabe que al hablar de turismo hablamos de sostenibilidad, de competitividad, de conectividad, de digitalización, de formación, de energía, de medio ambiente, de seguridad y que al final el turismo es transversal e influye en todo. Me gustaría dar tres ideas. La primera, el bienestar ciudadano tiene que estar en el centro.
No puede medirse el turismo solo en llegadas o en el PIB, sino también el impacto que el turismo tiene sobre la calidad de vida de la población. Cuando hacemos una encuesta en Baleares, el turismo debe contribuir a mejorar la vida de los ciudadanos que viven allí. Por lo tanto, el ciudadano en el centro.
Si mejoramos la vida de los que viven allí, el turismo será siempre positivo. Tenemos que hacer una gestión adaptativa, anticiparnos a las tensiones, rectificar cuando haga falta. Cada decisión que adoptemos en materia de turismo va a afectar a la vivienda, a los recursos naturales, a la infraestructura, al empleo, a la convivencia. Y la convivencia tiene que ser en paz. Y por lo tanto tenemos que hacer una gestión adaptativa y un aprendizaje continuo.
Y luego la diversidad europea. No es lo mismo ultraperiféricas que islas, no es lo mismo un territorio de montaña y por lo tanto la diversidad se tiene que ver no como un problema sino como una oportunidad para que nos adaptemos a cada territorio. Y por supuesto, y con esto acabo, la cláusula de insularidad debe tenerse en cuenta siempre a la hora de diseñar transportes, conectividad, vivienda, movilidad e innovación. Tenemos una oportunidad para 17 millones de habitantes de la Unión Europea.
Virginijus Sinkevičius
Thank you. The last speaker on my list is Alicia Homs Ginel for one minute please.
Alicia Homs Ginel
Sí, bueno a mí me gustaría darle la bienvenida al año 2026 al Partido Popular porque hace tres años nos llamaban turismofóbicos cuando hablábamos de masificación turística y de que había que poner límites y proteger a los residentes y veo que ya han asumido que ese es el discurso que hay que tener, ¿no? Sobre todo para proteger a nuestros residentes. Como bien se ha dicho, el turismo durante mucho tiempo se ha centrado en la parte económica y creo que ahora hay que invertir muchos esfuerzos en centrarlo en la parte social y medioambiental, que son las que están más débiles actualmente. Creo que poner límites es necesario. Poner límites a las entradas de coches, de vehículos, poner límites a las plazas turísticas, eso incluye alquiler vacacional, poner límites al número de cruceros que están en el mismo espacio de tiempo en un puerto de una isla porque al final nuestros recursos son finitos y son limitados y no podemos crecer más.
Por tanto, mi pregunta es: ¿qué límites creen que hay que poner en las islas y hasta qué punto apoyarían los modelos de participación ciudadana precisamente para poder proteger al residente con las soluciones que se brinden? Muchas gracias.
Okay, thank you very much for all the MEPs who have spoken and asked the questions. As you can see, this is a very emotional but also close to MEPs' heart topic. I'll give now a floor to each of our guests for three minutes, very strictly three minutes, to reply to some of the questions that MEPs asked. And we'll start with Mr. José Manuel Sanabria.
José Manuel Sanabria
Muchas gracias, señor presidente. Voy a intentar en tres minutos contestar a todas las cosas que se nos han requerido, pero es muy complicado. Y con la primera interviniente, ¿qué es lo más importante de la estrategia? Para nosotros lo más importante es poner en el centro a la ciudadanía, a los residentes. Por supuesto, la estrategia de turismo sostenible tiene que ver también con descarbonización, con sostenibilidad, con movilidad, con muchas cuestiones que tienen que ver con el destino, pero desde luego creemos que si no se transfieren los beneficios del turismo a la ciudadanía, a los residentes, no tiene especial sentido continuar con un modelo extractivo y creciente sin mucho sentido, ¿no?
Eso por ser breve. Antes otro compañero hablaba de las tasas y los impuestos, el compañero, no recuerdo, perdón, no veo porque no veo desde aquí el apellido. Cuando hablamos de turismo, 18 millones de turistas, bueno, no sé qué cifras maneja usted. En 2017 hubo 17 millones de turistas, en 2025 18 millones de turistas, no ha habido un millón cada año, no es cierto esa cifra. Es verdad que hubo un repunte a partir de la pandemia, pero que tiene que ver también con otros modelos y otros cambios que hubo en las sociedades, básicamente británica, de gastar más en experiencias y menos en consumo cotidiano, ¿no?
Pero bueno, eso no tiene nada que ver. A ver, nosotros tenemos un territorio limitado. No podemos crecer más en suelo turístico. Las plazas que son son las que están, no pueden crecer más. Es más, lo que hemos hecho para hacer una gestión del territorio más sostenible es en diciembre del año pasado entró en vigor la ley de uso turístico de la vivienda, es decir, la limitación de que el crecimiento de la vivienda vacacional no podía ser a criterio de los propietarios, sino del planeamiento urbanístico.
Esa responsabilidad, que no la hemos inventado nosotros, que está desde 1956, la hemos querido poner en valor y ya está pasando. Desde diciembre de 2025 no solamente es que no hay más, se han paralizado todos los crecimientos de vivienda vacacional y hoy tendremos en torno a 1.600 viviendas vacacionales menos. Cada semana hay unas 20 o 30 o 40 viviendas vacacionales menos en Canarias, que también tiene que ver con la presión que tiene que ver con las tasas de aguas y de basuras turísticas que también se les aplica a esas viviendas. Los ayuntamientos se van a beneficiar también de esa circunstancia. Y yo sí quiero comentarle también una cosa.
18 millones de turistas generan, el año pasado generaron 4.100 millones de recaudación tributaria, que paga el 120% de la educación pública en Canarias o el 95% de la sanidad pública en Canarias. Estamos esperando algún sector que sea capaz de contribuir con un solo punto del PIB, unos 600 millones de euros al año, para poder diversificar la economía. No lo hemos encontrado ni en economía, ni en ese sentido de recaudación tributaria, ni de empleo. Tenemos las mejores cifras de empleo y de desempleo desde el año 2007. Estamos hablando con 250.000 habitantes más.
Estamos hablando de un 14, 13% de desempleo, la mejor cifra de empleo joven de toda la historia del histórico de Canarias. Tenemos más autónomos que parados en Canarias. Todos esos son cifras que tienen que ver con el sector turístico. Es una economía terciarizada. No tenemos muchos sectores de crecimiento.
El comercio y el turismo están perfectamente vinculados y están relacionados en ese crecimiento que les acabo de comentar. Pero desde luego sí contribuye la recaudación tributaria al crecimiento de esta sociedad, pues por supuesto que sí. Y hablo también del modelo impuestos y tasas. Nosotros somos favorables al modelo de tasas turísticas para los servicios que se presten a los turistas, no para los impuestos por pernoctación, porque eso también los pagan los canarios. Nosotros viajamos de isla a isla para trabajar y para temas de salud y no queremos que los canarios, que no se les puede exceptuar por una sentencia del TC, no se les puede exceptuar del pago de impuestos, pero sí se puede y se hace, por ejemplo, en Lanzarote, que es un modelo para nosotros, el ingreso a las actividades turísticas las abonan los visitantes de esa actividad y eso genera empleo en ese municipio, economía en ese municipio y cánones para ese municipio.
No se va a unas arcas generales para distribución al resto de los presupuestos de la comunidad autónoma, ¿no? Nosotros hemos implementado, antes nos hablaban de qué estamos haciendo en Canarias, por ejemplo, sí hemos implementado la primera estrategia de cambio climático o el plan de acción climática en Canarias de todo el Estado y planes de acción climática regional y plan de acción climática insular. Estamos implementando ya los planes de acción climática, nos queda creo que una isla por implementar ese plan de acción climática. Estamos trabajando en eso porque creemos efectivamente que para nosotros la sostenibilidad no es una cuestión decorativa, es un requerimiento de competitividad. Nosotros no podemos seguir sin esa marca de sostenibilidad en nuestro destino, lo tenemos muy claro y estamos trabajando por eso.
La ley de vivienda vacacional, el plan de acción climática, los planes de descarbonización, etcétera, están sirviendo para eso. Y sí, okay.
Virginijus Sinkevičius
Excellent. Thank you very much for your deep and knowledgeable answers. We move now to Mr. Mavroyiannis. Please, the floor is yours for three minutes.
Giorgos Mavroyiannis
Thank you, Chair. I will speak in Greek for these closing remarks.
Όσον αφορά τις προτεραιότητες στον τομέα του τουρισμού, μπορούμε να πούμε ότι αυτές συνοψίζονται σε τρεις πυλώνες. Είναι η συνδεσιμότητα, η ανθεκτικότητα και η βιώσιμη ανταγωνιστικότητα. Αν θα μπορούσαμε να επιλέξουμε έναν από αυτούς, ο οποίος είναι κρίσιμος για τη διατήρηση ενός ισχυρού τουριστικού τομέα, θα επιλέγαμε τη συνδεσιμότητα. Θεωρούμε ότι όσον και να επενδύσουμε στους υπόλοιπους τομείς, αν δεν υπάρχει καλή συνδεσιμότητα η οποία να μεταφέρει τους τουρίστες, να μεταφέρει κόσμο από μια περιοχή σε άλλη, τότε ο τουρισμός δεν μπορεί φυσικά να είναι βιώσιμος. Επομένως η συνδεσιμότητα είναι πολύ σημαντική και επίσης πρέπει να συνδυαστεί με την ανθεκτικότητα, ούτως ώστε να διατηρείται η συνδεσιμότητα σε ένα ελάχιστο επίπεδο ακόμα και κάτω από έκτακτες συνθήκες και κρίσεις.
Και επίσης η συνδεσιμότητα μπορεί να είναι ένα πολύ χρήσιμο εργαλείο στο να βοηθήσει στο να αντιμετωπίσουμε τον υπερτουρισμό σε ορισμένες περιοχές, μεταφέροντας τουρισμό και σε άλλες πόλεις, σε άλλες περιοχές οι οποίες δεν είναι τόσο καλά συνδεδεμένες με την υπόλοιπη χώρα ή με την υπόλοιπη Ευρώπη. Όσον αφορά τη χάραξη πολιτικών, όντως τα νησιά έχουν ιδιαιτερότητες και χρειάζονται μεταχείριση και χάραξη πολιτικών σύμφωνα με τις ιδιαιτερότητές τους. Και αυτό δεν ισχύει μόνο για τα νησιά, αλλά ισχύει για όλες τις περιοχές, τις γεωγραφικές περιοχές της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης. Επομένως αυτό που λέμε εμείς είναι ότι είναι πολύ σημαντική η συλλογή και η αξιοποίηση των δεδομένων. Η συλλογή και η αξιοποίηση των δεδομένων μπορούν να μας δείξουν τις ιδιαιτερότητες κάθε περιοχής, εν προκειμένω των νησιών, ούτως ώστε να δούμε ποιες πολιτικές χρειάζεται να χαράξουμε και με ποιες δράσεις θα υλοποιήσουμε αυτές τις πολιτικές μας.
Και ολοκληρώνοντας για τους, σε σχέση με τους τοπικούς πληθυσμούς, είναι πολύ σημαντικό όταν σχεδιάζουμε, σχεδιάζουμε πολιτικές να λαμβάνουμε υπόψη όχι μόνο τους τουρίστες αλλά και τον τοπικό πληθυσμό. Δεν πρέπει ο τουρισμός να είναι εις βάρος του τοπικού πληθυσμού και μπορεί αυτό να γίνει εάν επενδύσουμε πάνω στην ανάπτυξη δεξιοτήτων, στην, στο να δημιουργήσουμε επαγγελματικές προοπτικές για τους κατοίκους και επίσης στο να βάλουμε κάποιες ασφαλιστικές δικλείδες για τους κατοίκους των περιοχών οι οποίες έχουν υπερβολικό τουρισμό, μπορούμε να βρούμε την ισορροπία και να διατηρήσουμε αυτό το πολύτιμο προϊόν το οποίο έχουμε στην Ευρώπη. Ευχαριστώ.
Thank you very much. Thank you for being excellent on time. Last, Ms. Tsytsu, the floor is yours for three minutes.
Andreas Tziatziou
Thank you, Chair. I will try to be on time as well. First of all, perhaps a word in relation to what was said regarding unbalanced tourism. Let me be clear that this is something that has come a lot during our consultations with all stakeholders from the tourism ecosystem. We are very much aware of the challenges and we are preparing instruments for destinations to be able to manage these challenges.
And here I'm not talking only about managing tourist flows. This will be something that we will be tackling with the aid of digital tools, but I'm also referring to other challenges such as sustainability and also crisis preparedness. And in particular when it comes to destinations, we do not believe that overtourism as such is the problem, it's rather the management of these tourist flows.
So with the right instruments, destinations will be able to tackle these issues. I would also very much like to thank MEP TARD and Mrs. NIKOL-NABRINIAK and all the members in the Tourism Task Force for the work done on the report that we have not only read with a lot of attention, but also will try to respond as much as possible in with the tourism strategy because these issues that you have identified in relation to connectivity, in relation to resilience, crisis preparedness, unbalanced tourism and so on are also the issues that we have identified during the consultations and the preparation of the strategy. On the issues raised in relation to the next MFF, tourism is part, very well mentioned in the national and regional plans proposal that was put forward by the Commission. Specific objective on tourism is included and here it is very important, and this is my appeal also to Member States, it is very important for Member States to take advantage of this possibility in order to finance the tourism projects. And of course we have other proposals such as the Competitiveness Fund which will greatly contribute to the greening of tourism.
Of course there is coordination between these different strategies, also the proposals that have been put forward by the Commission under the different financing programs and the objectives of this strategy. You have seen that in the island strategy there are specific mentions in relation to maritime transport, the financing of maritime transport and also of air transport. Let me say a word also about the social impact, I'll be very brief of course. As I mentioned, we would like to prepare these guidelines on unbalanced tourism together with our strategy. This means that one of the things certainly that we want to touch upon is carrying capacity, so how many tourists can a destination handle at the same time and of course the social aspect is something that we'd like to look at through this perspective of best practices that we have seen already in certain destinations.
Just maybe a final point, you have mentioned the ETS, of course this is a challenge but there are also specific exemptions for islands if I remember correctly. Thank you very much.
Virginijus Sinkevičius
Thank you, dear guests, dear colleagues, thank you for this discussion that has offered depth, clarity and new perspectives. And across Europe, more than 100 million people call our islands and coastal regions home. Responding to the needs of such diverse and sizeable communities requires bold action, first of all better connectivity and faster green transition to build real local resilience. This is how challenges become opportunities and how these regions can evolve into drivers of sustainable regional tourism contributing to a more competitive Europe. With this I'd like to conclude this exchange.
Once again, thank you very much to all our speakers and we move to our next item on the agenda.
Just give one minute for guests to change and we'll conclude, we will continue. Excellent. Dear colleagues, we now come to the next point on the agenda, which is the presentation of the study providing input for the aviation sector strategic action plan. Here in TRAN, the competitiveness of the EU aviation sector is especially close to our hearts. We are therefore glad for this opportunity to look into the future and consider our options for the best way forward.
I'm happy to welcome the two authors of the study, Mr. Peter Wiener and Mr. Mark Tolley from Steer. They will present the study for a maximum of 15 minutes in total, followed by a round of questions then from members. You ready? Okay, excellent. So, dear guests, Mr. Wiener and Tolley, the floor is yours for a maximum of 15 minutes.
Peter Wiener
Good afternoon, everybody. Thank you, Chair. So, I'm Peter Wiener, my colleague Mark Tolley and I will present this study to you. So, this is a study on the EU aviation sector strategic action plan. Next slide, please.
Oh, it's here. Thank you. Thank you. So, we'll talk you through the background and objectives, the methodology, strengths and weaknesses of competitiveness and our recommendations. Next slide, please.
Next slide, please. So, to start with, the background, what is the background objectives of the study? Aviation is a very important part of the EU economy. It's 7% if you take account of all the indirect effects as well, or 9 million jobs across the EU. And you can see that on the slide on the right.
And the objective is to analyze the competitiveness of the EU aviation sector. And we looked across the whole value chain, all the elements of the aviation sector, taking account of global competition and the EU's decarbonization policies. And based on that, we've developed some recommendations which could pave the way to an EU aviation sector strategic action plan.
So to just to give you some idea of the kind of things that we looked at if we could go to the next slide please. So we did third country comparisons where we looked at a number of countries around the world selected as very relevant in the aviation industry particularly the US and China but also countries in the Middle East Turkey Canada. What you see on the left hand chart is that the EU's the economic value of the aviation sector in the EU in 2023 was 760 million a billion euros. That compares with the USA the next bar which is 1.2 trillion and obviously much higher than all the others China and Middle East are the second two bars. So the EU is a major player economically.
If you look at just simple passenger numbers then you look at the chart on the right. Again the EU 1.5 billion passenger movements that's people moving through airports as opposed to nearly 2 billion in the US and a similar number in China just slightly smaller than the EU much lower in the other ones. Next slide please. We we also did some financial comparisons of companies in the various parts of the aviation sector. So we looked at airlines we looked at airports we looked at aerospace companies and also to air navigation service providers.
The blue bars so if we look at the left hand chart the blue bars are EU companies the green bars are non-EU companies. These were ones for which we could get financial information. The left hand chart is all about profit levels EBIT earnings before interest and tax. You can see that the EU airlines are slightly less profitable than their non-EU peers. On the other hand the airports which is the middle bar the EU ones are more profitable.
And then for aerospace it's relatively similar. On the right hand side as a way of getting a proxy for access to capital which of course is very important we looked at credit ratings. And you can see for example that the EU airlines and the non-EU airlines there's a different spread around the the median but the middle of that is triple B minus which is the the bottom end of investment grade. There are a quite a lot of reasonably strong airlines. Airports in Europe are particularly strong in terms of their investability.
Non-EU ones are also strong. And when you look at aerospace companies the EU ones are quite strong and stronger than competitors in terms of credit ratings. If we just move to the next slide please. So and one more. So in terms of what was the methodology very briefly we looked at a lot of different aspects of competitiveness.
We focused on economic issues the aeropolitical ones so the treaties and regulations that underlie the the industry financial metrics that you've just seen some regulatory structures and infrastructure and resources which includes also the the staff and people working in the industries. And based on these drivers we've identified competitive strengths threats and opportunities and I'll hand over to Mark to talk you through those.
Mark Tolley
Thank you Peter next slide please. So the first strength is that the EU benefits from a large and mature aviation sector with a well-developed regulatory acquis. The regulatory framework goes beyond what many third country competitors do in aiming to facilitate a level playing field as shown in in the table on the right hand side.
This is a summary of what's available in the full study, so I won't describe it in detail now, but there are several examples to demonstrate this point. The EU also has a high level of climate ambition, which goes beyond many third countries, with a structured framework in place already which builds on top of international agreements such as CORSIA. This is a competitive strength from a long-term perspective as the industry is aiming for net zero by 2050, so aligned policies with this help to future-proof the industry. Next slide, please. The EU internal aviation market is well-developed and particularly since the liberalization in the early 1990s has provided a competitive market which benefits consumers through increased choice and lower fares.
As seen in the chart, the market structure of the airline industry is supportive of its competitiveness because there's a high and growing proportion of low-cost carriers present in the market. And this is actually a greater proportion than in many third countries. Not only this, but the full-service carriers as part of alliances offer strong connectivity and benefit from network effects, again supporting their competitiveness internationally. Next slide, please. And the EU also benefits from strong aerospace and sustainable aviation fuel production industries.
The aerospace industry in the EU contains several world-leading firms, the most notable being Airbus, which is the world's largest commercial aircraft manufacturer, as shown in the chart. The sector is highly skilled and adds significant value to the EU economy as well as contributing towards its strategic autonomy in civil and military applications. The SAF production industry is growing with the uptake in SAF and the EU contributed around 20% of production in 2024, showing its already an important role in this nascent growing market. And both of these industries' market structures support their competitiveness because they are dominated by a small number of large firms which can leverage economies of scale. Next slide, please, as we go on to the threats to competitiveness identified.
So the EU's aviation decarbonization policies are driving the industry towards reaching net zero, notably ReFuelEU Aviation requiring the supply of SAF to Union airports and the EU ETS requiring carbon credits to be purchased and surrendered against emissions. However, the cost of compliance with these policies increases costs for the carriers because of the higher cost of SAF and cost of purchasing ETS credits. The chart on the right shows the additional costs that A4E members, which represent the majority of the EU airline market, are anticipated to face compared to third countries with no equivalent requirements. And this impacts EU carriers and thus EU airports more than third countries because the EU airlines center their route networks around EU airports and thus a greater proportion of their operations are in scope of these regulations. The current evidence is mixed whether these additional costs lead to business leakage, where the relatively lower cost of flying via non-EU airports encourages diversion of traffic away from EU airports and carriers.
Next slide, please. So the EU faces energy costs for energy-intensive sectors such as aerospace and SAF production that are around twice as high as in China and India and more than double the cost of that in the USA. As seen in the chart on the right-hand side, while Airbus and Boeing have similar energy consumption over the 2019 to 2024 period in the blue bars, the energy price indicated by the yellow line varies significantly, particularly since 2021 onwards.
And as a result, these industries face a competitive disadvantage relative to third countries. Next slide, please. And the final threat identified is that there are evolving global challenges highlighting that a focus on strategic autonomy is required within the EU. The aerospace capability is key for the EU strategic autonomy in the industry, but the degree to which civil-military synergies are recognized or facilitated lags behind the USA. Indeed, the revenues of major aircraft manufacturers between Europe and the USA shows that the 2024 revenues for US manufacturers are around double that of Europe and far above other major manufacturers such as Bombardier from Canada and Embraer of Brazil.
Other threats for the aerospace industry are that the industry is reliant on imported raw materials and critical resources. In recent years, exports have been subject to restrictions, and these demonstrate the need to avoid single-point dependencies to secure the resilience of the sector. And the SAF production industry in the EU, while this is a substantial part of the global market at present, also relies on imported feedstocks, and there's a risk that without long-term supply agreements, this may face supply challenges. Next slide, please. So moving on to the opportunities identified to boost competitiveness.
The first is innovation and technological developments, which offer competitive benefits in the future, primarily through increased efficiency of operations, which can lower costs. This is true in the aerospace industry through the development of new propulsion technologies such as electric and hydrogen aircraft. This also helps the EU support its strategic autonomy, and it offers a growth opportunity for the industry. In air traffic management, there are new technologies which enable a trajectory-based operations concept. This relies on satellite tracking of flights, which is more accurate than existing systems and can allow for a higher throughput of aircraft.
AI can also be used across several possible use cases in the sector, ranging from flight crew support, predictive maintenance, and support for more efficient air traffic management and airport operations. Next slide, please. On the SAF industry, the importance of it in the decarbonization of the aviation sector, as well as the strong current position of the industry and the regulatory framework in place, all indicates that the EU has an opportunity to play a leading role in the production of bio-SAF and e-SAF into the future. There's some way to go to achieve this because, particularly for e-SAF production, while there are around 40 commercial SAF projects which have been announced in the EU, none of these have reached a final investment decision, which is the final milestone before a project begins construction. So de-risking private investment was identified as the key reason to, or the key factor to take charge of this opportunity.
Next slide, please. And finally, in the aerospace industry, while it is strong compared to its competitors, it does not benefit from a comprehensive and joined-up policy such as an industrial strategy at the EU level to reflect its strategic importance. For example, the defense industrial strategy does not reflect aerospace's significant contribution to the defense industry, and similarly, access to raw materials, high energy prices coming down, and ensuring it has a highly skilled workforce in the future are important considerations which could be developed further. And over to Peter for the recommendations.
Peter Wiener
Next slide, please. And the next. Thank you, Mark. So just to summarize very briefly, we have a number of recommendations. This slide summarizes them.
The blue ones relate to air carriers and sustainable aviation fuel production particularly. The orange ones relate to aerospace and technology, and then the green one is to do with people skills. So just going through them very quickly, we recommend that you should review options to reduce costs and enhance the competitiveness for EU carriers under ReFuelEU Aviation and EU ETS. Also secure resilient SAF feedstock and support bio and e-SAF production within the EU. Also evaluate fair competition measures to ensure a level playing field with third countries and to identify best practices.
On the aerospace side, developing an aerospace strategy to ensure access to key resources and support civil and military technology synergies. Address the high energy costs for EU aerospace and the sustainable aviation fuel industries to close gaps with non-EU competitors. And boost future competitiveness by funding new technologies in aviation, that could be air traffic management, propulsion methods, artificial intelligence, e-SAF. And then finally, develop targeted skills policies for strategic industries such as aerospace and also those facing shortages, which includes air traffic management and ground handling. So thank you very much for your attention.
Virginijus Sinkevičius
Thank you very much, thank you for being so excellent on time. I think it's an extremely interesting presentation, especially in the light of the latest debates that we have had. And I'll now give the floor to our coordinators, each for two minutes, and then we will have an opportunity to also give a floor for one minute to other members. I'll start with the EPP, Jens Gieseke.
Jens Gieseke
Yes, thank you very much Chair, and thank you very much for the presentation, very interesting indeed. And your study concludes that recruitment, production capacity and feedstock availability are among the most significant competitiveness challenges. Given this, why does your study devote such extensive attention to employment models and working conditions? Secondly, why does the study devote relatively limited attention to COMAC, the Chinese industrial policy and strategic implementation of Chinese growing aerospace capabilities? What to see, do you think there are parallels between the pressure currently affecting European automotive industry and those facing aviation, and what policy lessons should be drawn to avoid repeating the same mistakes?
In former times the Commission, now we wait for the new strategy to come in in autumn, there was much focus on revision of ground handling, slots, airport charges. Do you think there is need to revise this legislation as well? And on the ReFuelEU Aviation, my question is, do you see a need to have an earlier review of ReFuelEU Aviation because obviously if it comes to the SAF quotas, they apply just to European airlines, and if we want to have a level playing field, we need to have the rules applied to all carriers, not just the European ones. So these are my questions and I'm happy for the answers, thank you.
Johan Danielsson
Thank you Chair. Firstly, on the issue on working conditions, which I am glad in the report, not so much in the presentation, you identify serious problems. In the report you clearly show that atypical working conditions are associated with lower working condition and this also have an impact on safety cultures.
On the issue of bogus self-employment, you conclude that it's hard to be correctly self-employed in aviation, henceforth most of the self-employed are bogus self-employed. And when you read this together with the fact that in some member states a majority of the employers are self-employed, also that you have some low-cost carriers with the majority of pilots being self-employed. You add to this the fact that your report states that somewhere between 8 and 10% of pilots have to pay to fly schemes in their early careers. And if you add to this also the increase of wet leasing where you can see the atypical employment go up to 65% compared to the 10% on average. We have serious issues with working conditions in employment.
In the proposed strategies and recommendations, it's mostly about skills shortages. Would you agree that a serious aviation strategy also need to deal with these issues of atypical employment contracts, bogus self-employment, wet leasing and so on, and if so, how? Secondly, on external aviation policy, I think the study rightly shows that EU air transport agreements does not always deliver a genuine level playing field between EU carriers and third countries. With the Qatar agreement, for example, we still see concerns around the state support and compliance with social and labor commitments, including ILO standards. In the study you recommend further study and evaluation.
I think this is a welcome conclusion, but could you agree that given the lack of efficient enforcement by the Commission, that it would perhaps make sense to consider in the future that we ensure compliance with these commitments before providing access to the EU aviation market to third countries? Thank you.
Thank you very much on behalf of Patriots. Okay, we move ECR, no, on behalf of Renew, no, on behalf of Greens, Kai.
Kai Tegethoff
Yes, thank you to the authors for this substantial study. I welcome its focus on the whole aviation value chain rather than reducing it to competitiveness to airline costs or environmental rules. Too often environmental rules are treated as the explanation for every difficulty. So the study shows a wider picture: fragmented airspace, operational inefficiencies, skills gaps, industrial weaknesses, strategic dependencies and weak enforcement of fair competition tools. Competitiveness cannot mean lowering environmental or social standards, it means fixing those structural weaknesses.
In this regard, I do have several questions. First on the book and claim. The study sees it as a possible way to create a more flexible EU SAF market, but Europe remains heavily reliant on imported feedstocks and the system would require a robust central registry. How can we guarantee the origin, traceability and environmental integrity of certificates? And should the system initially be limited to a European scope to strengthen oversight and avoid opaque supply chains?
Second, on the synthetic aviation fuels. The sub-target starts in 2030, but there is still no commercial scale e-SAF production in Europe. How do we use the support available now more strategically to help projects reach final investment decisions and build European production capacity before the mandate takes effect? I'm thinking particularly about ETS free allowances as contract for difference available until 2030 precisely. Finally, SESAR and trajectory-based operations can reduce delays, fuel use and emissions.
But skills shortages and poor conditions remain serious, especially in ground handling. How can the action plan ensure that efficiency and digitalization go hand in hand with training, better working conditions and a workforce strategy? Thank you.
Arash Saeidi
Merci Monsieur le Président. Merci pour ce rapport. Merci pour ce rapport, j'ai tendance à considérer que le français devrait être une langue de travail normale dans un pays francophone. Et comme les deux sièges sont dans des pays francophones, je démarre au quart de tour. Faut que je prenne l'habitude de prévenir.
Merci donc pour votre rapport. J'avais trois petites questions qui reprennent un peu ce qu'ont dit mes collègues, donc je ne vais pas étayer longuement. D'abord sur les conditions d'emploi, c'est effectivement un aspect sur lequel dans notre groupe on prête une attention particulière. On a tendance beaucoup à entendre les compagnies, alors ici aériennes mais ça peut être d'autres secteurs, je referai le parallèle avec l'automobile tout à l'heure aussi, se plaindre des coûts et cetera, tirer toujours sur la corde avec les recours excessifs à des pseudo auto-entrepreneurs et puis se plaindre derrière du manque de main-d'œuvre. Donc bon, vous avez compris où je veux en venir et ce que je pense.
Mais est-ce que vous pourriez nous éclairer sur la part du coût de la main-d'œuvre dans la structure des finances de ces compagnies ? C'est pour qu'on réalise aussi est-ce que c'est pas des économies de bouts de chandelles qu'on fait en voulant vraiment tirer, presser les salariés ou non-salariés comme des citrons et pour économiser quelques euros et derrière en fait perdre en compétitivité pour le coup réellement puisque je considère, mais je pense que je suis pas le seul ici, que l'attrait d'une compagnie, l'attrait d'une société, l'attrait d'un industriel réside également dans la valeur de sa main-d'œuvre. La deuxième question, je vais être plus rapide, c'est sur l'application de nos règles aux compagnies étrangères. On a été récemment confrontés dans un dossier qui était le droit des passagers aériens à une résistance y compris des États européens qui en gros nous ont dit ne cherchez pas absolument à appliquer la législation européenne aux compagnies hors Union européenne parce que sinon on va se prendre un retour de bâton. Est-ce que sur cet aspect-là vous pourriez nous éclairer un peu et nous dire dans quelles conditions, est-ce que ça dépend juste de notre volonté politique, est-ce qu'un peu plus de courage politique de la part de l'Union européenne suffirait ou pas ?
Et est-ce que, parce que quand j'écoute votre présentation, énormément de problèmes résident dans le fait qu'on a une concurrence déloyale parce que nous ne savons pas appliquer nos règles aux compagnies hors Union européenne et que ça fait une concurrence déloyale. Et j'en finis très très vite Monsieur le Président sur la part consacrée à la recherche et développement par les industriels de l'aérospatial et de l'aéronautique européenne. Est-ce que vous pouvez nous dire si, c'est une vraie question, je n'ai pas idée de la réponse, est-ce qu'à l'instar de l'automobile nous on a un problème d'investissement où souvent les compagnies se plaignent et veulent que l'Europe, les États viennent les aider alors qu'elles-mêmes ont oublié d'investir correctement dans la recherche et le développement ? Merci Monsieur le Président de ne pas m'avoir coupé.
Virginijus Sinkevičius
Merci beaucoup. Right, on behalf of ESN, and now other members who would like to speak.
I have only one... two. Okay, excellent. So we start with Julien Leonardelli on the list and then... okay.
Julien Leonardelli
Merci, merci Monsieur le Président. L'aviation européenne, c'est près de 10 millions d'emplois. C'est notamment Airbus dont les chaînes d'assemblage font chez moi la fierté de Toulouse et de toute l'Occitanie. Mais que fait-on de notre fleuron ? Le rapport est clair : à chaque vol, Bruxelles nous impose un carburant vert plus cher en y ajoutant par-dessus une taxe carbone.
Cela représente plus de 7 euros de surcoût par passager. Ce qui me frappe, c'est que ce rapport n'arrive même pas à prouver que toutes ces contraintes changent quoi que ce soit pour la planète. Alors pourquoi continuer de les imposer ? Pendant ce temps, nos concurrents américains et chinois font décoller leurs avions sans débourser le moindre centime quand nous freinons les nôtres avant même le décollage. Finalement, ici à Bruxelles, qu'importent les sujets, les jours se suivent et se ressemblent.
On se tire des balles dans le pied en regardant Washington et Pékin nous dépasser. Il est temps d'arrêter de se sacrifier et de sacrifier notre souveraineté industrielle et nos emplois sur l'autel d'une écologie symbolique et unilatérale. L'Europe doit choisir : soit elle redevient une puissance qui produit, qui innove, soit elle se condamne à devenir une belle réserve naturelle survolée par des avions des autres. L'aviation n'est pas un luxe, c'est un vecteur de puissance, il faut la défendre.
Virginijus Sinkevičius
Thank you very much. And the last speaker on my list is Ms. Wind. Please, the floor is yours.
Marianne Vind
Thank you so much for being here and thank you for the presentation. I'm a little bit interested in more fair competition between companies. We see some companies in Europe are working really hard on the best working condition and in fact a lot of those companies don't have a lack of labor force. They secure the occupational health and safety. And we see other companies that use people and have a really terrible working condition and terrible health and safety at the workplace.
This sector is known for very heavy lifting, bad postures when you are lifting really heavily, and particles in the air and soon the heat outside. So there are a lot of things to do and I think we could all win if we find some solutions for all companies. Thank you.
Thank you very much. Thank you for all members of the Parliament. Now, dear guests, you will have in total six minutes to reply more or less to what members of the Parliament has asked. Who would be first? Mr. Wyna, please, the floor is yours.
Peter Wiener
Thank you, thank you Chair. So I will try and address these questions as I can. Maybe we should talk about employment as one particular area. I think generally speaking, aviation employment isn't necessarily specifically different from employment in other sectors. It is in certain cases where there are skill shortages, but although obviously there could be better measures to protect workforce in difficult, you know, in things like ground handling where there's a lot of lifting and so on.
I'm not sure that a focus of aviation-specific legislation necessarily needs to be there. There may be particular instances in the irregular forms of employment in airlines and so on.
But again, I think these things need to be balanced against the cost-effectiveness and profitability of the companies as well. So, I mean, the balance between employer profitability and rights of workers is a larger, wider issue, I think, than aviation. I'm not sure there need to necessarily be many aviation-specific measures. Some, as we've highlighted, but I think, you know, you can't look at it as the only thing to, you know, it's not necessarily an aviation-specific area. So, I mean, clearly there are things like the safety culture.
I guess that needs to be addressed because we know that safety culture is a very important thing in aviation safety. It is partly why aerospace is a very safe and effective industry and the airlines. So that again needs to be recognized. But I don't think we wanted to focus too much on these measures because some of them are just broader labor versus capital issues, if you want to put it that way, which obviously different people have different views upon. I think if we talk about environmental issues, so ESAF, the SAF mandate is obviously a very fundamental, important issue.
We're very well aware that the EU is very committed to the environmental agenda. We're also very well aware that airlines are concerned about the costs that it imposes on them. I think that what we're trying to propose here is not a specific solution necessarily, but that you should balance those two aspects. If the environmental rules are so stringent that they cannot be achieved, then clearly the production of ESAFs, synthetic SAFs, by 2030 is going to be very difficult to achieve. There may be measures that can be taken to support the industry, support of investments.
There are SAF allowances. There are a number of things that are being looked at. We're aware of those. We're not trying in this study to propose a specific solution. But I think we are proposing that you should look at the options for solutions and probably adopt something because the status quo isn't working.
And therefore, if you want to help the agenda survive, the environmental agenda survive, you may need to tweak some of the rules to some extent.
Mark Tolley
Yeah, thank you, Peter. And a few additional points from myself on the questions on employment. I think it's important to remember that there is a need for workers in these sectors to fulfill the work and to accommodate growth within the sector. And to do this, it needs to be attractive to people to take employment and to maintain their employment within these industries. And this is particularly true in sectors where we've identified there are difficulties, such as in ground handling.
On the ESAF and climate policies more generally, there are examples of measures that have positive benefits to reaching a final investment decision on the financing side. So examples of contracts for difference and double-sided auctions, which are covered in the study in full. We think they show potential, but it's not a firm conclusion of this study which of these is to be used going forwards. But we suggest to take these into account very closely.
On the point of you know having these mandates in place I think it's important to remember that the climate emergency is a global issue and there's a global roadmap set out for the whole of the aviation sector across the world through ICAO and IATA to reach net zero by 2050. So yeah and finally on fair competition as this has come up in a few questions that the finding from the study is that there are measures in place that could be used to address the imbalances so 2019 712 and fair competition clauses but how effective they are is not yet clear for us.
Peter Wiener
Just to add to that point I mean fair competition of course it's always an issue but the I think our study shows that EU airlines are doing quite well so you should not feel that it's absolutely critical. Of course it's important to do it but even the Qatar study the agreement which we know everybody is uncomfortable about nevertheless the industry is still doing pretty well and so I think that should be borne in mind. I think there was a question about the regulation of foreign companies and should they be treated in you know in the same or more subject to EU regulation. Again there are commercial and political limits to what the EU can impose on third countries. The EU is not doing that badly so yes with some subtlety yes you can insist on things but I don't think it's an issue of of panic.
Virginijus Sinkevičius
Excellent. Thank you very much dear Mr. Wiener and dear Mr. Tolli. Thank you very much for the study as well as for the interesting presentation discussion and your answers. I would like to also thank our dear colleagues from the policy department for their work on this item. Thank you and now we will move to the next agenda item.
Colleagues let's move on the next point of today's agenda which is the feedback from the TRAN mission to Washington DC. This mission took place from 26 until 28 of May. The delegation considered of seven members from five political groups. Members of delegation were Ms. Sophia Kircher who was the head of the delegation Mr. Jens Gieseke from EPP Matteo Ricci S&D Marian Windt S&D Roman Haider Patriots Matej Vasik ECR and Valérie Devaux Renew. It was the first TRAN mission to Washington since the current US administration in office and we are looking forward to hearing the feedback from the head of the delegation Ms. Kircher.
You have the floor for five minutes.
Sophia Kircher
Thank you so much chair dear colleagues dear employees of the TRAN secretariat. First of all I want to thank everyone who made this trip and journey possible and especially also my colleagues from the European Parliament who were super active in the debates we had. As you just mentioned the TRAN mission took place from the 26th to the 28th of May and it was the first time in the within the Trump 2 administration that our committee visited the United States.
And we visited Washington DC and also Baltimore. And I mean, as all of us know, we are living in quite challenging times also when it comes to the transatlantic relations. And I believe it was even more important that we directly engage with our partners and that we try to stay in contact when having in mind all the uncertainties and also the rapid change in the mobility sector. And in these times, this exchange matters more than ever before. During the mission, we had, for instance, a valuable exchange with several members of Congress from both parties on several issues such as market access, tariffs, and the regulatory framework for the safety deployment of autonomous vehicles.
We also met several European companies operating in the United States, for instance, Airbus, but we also visited Tesla. These meetings highlighted just how interconnected our economies are, especially in the mobility sector, through integrated supply chains and shared expertise. This makes stable and predictable frameworks conditions on both sides all and super important. We also visited Baltimore. There we visited the port and the airport.
And we've also heard about challenges that they are facing. We also learned more about the EASA and FAA cooperation, certification procedures, air traffic management, and intermodal infrastructure. And obviously, the passenger rights that were under negotiation back then were also a substantial topic mentioned there. We focused a lot on autonomous driving. And it was a highlight, I would say, that we had the chance to drive with a self-driving taxi at Waymo.
And it was for me also a new experience to, yeah, be sitting in a Waymo taxi without a driver. There is much we can learn, but I think we also have to be careful, especially having in mind the news we are receiving right now from Waymo, that there's still improvements needed as well. More broadly, we discussed about aviation, maritime transport, rail, modern infrastructure, and also decarbonization. I think we've touched many important parts when it comes to the transport sector in general. It was an insightful visit.
And let me conclude also by thanking the TRAN committee for organizing it and all the colleagues being there, being active. And I'm looking forward to future missions as well.
Dear Sophia, thank you very much. Thank you for your presentation and insights. Does anyone else would like to to add anything? Jens?
Jens Gieseke
Yes, thank you very much. Yes, so it was an excellent summary of Sophia Kirchner, who was the head of our delegation. It was interesting, three intense days, good program, well organized by the secretariat. And the priorities have been described very well. It is not so easy to have this exchange with our American friends from time to time with the administration.
It's difficult to get real answers on our open questions, to have an open answer. But behind the scenes, it was much easier than in the on the public stage. It was good to see that that the Americans are prepared for the soccer World Cup, that all the planes could could land effectively. This is what we see for the moment. So let's keep the track in this direction and continue the dialogue.
That is very important. Thank you.
Thank you very much, dear Jens. And we also have Madame Madame Wind. Yes, please, the floor is yours.
Marianne Vind
Thank you. And I will start to say thank you to our head of our delegation. You were a wonderful leader. And we have a really great time, all of us. And thank you for the advisors' help.
And also I would like to say a thanks to to our local European Parliament in America.
They were a huge help during our days. I have a thought about sometimes when we're talking about USA and where they are, we have one picture, but but in the same day we were driving autonomous taxis and saw Baltimore airport control room and they haven't changed it for 50 years. It was before my childhood and it was a it was control room for the airport, international airport. So so when they're talking about exporting their technologies, there is still a way to do back in the United States. But it was a really a great trip and we talked about transportation in a lot of different ways with a lot of different people all over Washington and Baltimore.
It was really interesting. So thank you.
Virginijus Sinkevičius
Thank you very much. And just for concluding remarks, I give back floor to Sophia, please.
Sophia Kircher
Thank you, Chair, and thank you, dear colleagues, also for sharing your insights. And I think we saw also on one hand that we can be proud of the infrastructure that we are having in the European Union, but that there are specific parts where we can learn from each other. And although it's not part of the agenda, dear Chair, allow me to welcome a visitor group from back home, the President of Junge Industrie together with his fellow Austrians. I want to welcome you here at the TRAN Committee.
Virginijus Sinkevičius
Welcome to the TRAN Committee. We conclude this item. Thank you very much. And we move now to the last agenda point for today, which is the reporting back to the committee on the interinstitutional negotiations on the road vehicles maximum weights and dimensions. This is an important file with tangible implications for our economy and road safety.
This is second trilogue that took place on 11th of June was an occasion to take stock of the progress made during the Cyprus presidency. And I'll give the floor to our rapporteur, Ms. Serrano Sierra, who will tell us more about it. Ms. Serrano Sierra, the floor is yours for five minutes, please.
Rosa Serrano Sierra
Muchas gracias. Permítanme comenzar agradeciendo el trabajo técnico realizado durante estos meses. Hemos celebrado ocho reuniones técnicas, además de numerosos contactos bilaterales con el Consejo, así como con la presidencia chipriota. A continuación resumiré los elementos principales acordados en el trílogo del pasado 11 de junio. En materia de transporte indivisible, hemos avanzado en la armonización de los formularios que elaborará la Comisión mediante un acto ejecutivo y serán digitales.
También avanzamos en armonizar los plazos para la concesión de permisos y sobre el uso y la señalización de los vehículos de escolta. Además, hemos conseguido acordar una propuesta impulsada por el Parlamento: la creación de una etiqueta europea para identificar los vehículos de más de 18,75 metros que participan en operaciones internacionales. Una medida sencilla pero útil para mejorar la seguridad vial y aportar claridad a los usuarios. Esperamos que con el tiempo los Estados la incorporen a sus operaciones nacionales. Otro avance importante es la mejora de la información para los operadores.
Hemos acordado crear puntos nacionales de acceso disponibles en la lengua nacional y en otra lengua oficial de la Unión. Estos puntos contendrán información relevante sobre permisos, formularios y las características de las infraestructuras. Además, se establecerá una ventanilla única europea que se publicará en la página web de la Comisión y contendrá los enlaces a estos 27 puntos nacionales.
Hemos incorporado salvaguardias para situaciones de crisis. Cuando una crisis afecte a varios Estados miembros, la Comisión podrá intervenir y autorizar excepciones temporales en materia de pesos y dimensiones. Esto será complementario al marco de la movilidad militar. En cuanto a los EMS, hemos conseguido introducir una evaluación previa para verificar que la infraestructura está preparada para su introducción y para su uso desde el punto de vista técnico y de la seguridad vial. Además, las pruebas, estas pruebas serán obligatorias y durarán siete años.
Sus resultados deberán publicarse para facilitar el intercambio de buenas prácticas y se deberán realizar controles adicionales cuando los EMS se extiendan a nuevas partes de la red. También se ha logrado reintroducir mecanismos de seguimiento durante estas pruebas que el Consejo eliminaba. Y aunque no hemos conseguido mantener el seguimiento posterior a las pruebas, sí hemos garantizado que el impacto de los EMS se tenga en cuenta en los futuros planes de mantenimiento, modernización y también para el desarrollo de la red viaria. En definitiva, hemos alcanzado acuerdos equilibrados que combinan competitividad, sostenibilidad, seguridad vial y una mejor integración del mercado interior. Quiero agradecer a la presidencia chipriota su compromiso y también su disposición para acercar posiciones a un expediente complejo y sensible.
En las próximas semanas iniciaremos las negociaciones con la presidencia irlandesa. Me he reunido con el ministro y creemos que hay voluntad de seguir avanzando, pero es una tarea compleja porque el Consejo tiene una mayoría que sigue siendo muy ajustada. Por nuestra parte, queremos acelerar el ritmo de las negociaciones con un espíritu constructivo, pero también con determinación. Seguiremos defendiendo tres prioridades fundamentales del mandato del Parlamento: el artículo 4b, el anexo, las disposiciones relativas al control y a la aplicación de la normativa. Muchas gracias.
Virginijus Sinkevičius
Thank you very much. Now I'd like to give the floor to the shadows, but I don't see any. So I guess that's it. Thank you very much, Ms. Maria Serrano Sierra, for your presentation. Dear colleagues, that means that we have come to the end of our meeting.
Thank you very much. Please note that our next meeting will take place on 15th of July. My sincere thank you to participants, interpreters, ushers, technicians, and our staff for preparing this meeting. Thank you very much and have a lovely evening. Thank you.
Ask anything about this video — I analyse its transcript to answer.