Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection Ordinary meeting
Legend
Transcript markers
- text Sentence being played
- text Search result
- text Intervention cited by the link you opened
Click a sentence to play the video from that moment. Select text to quote it with the speaker, timestamp and link.
More options
Offset
Transcript offset
Export
Live capture
Versions of this video
Transcripts may differ slightly from one version to another.
IMCO European Parliament
Follow its sittingsAnna Cavazzini
And I welcome again officially Mr. Peter Burke, Minister for Enterprise, Tourism and Employment, and Ms. Neale Richmond, Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Tourism and Employment with special responsibility for trade promotion, AI and digital transformation. Very long title, I had to read it, but with important topics. So you have 14 minutes for the presentation of your points, of your program, and then we have two rounds of questions and answers. So looking forward.
I don't know who wants to start.
Peter Burke
Gabh mo leithscéal, a Chathaoirligh, agus na comhaltaí de Pharlaimint na hEorpa. Tá áthas orm a bheith anseo ar maidin le mo chara, an tAire Niamh Smyth. It's a real privilege to appear before this committee this morning on behalf of the Presidency of the Council of the European Union. I am grateful for the opportunity to discuss a wide range of issues within the committee's remit and to exchange views with members on these important matters. As Minister for Enterprise, Tourism and Employment, I greatly value the role of the European Parliament and of this committee in particular in shaping policies that have a meaningful impact on the business and consumers across the European Union.
In assuming the Presidency, we have adopted the motto "Ní neart go cur le chéile", strength through unity. This motto embodies our commitment to close cooperation with the European Parliament, the European Commission and Member States in advancing our shared priorities and delivering tangible results.
As a presidency, we are focusing our efforts on enhancing the competitiveness of the EU economy, safeguarding the values of the Union, and ensuring the security of the Union and its citizens. To this end, the core themes guiding the work of the Irish presidency are competitiveness, values, and security, which are reflective of the pillars of the strategic agenda for 2024 to 2029 as adopted by the European Council. Today's discussion provides a valuable opportunity to reflect on the progress made in the relevant priority areas, consider the challenges that still lie ahead, and explore how we can continue to work together to achieve positive outcomes for citizens across the European Union. Enhancing our competitiveness is a key priority for this presidency. In order to secure an economic future which meets the needs and expectations of its people, Europe must act urgently to enhance its competitiveness and productivity.
We are strongly committed to the EU single market reform agenda. Optimizing the single market is fundamental to the EU's broader objective to advance Europe's competitiveness and resilience in a period of geopolitical change and uncertainty for the open, rules-based multilateral trading system.
This underlines the importance of controlling and influencing those levers that are within our own control, the removal of barriers to the cross-border trade of goods and services within the EU and with it the enabling and maximizing of growth across the common single market. The context of the single market fragmentation has been set out in stark terms by the European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund. They've estimated that the ad valorem equivalent of the remaining barriers constraining intra-EU trade stands between 45 and 65% for the average manufacturing sector and an even higher 100 to 110% for the average services sector. This in turn promises significant potential for growth if we are successful in delivering on the ambitions of the single market strategy as well as the EU's One Europe One Market roadmap. Competitiveness and the advancement of the single market and unlocking its full benefits for businesses and citizens is central to the theme of Irish presidency.
We are emphasizing the single market as a cornerstone of European prosperity, working to reduce the barriers identified in the single market strategy, boost intra-EU trade and secure a level playing field for businesses operating across the EU. This includes the removal of barriers to cross-border trade of goods and services that are faced by businesses throughout the EU, most notably the terrible ten most impactful European market barriers identified in the single market strategy. Ireland stands ready to represent the Council in the trilogue negotiations for proposed single market and customs program. On behalf of the Council, we are ready to work with the European Parliament to finalize a program that will contribute towards the delivery of the ambitions set out in the single market strategy, in particular the removal of the terrible ten most persistent single market barriers. The urgency of delivering on the single market agenda has of course been underlined by the commitments set out jointly by Council, Commission and Parliament in the One Europe, One Market roadmap.
This proposed program will provide essential funding for the operation and improvement of the architecture that underpins the functioning of our common single market across the internal market, customs, tax cooperation and anti-fraud implementation and enforcement. This is in line with Ireland's priorities during its presidency of the European Council.
During our presidency, we are emphasizing the single market as a cornerstone of European prosperity, working to reduce the barriers identified in the single market strategy, boost intra-EU trade, and ensure a level playing field for businesses operating across the EU. Reducing energy prices and decarbonization is a vital element of the competitiveness agenda. The Industrial Accelerator Act, identified as a priority by leaders at European Council, will play a major role in this space. This is reflected in the ambitious timeline for completion by the end of 2026. Irish presidency is fully committed to that timeline and will work with member states to progress the file as quickly as possible while ensuring a focus on developing quality legislation that delivers the overall ambition and aligns with the principle of simplicity by design.
We intend to make steady progress in the months ahead and are grateful for the constructive engagement of all member states and Parliament on this complex but impactful file. We have a lot of work to do together, and we owe it to European industry to live up to the accelerator promise in the proposal's title. Europe's industrial competitiveness is on the line.
We have a clear mandate to take action. The Accelerator Act is a key piece of EU's response to ensure our strategically critical sectors and the skilled workforce that underpins them are resilient in the face of turbulent global markets. I am of course aware that stakeholders hold a wide range of views on the Industrial Accelerator Act. Discussions of the Council have been detailed and intensive. I look forward to similarly robust and constructive discussions with the Parliament when appropriate.
Achieving the ambitious timeline for agreement across institutions will depend on the shared ambition and willingness of all Member States and Parliament to be pragmatic and constructive in agreeing a well-designed text. All Member States share the common goals of the IAA, namely accelerating industrial decarbonisation, enhancing economic security and simplifying permitting. Ireland remains committed to ensuring that regulation is simple, of high quality, legally robust, easily to implement and avoids any excessive administrative burdens for industry. Driving the digital and AI transformation is one of the five strategic building blocks for the One Europe One Roadmap.
To aid this agenda, we welcome the European Product Act as an opportunity to modernize and simplify the EU product framework while maintaining high standards of safety and consumer protection. Ireland will prioritize an early progress on the EPA during its presidency, focusing on building consensus around a coherent and proportionate framework that supports competitiveness and simplifies compliance. We will place particular emphasis on strengthening market surveillance and advancing practical digital solutions, such as the digital product passport, to improve enforcement and supply and support a level playing field. Priorities for our presidency will include simplification and enforcement of the current digital rulebook. Therefore, it will be important that the EPA complements and reinforces, in particular, the Digital Services Act.
We support a coherent and proportionate framework that strengthens the single market and remains workable for businesses, particularly SMEs. Effective market surveillance will be critical, especially in relation to e-commerce and imports from third countries. The new framework should complement existing legislation, including the Digital Service Act, and avoid unnecessary duplication. Ireland will continue to support a balanced outcome that promotes competitiveness, consumer protection and fair competition across the single market.
The simplification of rules is another one of the strategic building blocks of the One Europe, One Market roadmap. The Public Procurement Act was published yesterday. I am aware that it is high profile and the proposal and it will be a core priority by Ireland during our presidency. The ambition for the remainder of the presidency term will be to advance consideration of the file and achieve agreement on several key elements. Under the One Europe, One Market roadmap, it is due for completion by the end of 2027.
This is an ambitious timeline, and we are mindful of the potential level of divergence of opinion on the file and highlight that compromises will have to be achieved to progress this file. To this end, Ireland is working closely with the presidency trio colleagues, Lithuania and Greece, to ensure a smooth transition of the file. Achieving the ambitious timeline for agreement across institutions will depend on the shared ambition and willingness of all Member States and Parliament to be pragmatic and constructive in agreeing a well-designed text. The draft Public Procurement Act is one of the several legislative reforms to strengthen the single market.
Public procurement has long been a pillar of the single market and it requires a new vision and a reinvigoration to make it fit for purpose in a rapidly changing market conditions. Chair, honorable members, as I highlighted earlier, the Irish Presidency will carry out responsibilities guided by the spirit of our motto, Ní neart go cur le chéile, strength through unity. The principles reflect our conviction that best outcomes are achieved through cooperation, respect and a shared sense of purpose. I am grateful for the opportunity to appear before the committee this morning. We look forward to maintaining strong and constructive partnership with Parliament in the months ahead as we work collectively to advance the interest of all citizens throughout the European Union.
I will now hand over to my colleague, Minister Neale Richmond, who will also address the committee. I look forward to hearing your views and engaging with your questions following Minister Richmond's remarks. Go raibh maith agat.
Niamh Smyth
Thank you so much. Chair, honorable members. It is a pleasure to join you here today and to contribute to this important discussion.
I welcome the opportunity to engage with members of the committee and to build on the remarks already made by my colleague Minister Burke. The European Parliament plays a vital role in ensuring European policymaking remains closely connected to the needs and expectations of our citizens. This committee's work is particularly important in helping to shape policies that support economic resilience, competitiveness, and sustainable growth across the Union. Throughout the presidency, Ireland has sought to foster open dialogue, practical cooperation, and a strong spirit of partnership within the European Parliament, the Commission, and of course the member states. At a time when Europe faces significant economic, social, and geopolitical challenges, our ability to work across together across institutions is more important than ever.
By combining our experience, our expertise, and our shared commitment to the European project, we can develop effective responses to those challenges while creating new opportunities for citizens and businesses throughout the Union. I look forward to working to outlining our approach in greater detail and to hearing the perspective of committee members during today's exchange. As a Minister for Trade Promotion, Digital, and Digital Transformation, I am determined to lead the digital and AI transformation pillar of the One Europe, One Market roadmap, which is central to strengthening competitiveness, innovation, and productivity across the European Union.
At the same time, we need to be cognizant that developments in this area are not solely about regulatory compliance. They are also intended to protect consumers and citizens across the EU, ensuring that innovation is balanced with appropriate safeguards, transparency, and accountability. To this end, I welcome the Commission's review of the Consumer Protection Cooperation Regulation. Strong consumer protection is essential for a well-functioning single market, particularly in an increasingly digital economy. The current framework has delivered important results, but experience has also highlighted challenges in tackling complex cross-border infringements.
Consumers should enjoy the same high level of protection across the single market, regardless of where a trader is established. Enforcement against non-EU traders remains a significant challenge and will be an important focus of future discussions. Following publication of the proposal, the Irish presidency will facilitate initial discussions among member states and identify areas requiring further examination. The Irish presidency looks forward to working to strengthening consumer protection and support a fair, competitive single market.
We welcome efforts to strengthen consumer protection in the digital environment and address genuine online harms. Consumers should enjoy a comparable level of protection online as they do offline. However, any future proposals should be proportionate, evidence-based, and avoid unnecessary duplication with recently agreed EU digital legislation. Allowing adequate time for the Digital Services Act, Digital Markets Act, and AI Act to take effect will ensure a coherent, evidence-based regulatory approach. Legal certainty and regulatory coherence will be critical to avoiding fragmentation across the single market.
It will be important to strike an appropriate balance between consumer protection objectives and the ability to do business, especially for SMEs to innovate and compete. Ireland looks forward to engaging further once the Commission's proposal is formally published. As presidency, Ireland will work constructively with all member states to advance discussions and build consensus on these files. We have strongly supported the objectives of the Digital Markets Act and the creation of a fairer and more contestable digital markets across the EU.
The DMA is an important demonstration of Europe's ability to shape global digital regulation while protecting consumers and supporting and promoting innovation. Effective, proportionate, consistent enforcement is essential in maintaining credible and legal certainty. As home to major European operations of many digital companies, Ireland has a strong interest in both effective regulation and a competitive investment environment. It is important that the implementation of the DMA achieves its objectives while also preserving incentives for innovation, product development, and investment in Europe. Additionally, we also have supported the objectives of the DSA in making the online environment safer, more transparent, and more accountable.
The DSA is a key part of Europe's digital regulatory framework, introducing obligations on online intermediary services, including social media platforms, to protect users and consumers online. The regulation is designed to provide better protection of fundamental rights, more control and choice for users, stronger protection for children online, and faster removal of illegal content.
Very large online platforms and search engines have additional responsibility under the DSA, reflecting the scale of their reach and the evaluated risk that they can impose. The Digital Services Act provides a clear framework in Europe, implemented through the online safety framework in Ireland, to hold platforms accountable for the addictive design and effects of their services. The European Commission has primary responsibility for regulating the largest platforms and search engines, but works closely with national authorities. Our approach is to support innovation and competitiveness, while ensuring that every company operating here complies with European and Irish law. As Minister for Trade Promotion, AI and Digital Transformation, I'm acutely aware that AI is one of the defining technologies of our time.
It is already delivering real benefits across medicine, public services and the wider EU economy. However, AI also carries real risk. Without appropriate oversight, it can embed and amplify discrimination, manipulative behavior, or exploit the vulnerabilities of people, posing threats to health, safety and fundamental rights of our citizens. To this end, we welcome the adoption of the Digital Omnibus on AI.
Regulation plays an important role in ensuring markets operate fairly and protecting our consumers. It is essential that such regulation is proportionate and targeted to its objectives, protecting citizens while promoting innovation and competition. The Digital Omnibus on AI strikes a balance by simplifying and clarifying the EU AI Act while maintaining clear and predictable safeguards. Chair, honorable members, the issues before us require continued collaboration and a willingness to work together in pursuit of common objectives. Ireland has been committed throughout its presidency to promoting solutions that are ambitious, that are practical, and focused on delivering real benefits for people across the European Union.
Our engagement with Parliament has been an essential part of that effort, and we greatly value the contribution of this committee to advancing our shared goals. We remain committed to maintaining a close and productive partnership with this committee and with the European Parliament as a whole in the period ahead. Thank you, Chair, I look forward to continuing our discussions and working together to deliver positive outcomes for the citizens across the European Union.
Anna Cavazzini
Yes, thank you so much to the two of you for your input. And now, as I announced, we have two rounds of questions and answers. So the first round is one and a half minutes question, one and a half minutes ideally answer, so that we have a little bit of a fast ping-pong.
We start with the EPP coordinator, Pablo Arias Echeverría.
Pablo Arias Echeverría
Thank you very much. I'm going to speak in Spanish. Muchas gracias, presidenta. Bueno, en minuto y medio es muy difícil hablar de todos los temas que tenemos encima de la mesa y, por tanto, pues voy a intentar ir a lo que realmente me interesa trasladarles. En primer lugar, agradecerles estar aquí, la comparecencia.
Creo que la presidencia irlandesa tiene grandes retos y las palabras que traen son palabras constructivas que van más allá de no hacer nada y simplemente poner palabras encima de la mesa. La cuestión del mercado único, claramente tenemos muchos retos encima de la mesa. Yo me voy a centrar en uno que se publicó ayer, que es el de la contratación pública. Hemos hablado de la fuerza de la unidad, que está muy bien. Hemos hablado de la competitividad, de los valores y de la seguridad.
Perfecto. Ahora, tenemos encima de la mesa una revisión de las directivas de contratación pública en forma de reglamento. Tanto la Comisión como el Parlamento en principio apoyan esa forma de reglamento. Sin embargo, el Consejo parece que tiene ciertas dudas.
¿Qué va a hacer la presidencia irlandesa para fomentar esa forma de reglamento y que esa transformación o esa revisión de las directivas de contratación pública sean y tengan éxito y sean una realidad en un futuro próximo? Y a la ministra Smith, bueno, pues también estamos hablando, hoy se publica en el diario político que el martes se ha incluido en la agenda del Consejo la cuestión de la protección de menores online. Es un tema que nos ocupa. Llevamos ya mucho tiempo hablando de ello y es un tema que para nosotros es prioritario. También se ha convertido en prioritario para muchos Estados miembros y esa presión que está metiendo la sociedad al respecto como consecuencia de las situaciones que hemos ido conociendo hace que sea una cuestión de máxima relevancia y de máxima prioridad para nosotros.
¿Qué va a hacer la presidencia en este sentido y qué es lo que vamos a ver el martes en esa agenda o en esa inclusión sobre la protección de menores en la agenda del Consejo, puesto que presumiblemente la presidenta von der Leyen va a incluir este tema como una de las prioridades en su debate sobre el estado de la Unión? Muchas gracias.
Anna Cavazzini
Thank you so much. So probably Minister Burke you want to start on the public procurement?
Peter Burke
Gabh mo leithscéal, a Chathaoirligh, and thank you, Pablo, for your very important question on the public procurement framework. First of all, there is a huge ambition on behalf of the Irish government in connection to this area. Another minister deals specifically with policy responsibility, but obviously it comes under competitiveness on behalf of the Irish government.
Obviously the roadmap, One Europe One Roadmap, committed to a very ambitious timeline for completion by the end of 2027. I think one of the key and more important views that we've taken is looking at our trio partners and ensuring that we have continuity as this file progresses. And that's why, as I set out in my opening remarks, we've done a huge amount of work in that regard, ensuring that nothing is left behind in relation to it. I know we have a huge amount of work to do in reinvigorating market conditions, ensuring we get continuity and the huge amount of opportunity that lies therein. But obviously from publication yesterday, it's very early stages for the presidency, but we're very ambitious in delivering it.
Niamh Smyth
Yeah, again, just to thank you Pablo for your question. Obviously online safety is... Thank you very much for your question. Just to say that we look forward obviously to President von der Leyen's speech and address to the Union.
And like that, like you said, we expect an announcement maybe that will be something that will be, I suppose, give context to your concern as we all are about online safety for young children when it comes to AI and other platforms as well. Just to say that my colleague Minister Patrick O'Donovan, who's unfortunately unable to attend the last meeting appearance, will be making, leading the efforts in terms of the Irish presidency for on the proposal for online safety and age verification. And of course, it's rooted in the Digital Service Act, so my officials and I will assist where we can. But very happy to hear your views today and reflect upon them.
Georgia Tramacere
I will speak Italian. Ministro Burke, Ministra Smith, benvenuti e buon lavoro. E condivido perfettamente le priorità della presidenza irlandese: rafforzare la competitività, completare il mercato unico e accelerare la transizione digitale. Dobbiamo però essere molto chiari su quale competitività vogliamo costruire in Europa. Per noi socialisti e democratici competitività non significa meno regole necessariamente.
Significa più investimenti, maggiore innovazione, un lavoro di qualità e opportunità per le nostre, anche per le nostre piccole e medie imprese.
Lo dico anche da donna del Mezzogiorno, io vengo dal sud dell'Italia e sono consapevolissima che l'intelligenza artificiale è uno strumento straordinario di crescita, ma il rischio è che si possano creare dei nuovi solchi, delle nuove divisioni anche in quelle regioni che soffrono ancora un deficit forte di infrastrutture. Nel sud Europa l'economia vive ancora di artigianato, di manifattura, di agricoltura, di quei saperi che definiscono la nostra identità. E quindi la vera sfida non è scegliere tra innovazione e tradizione, ma è usare l'innovazione per proteggere e per digitalizzare anche la tradizione. L'intelligenza artificiale deve affiancare il lavoro umano, non deve sostituirlo. Deve liberarlo da quelle mansioni ripetitive certamente, ma non deve cancellare il valore della competenza e dell'esperienza.
Allo stesso modo semplificare è importantissimo, ma deve significare meno burocrazia, non meno tutele. E quindi alla presidenza irlandese chiedo, chiediamo due impegni e due domande pratiche. Uno come si intende garantire che la competitività e l'intelligenza artificiale rafforzino il lavoro senza indebolire i diritti dei lavoratori e dei consumatori. E l'altra quali iniziative promuoverà affinché gli investimenti digitali raggiungano davvero anche le periferie a partire dal sud Europa. Grazie.
Anna Cavazzini
Thank you so much. Sorry, I have to look a little bit at the time because we are running a little bit late, but if also the two ministers can stay a little longer than 10:00? Yeah? Okay. So please.
Peter Burke
Thank you. Minister Smith may want to comment on the AI part. First of all, as you will see, one of the key priorities of our presidency is values. And that is so important for us as European citizens in connection with the work we do on competitiveness, because I think the key thing is to have better regulation. Simplification is important, but you need to ensure that you're not compromising the Union by it.
I think the Irish presidency gets a good balance in that regard. I think, take for example through the ECF, how important it is to have a simplified code for SMEs, be it a single authorization process that you can process and get fundings into indigenous companies who can scale into the European market and how critically important that is for the Union that we improve upon it.
So I'd always be very clear that better regulation, enhancing our values, ensure that we do not stray away from that and ensuring that we are protecting consumers and protecting the Union. And Ireland is very much at the forefront of that and I thank you, Georgia, for your comments.
Niamh Smyth
Thank you very much, Georgia, for your comments also and equally the Council and the Irish presidency very cognizant of the transformational impact that AI will have and particularly on the jobs industry. And I concur with your comments in terms of the benefits of perhaps taking the drudgery out of some very mundane and repetitive jobs. It's certainly got that capability. But I suppose during our presidency, we are also trying to strike the balance that AI doesn't, I suppose, impact in a negative sense and that we get the balance right, that we allow for an environment that nurtures creativity and innovation also. So we hope that it will obviously generate industry in new areas also.
Virginie Joron
Merci, Madame la Présidente. Monsieur le Ministre, Madame la Ministre, bienvenue. 944 milliards d'euros. C'est l'écart de valorisation entre Mistral, la première entreprise européenne d'intelligence artificielle, et l'un de ses concurrents américains, Anthropic. 944 milliards.
Ce chiffre est plus qu'un chiffre. C'est le symbole du décrochage de l'Europe dans la course à l'intelligence artificielle.
Une Europe qui dispose de talents, de la recherche, d'un marché de 450 millions de consommateurs, mais qui peine encore à transformer ses atouts en champions mondiaux. Alors j'ai regardé votre programme pour cette présidence et je me réjouis de lire que vous souhaitez renforcer le rôle moteur de l'Union européenne dans les domaines du cloud computing et de l'intelligence artificielle, et de faire avancer les travaux en matière de simplification numérique. Je m'en réjouis. Mais ce ne sera pas simple. J'ai eu l'occasion de négocier avec certains de mes collègues l'omnibus sur l'intelligence artificielle, et ces négociations m'ont conforté dans une conviction : l'Europe a besoin de simplification, mais le Conseil n'a pas toujours fait de la simplification une priorité.
Nous ne pouvons pas d'un côté appeler à l'émergence de champions européens de l'IA et de l'autre leur imposer un environnement réglementaire qui les désavantage face à leurs concurrents américains et chinois. Ma première question, c'est : comment comptez-vous convaincre vos collègues au Conseil que la simplification n'est pas un objectif secondaire, mais une condition de notre compétitivité ? Mais la réglementation ne suffira pas. J'ai également regardé les travaux d'Europe 2031 sur les capacités de calcul. Ils montrent que l'Europe pourrait choisir entre rester autour de 5 % du calcul mondial en 2031 ou viser 15 % à condition d'agir dès maintenant.
Or, sans capacité de calcul, pas d'intelligence artificielle à grande échelle. Donc je conclus, Madame la Présidente, Madame la Ministre, pardonnez-moi, quelle initiative comptez-vous porter pendant votre présidence pour que l'Europe ne se contente pas de réglementer l'intelligence artificielle, mais se donne enfin les moyens de la produire et de l'entraîner, de la déployer à grande échelle ? Je vous remercie.
Niamh Smyth
Thank you very much in relation to your question. Obviously, as I said in my opening remarks, the AI Act was established and very carefully negotiated framework and we are, I suppose, allowing time for it to bed in at the moment. And as you know, in Ireland, we have moved quickly to introduce our own domestic law around AI and also to establish the development of a new AI office, which I know most all member states will be ambitious towards doing also. And I suppose to give that certainty and legal certainty to businesses that they are using AI in a way that is transparent, in a way that has, I suppose, the good of citizens behind it all as well. We are obviously during our presidency, one of our flagship events is our international AI summit.
And I suppose some of the comments that have been made so far today and remarks, it would be an opportunity to tease out some of those ideas a little bit further as well. Ireland signed the AI simplification into law at the start of the presidency, and of course the Cloud and AI Development Act is central to the EU's ambition to strengthen Europe's capability in cloud computing and of course AI infrastructure. Ireland's role as presidency is to ensure that the member states have the opportunity to fully share their views relating to sovereignty, to security, innovation and competitiveness. And for the presidency, it reflects these views while progressing the file in line with the One Europe, One Market roadway. I think, I hope that answers your question.
Anna Cavazzini
Thank you so much. So for ECR, I didn't have anybody registered, but Mr. Pîslaru, you want to speak? Yeah.
Gheorghe Piperea
Just a few words, but in Romanian, please take your headphones.
Vorbim despre simplificare și din păcate așa cum rezultă din analiza făcută de shadow raportorii noștri atât în IMCO cât și în LIBE și în ITRE rezultă niște sarcini suplimentare chiar rezultă niște situații mai mult complicate decât sunt în momentul de față din punctul de vedere al datelor personale și aș spune că cel mai important lucru de făcut zilele astea este ca realmente această inițiativă omnibus să ducă la simplificare și așa cum bine spunea doamna Jourová adineauri trebuie să începem să producem în România și de asemenea în Franța și de asemenea în Uniunea Europeană și inteligență artificială și mai puțin să reglementăm. E adevărat că avem această poziție primordială de campioni la autoreglementare și la suprareglementare în momentul de față aș spune că nu trebuie să ne mai mândrim cu așa ceva. Vă mulțumesc.
Niamh Smyth
Again thank you very much for your observations and remarks here today. On tackling this issue the Commission has circulated a questionnaire to Member States on national approaches and understanding of gold plating potential do's and don'ts for national administration and sectoral evidence of the most affected single market areas. So under the Irish Presidency we'll discuss the findings of these questionnaires and devise possible next steps to tackling single market barriers created by a lack of or incorrect or burdensome implementation of the EU.
Go raibh maith agat.
Anna Cavazzini
Thank you so much. So I don't see anybody from Renew, so we come to the Greens, Katrin Langensiepen.
Katrin Langensiepen
Yeah, thanks. I have two questions. What's your view on strengthening cross-border enforcement via the upcoming review on the Consumer Protection Cooperation Regulation and on tackling harmful online practices towards consumers via the upcoming Digital Fairness Act? That's my first question, if you have something specific on it. Second question is on housing.
What's your ambition or are you ambitions related to the Housing Act presented yesterday by the Commission in combination with the Construction Services Act? Are there any ambitions from your side? Thank you.
Niamh Smyth
Thank you very much for your question and observations. The Council has welcomed the Commission's intention to propose a revision of the regulation on the conclusions of the 2030 Consumer Agenda earlier this year.
This revision is part of the One Europe, One Market roadmap, meaning we as a presidency are committed to the progress of the file. Once the proposal is presented, the Irish presidency stands ready to advance the work in the Council with our fellow member states. We agree with the aim to ensure the consistent application of the EU consumer law. We look forward to the Commission's proposal on facilitating more effective enforcement and compliance, obviously. An effective enforcement of the consumer protection legislation will certainly support the EU and the member states' competitiveness.
And then in relation to the Digital Fairness Act, the Council recognizes the need to address existing regulatory gaps to strengthen the protection of the consumer in the digital environment and address genuine online harms. Once the proposal is presented, the Irish presidency stands ready to advance the work in the Council.
Consumers should be protected of course against all harmful practices online and as I said in my opening statement enjoy comparable level of protection online as they do offline.
Peter Burke
Thank you Cathal. And in relation to the Affordable Housing Act, Katrina, in our view in our government another minister deals specifically with housing but just on a broader basis to say first of all we have had the publication yesterday on the 9th of the Affordable Housing Act. We know that it will or aims to give regional local authorities the tool to deal with areas where there are significant housing stress like as we know with short-term lets for example being one of those key areas. And I'm very much aware from the Union's perspective right across the whole EU the pressure that housing is and the work that we have to do as a Union to ensure that affordable housing is a reality for citizens. And we obviously be engaging with Member States on this proposal and working to ensure that we progress it as diligently as possible.
Luke Ming Flanagan
Go raibh maith agat a Chathaoirligh agus fáilte romhat go Peadar agus Niamh. I'm not sure have you did you hear the news yesterday that a lead researcher at Anthropic, one of the world's leading artificial intelligence firms, said that he believes there is more than a 10% chance that AI, now wait for it, I had to read this and listen to it on several occasions, could kill all humans within the next decade. He said we really do earnestly believe AI could kill all humans. I personally think it is 10% within the next decade.
Evan Hubinger, the San Francisco-based company alignment science lead, said this on X-post yesterday, and they've also had a resignation from that firm. So it's very worrying to hear that. Even more worrying, I don't know how long I'm going to be around, but I have three children and I would be worried for their future. In your opening remarks, Peter, you mentioned competitiveness, values, and security as being what's important in the European Union. I'm just wondering which is more important: values or competitiveness?
And I ask that question because I believe there is a danger that in a rush to win this competition, we will dump our values. And there is plenty of examples of us doing it in the past, but in this area it will cause us even more problems. And in relation to simplification of rules, what is the difference between simplification and deregulation?
This is part of a house of a person I know, what's left of it because of deregulation in Ireland, because of simplification. Can you please tell me what's the difference between simplification and regulation? And will this new simplification create a situation where the people I represent are living in houses that are quite literally falling on their children's heads?
Niamh Smyth
Thank you very much, Ming, for your question. And I too was very much aware of that story that broke yesterday. And I suppose as a Council, that is our job, to ensure European values stay central. And I think the one thing the European Union has been very, we may be criticized for maybe not moving as fast as other continents in terms of the race for AI, but I think slow and steady and ensuring that our values remain central to AI. And of course, you know the AI Act that was developed here in Europe and now being implemented in Ireland too.
Slow and steady and ensuring that we're not, I suppose, trying to break any world records is what will, I suppose, ensure that the technology develops at a pace that is, I suppose, encouraging for the development of the technology itself, but doesn't at any point lose sight of the values of the European Union for its citizens.
Peter Burke
Thank you, and I thank MEP Luke Flanagan for his contribution.
I would make the point, as I did in my opening remarks, our values are most important, but equally, better regulation can go hand in glove with our values when it benefits the Union and its citizens. And when you're talking about, for instance, SMEs, should we make it simpler for SMEs to access the European single market, which should be the most powerful tool to drive growth, to make our citizens better off? Should we assist SMEs to grow and scale through the Union? It's been pointed out, as I made in my opening remarks from various different sources, the amount of revenue that's been lost through the single market because of varying rules right throughout the Union. So I think better regulation that has a strong, robust single market that allows firms to have an equivalence across the Union, and particularly in services whereby there has been very little reform since the single market's birth, surely that's a good thing, and surely better regulation in that area is a good thing.
I'm very clear in life that we always need good, solid, sound regulation to underpin transparency, to underpin a strong, consistent market.
The Irish government is very much in favour of a rules-based, strong single market that gives every opportunity, every state that chance to grow its share and ensure that it ultimately and primarily benefits our citizens, and we should never get away from that point.
Anna Cavazzini
Thank you very much, and the last speaker for the coordinators' round, Arno Bausemer for the ESN.
Arno Bausemer
Ja, vielen Dank, Frau Vorsitzende, vielen Dank, Mrs. Smith und Mr. Burke, dass Sie uns hier im Rahmen der Präsidentschaft von Irland zur Verfügung stehen als Gesprächspartner. Ich möchte gern drei Fragen stellen an Sie. Zunächst aus aktuellem Anlass möchte ich an die Landtagswahl meiner Heimatregion Sachsen-Anhalt am vergangenen Sonntag erinnern. Die erfreulichen Zahlen dort, zunächst für meine Partei, die AfD, mit 44 % das beste Ergebnis, was überhaupt eine Partei jemals seit der Wiedervereinigung eingefahren hat. Und für alle erfreuliche Zahlen: die Wahlbeteiligung.
Die Wahlbeteiligung lag bei 80 %, 20 Prozentpunkte mehr als bei der letzten Wahl. Und mich würde interessieren, welche prodemokratischen Initiativen werden Sie mit der irischen Ratspräsidentschaft unterstützen, um auch in anderen Regionen, anderen Ländern der EU solche hohe Wahlbeteiligung zu ermöglichen? Und vielleicht noch mal konkret zu Sachsen-Anhalt gefragt und zu Deutschland: Wie bewerten Sie solche antidemokratischen Ideen, die nach der Wahl jetzt aufgekommen sind, unsere Partei zu verbieten? Zweite Frage: Das Thema KMU wurde eben schon aufgebracht, aber sehr stark in Verbindung mit dem Thema KI.
Ich nehme das sehr positiv zur Kenntnis, dass Sie sich zum Ziel gesetzt haben, KMUs zu stärken in dem halben Jahr Ihrer Präsidentschaft. Mich würden eher jetzt interessieren so Berufe wie Pflegeberufe, Pflegeunternehmen, Handwerker, klassische Handwerker, Maurer, Elektriker. Wie werden Sie diese Unternehmen stärken im Rahmen der Präsidentschaft? Und die letzte Frage, es gab vor einer Woche eine Studie der Technischen Universität München, die ergeben hat, dass die CO2-Neutralität von E-Autos eben nicht gegeben ist und dass bei der Produktion, auch beim Verbrauch durch den Strom, der da benutzt wird, durch das Recycling der Batterien doch sehr viel CO2 emittiert wird. Und da würde mich interessieren, halten Sie ernsthaft am Ziel der CO2-Neutralität bis 2050 fest in Anbetracht solcher Studien?
Vielen Dank.
Anna Cavazzini
Ja, die Wahlbeteiligung in Sachsen-Anhalt ist in der Tat erfreulich gewesen. Nicht so erfreulich war, dass da Personen und Kandidaten mit dem Baseballschläger auf Kinder losgegangen sind, was ich eine Schande finde für Ihre Partei und auch für das Europaparlament. So I give the floor back to...
Peter Burke
Thank you very much, Arno, and thank you for your contribution.
First of all, obviously democracy is key to the Union and fostering it, ensuring that it is protected is something that Ireland really holds dear. We do a huge amount of work through the General Affairs Council whereby member states obviously come forward with hearings for each individual country, ensuring that rule of law is adhered to and particularly in relation to our huge ambition on enlargement. You'd be very much aware in a previous presidency Ireland had that magnificent day of welcomes when we brought so many new countries into the Union, which was a very proud moment in our history. So I think it's so important that we foster democracy, ensure strong robust rule of law and that's carried out right throughout the Union members. And particularly it's so important that European citizens can feel the value of European membership and as I pointed out earlier on some of the very significant funds, particularly with the ECF that were coming forward, that will be so, so important.
When you talk about the production of electricity, you know, ensuring that we have a absolutely decarbonization agenda and embarking upon the green transition, I think it's very important through the ECF and Industrial Accelerator Act that we don't lose sight of how critical it is for the Union to decarbonize, but making that beneficial for businesses that they can see the value in it. And that's ultimately where we're trying to achieve and making it simpler for them to do what will be good for the environment and leave the planet and indeed the Union in a better state than we received it from the previous generation.
Niamh Smyth
And thank you for your question and I'm delighted that you raised about the creative industries, carpentry trades. I think the one thing we know from the development of technology that the trades and the creative industries will become even more important, I think more embedded in our citizens' consciousness, particularly with the introduction of labeling where people now are very much aware when they're looking at maybe AI-generated images, videos, that it is AI-generated. Our own experience in Ireland is that we're very conscious of ensuring that the creative industries are not obliterated or anything like that by the technology. Again, I'd refer to our international AI summit and any of our colleagues here who'd like to come to hear the discussion. We will have exhibitors in AI but also in the creative industries too and in Ireland and throughout the I suppose presidency we're ensuring that it's very much part of the conversation.
Anna Cavazzini
So we are short of time, but it's also a good sign because that also means we have so much to talk about. But luckily the Irish presidency told me they can stay a little longer, that's great. I would nevertheless suggest that we group now, so I will always take two MEPs, if that's okay. Next one is Deirdre Clune for the EPP.
Dóra Dávid
Thank you, and thank you, ministers, for being here and for staying. I welcome your commitment to single market integration because I also agree that it's key to unlock our competitiveness. But we've heard this from every presidency, and I share your sense of urgency, and I'm sure you agree that we need concrete actions now. You also referred to the terrible ten barriers, and one of the barriers that the Commission identifies is complicated business establishment. And we have a concrete proposal on the table, the EU Inc proposal, but I'm very concerned that it will be diluted throughout the negotiations.
So first of all, I think it should remain a regulation rather than a directive. And second of all, I welcome the Council's preservation of the free choice of seat registration. But I am concerned about the size cap for the EU employee stock options eligibility because it would make it hard for startups to attract and retain talent precisely when they need it most, when they're scaling, and it may actually even incentivize firms to limit growth. So if we want our startups to grow in Europe rather than relocate to Delaware, then I think we need to get this right. So I would really be interested in how you will advance the EU Inc proposal during your presidency and how you will ensure that it is going to be meaningful.
Anna Cavazzini
I will now take, as I said, a second speaker, Laura Ballarín Cereza, for the S&D.
Laura Ballarín Cereza
Muchas gracias, presidenta. Voy a hablar en castellano. Me gustaría dar las gracias a la presidencia irlandesa. Creo que sus prioridades concuerdan mucho con las prioridades del grupo socialista, y en especial una pregunta sobre la Housing Affordable Act. Creo que para Irlanda, igual que para España, la presión y la emergencia habitacional es una urgencia que está muy bien dirigida gracias a la presentación de la ley que se hizo ayer.
La regulación de alquileres de corta duración tiene que ayudar a dar más acceso a las familias, como el ministro ha comentado. Pero a mí me gustaría preguntarle por el comunicado que hizo el Partido Popular Europeo ayer, que criticó fuertemente esta ley y dijo que precisamente regular los alquileres de corta duración era una medida excesiva y desproporcionada. Y a mí me gustaría saber cómo la presidencia irlandesa afronta estas negociaciones, que para ciudades como Barcelona o como Dublín o como tantas otras es necesario abordar esta cuestión, intervenir el mercado para que los vecinos no sean expulsados de sus ciudades.
En segundo lugar, a la otra ministra sobre la Digital Fairness Act, la ha mencionado, pero para el grupo socialista es una prioridad, creemos que hay que abordar los diseños adictivos, los influencers, los videojuegos que no están recogidos en las leyes actuales. Era una prioridad para el comisario McGrath de su país y ahora mismo no lo vemos en el calendario de la Comisión, así que nos gustaría saber en qué momento podemos esperar, qué día vamos a esperar esta ley. Muchas gracias.
Peter Burke
Thank you very much, Cathaoirleach. First of all, Dora, you make a huge valid point in terms of the discussions in relation to simplification and driving growth within the Union has been going on for decades, one could argue. I think we're in a very stark position now, particularly in relation to the talent, the companies that are being lost to other markets and particularly the flight of capital from the Union is very urgent. I'm very clear, EU Inc is a solid target for this year. We have to make the completion of the file this year.
That's a big challenge for our presidency, but one we're very committed to and to have a cost-effective digital first, ensuring that you have the equivalence of rules. I know in relation to share options and legal framework are areas that we've work to do, but I think it will make a strong statement for Europe if we can deliver this because it will really drive investment and it's one of the important areas that I'm very much committed to.
Laura, just in relation to your issues in relation to housing, obviously the Affordable Housing Act was published yesterday. We're obviously examining that and working through it but I do know right across the Union in terms of short-term lets are creating huge pressure in cities. It's something that really, you know, has to be tackled and empowered in terms of regional and local authorities to take action in that regard and ensure that citizens have really that trajectory, that vision that they can realize for housing. And very much committed to working with my colleague Minister James Brown in our government will be dealing with the file obviously with me through the Competitive Council. So we're very much committed to working as hard as we can to make progress on it over the term of our presidency.
Niamh Smyth
Thank you very much, ladies, for your contribution. Just in relation to the Digital Fairness Act, we await that proposal of the DFA and once we have the proposal, the Irish presidency stands ready to advance the work in the Council. And just on that, while emphasizing the need to ensure a high level of protection for consumers, the Council believes it's necessary to pay particular attention to those most vulnerable, especially minors, who require enhanced safeguards in the digital environment. Go raibh maith agat.
Anna Cavazzini
Thank you very much.
So we have the next round of speakers. We'll start with Kamila Gasiuk-Pihowicz for EPP.
Kamila Gasiuk-Pihowicz
I didn't hear. Thank you very much. Ministers, thank you very much for your presentation and for being here with us. Your presidency has indicated it would work to ensure continued close cooperation between the member states and the Commission in the implementation and application of the DSA. Last December, the Commission issued its first fine under DSA against a large social media platform X for breaching transparency obligations, especially in relation to deepfakes.
This summer, Poland was shaken by a scandal where deepfakes AI-generated images of a businessman who is also the leading figure of our government's simplification and deregulation efforts, Rafał Brzoska, were used on social media in a massive advertising campaign, which means funds were also involved in promoting such posts.
When he denounced this practice, Meta suspended his accounts rather than coming to his assistance. His case received media attention and he's a public person, he has a good financial situation and was able to hire experienced lawyers. However, millions of European citizens can face similar issues with deepfakes online and in their case the disparity in resources when taking a tech giant to court produce a chilling effect, many being forced to abandon the fight. The DSA and AI Act should guarantee that users are protected and platforms giants support them in solving such problems rather than trust against them, turn against them. Many of the large online platforms are based in Ireland, benefiting from a competitive environment for business in your country.
This also means that for certain aspects your national Digital Service Coordinator has an even greater responsibility in exercising its duties. Ms. Smith, what is your presidency's plan for tackling disinformation, the use of deepfakes and online manipulation now that legal tools exist but implementation is still lagging behind?
Is this a priority for the Irish presidency, especially in the context of crucial upcoming elections in several member states? Thank you very much for your answer for this question.
Christel Schaldemose
Thank you very much. Two, one question and one remark. First to Minister Burke. We know that there's a lot of unsafe and non-compliant goods coming in from China and we're trying to tackle it with different pieces of legislation, amongst others the European Product Act. Do you think that that's enough and what will Irish presidency do in order to help that piece, those pieces of legislation moving forward?
And to Minister Smith, when the EPP coordinator asked you about the age limit and age verification, you said you wanted to hear our opinion. Let me be quite clear. The European Parliament, we made a report and we have, we have a wish to have a European age limit and age verification, of course privacy protective etc. But we just want to say that we hope that the European Commission and Ursula von der Leyen next week will come up with a proposal that can help us protect kids. They should not be online as long as it is so unsafe as it is today.
That's the opinion of the Parliament. Thank you.
Niamh Smyth
Okay, well thank you very much. I might just go to your comments and say that I would concur with your message and I'm glad to hear that that is the view of the Parliament and look forward to Ursula von der Leyen's, President Ursula von der Leyen's address to the Union in the coming weeks. So hopefully we'll all have a sort of consensus around that. In relation to the DSA, whilst I'm at this meeting to discuss the role as chair of the Competitiveness and Growth Council, I'd like to also state that because in Ireland we have the, it is the main establishment for the majority of the designated VLOP and VLOs under the DSA and we take the role very seriously. We have resourced our national Digital Services Coordinator accordingly and fully independent regulatory body is now ably assisting the Commission in its DSA enforcement efforts.
And enforcement is key to any of the legislation we talked and you alluded to the AI Act too and I did in my opening remarks about, you know, the opportunity for it to bed in, but of course enforcement will become key.
And I think that piece within the AI Act where now labeling is required for deepfakes and AI-generated images will ensure that huge fines will be imposed on these companies that allow that to perpetuate across online too. Because I take your point about your colleague who had the financial wherewithal to take on the companies, and that isn't the same for our citizens right across Europe. So that's why that act is hugely important. So as I said, the embedding of it, the enforcement of it is key and crucial. And as presidency, we intend to ensure to continue in that vein on behalf of all member states.
On the Digital Services Act, member states including Ireland support the findings within the Commission's review of 2025. And we are expecting a fuller review in 2027, which will come after the Irish presidency, but we'll assist the Commission through the work of the Council as it progresses. Go raibh maith agat.
Peter Burke
Thank you, Arasella. And obviously it's a very significant challenge in relation to third countries and import product coming in, in terms of quality, in terms of cost, and in terms of the challenge it faces to the Union. I really look forward to working with our colleagues in the Council in advancing the EPA, which will be critical in terms of market surveillance, which is very important that you have that robust enforcement and market surveillance in third countries, particularly for imports and e-commerce, which is so, so critically important to protect it.
As well as, you know, what we're doing on the manufacturing side with the IAA will also be very, very important to build up the resilience and get growth back into our manufacturing industries right across Europe. So when you look at e-commerce and the EPA is very important and also on the manufacturing side. So we'll do as much as we can to advance those initiatives and ultimately to protect the Union from below-cost imports coming in and challenging our model.
Anna Cavazzini
Thank you so much. And then we have a last round, start with me. I wanted to actually take up the question that Pablo, my EPP colleague, asked because, again, we hear so much from the member states they want to overcome fragmentation and they want to harmonize the single market. But I also hear now that member states are complaining that the Commission proposed a regulation instead of a directive for the public procurement. So what is your, the Irish presidency's stance on that?
Because I see a huge mismatch between like these Sunday speeches and then concrete action when it comes to harmonization of the single market. And then secondly, you mentioned the Industrial Accelerator Act and the huge challenge that the European economy is just facing with unfair competition from China and so on and so on.
The three co-rapporteurs just yesterday finished our report. And I just wanted to also know if the Irish presidency is also committed in strengthening some of the proposals from the Commission because all the feedback we get from industry, all the feedback we get from the businesses is that the Commission proposal is even too weak to make sure that we can properly protect our industrial base and decarbonize it at the same time.
Elisabeth Grossmann
Danke schön. Es wurden heute die Terrible Ten schon erwähnt, die zehn identifizierten Hindernisse für das Funktionieren des Binnenmarktes. Und hier möchte ich besonders hervorstreichen die territorialen Lieferbeschränkungen, die speziell in kleinen und mittleren Mitgliedstaaten dazu führen, dass dieselben Produkte oft um ein Drittel mehr kosten oder gewisse Güter und Dienstleistungen gar nicht verfügbar sind. Und es wurde schon in Aussicht gestellt, das endlich anzugehen, aber welche Pläne haben Sie hier für Ihre Präsidentschaft vorgesehen?
Peter Burke
And first of all, obviously the Public Procurement Act is dealt with another minister in the government, but I would say critically we should focus on substance over form. I think it's so important that we do make progress, but critically, you know, we have a journey to go. It is, you know, so important for the Union that we do, and just to show you that the presidency is committed to that. And obviously we look forward to working with the Parliament in that regard. I think in relation to a manufacturing base, we have a huge challenge.
You know, if we're going to realize our ambition of getting to 20% of GDP by 2030 of the Union, just a little over 14% right now, we really need to make progress and get more ambition into proposals in terms of accelerating decarbonization, accelerating permits, consents, licensing, all those areas that really underpin the growth of our Union and also to protect our base from, you know, the challenge of third countries. Because if we can iron out the difficulties that are currently exist within the single market, you know, Europe can stand head and shoulders negotiating trade deals because of the power, because of that half a billion and the strong industrial base and the loss of capital that we can hopefully reverse.
And that's going to be a huge challenge. So the IA is obviously a huge priority for us as a government and we'll obviously be liaising with you in relation to the procurement framework too, which is also very, very important. In relation to the territorial supply constraints, which equally there has been, you know, a huge discourse on over the last number of weeks, and we obviously note the concern that has been raised by member states in connection with that. And we're currently, the Commission obviously is in the process of consulting with European stakeholders on this issue and exploring the results of that consultation and furthering the debate with the Irish presidency. So based on current information, we have no proposal right now from the Commission, but we do stand ready and obviously understand the concerns that have been raised.
Anna Cavazzini
So thank you so much. That concludes the round of question and answer time.
If you want, you can of course still have some short concluding remarks. Yeah. Please.
Peter Burke
Thank you very much, Cathaoirleach. Just to thank all the members and my sincere appreciation for the courtesy afforded myself and Minister Smith this morning. And the perspectives obviously that were brought forward are invaluable to our work as we go about our presidency from the single market strategy, the IAA, the EU product, many of the areas in relation to the Affordable Housing Act and competitiveness and critically better regulation because that has to be key in our journey to support citizens as well. We obviously will have a strong commitment in progressing the files that are raised and particularly those priority ones that are central to the success of the Union where there are very significant challenges right now. We're committed to working very constructively with the European Parliament and recognize that the only way legislation can succeed is through dialogue.
So we welcome progress on the ambition that has been set out on the One Europe One Roadmap. It's important that we do progress to having positions as early as possible and that'll be critical for our success in the presidency as well. So I'd encourage progress in relation to that. Just to thank everyone for their expertise and their experience that they've brought to the table this morning. Go raibh maith agat.
Niamh Smyth
Chair, honorable members, thank you for a very valuable and constructive discussion today. I'd like to join with my colleague Minister Burke in thanking the members of the committee for their engagement and for their insights that you've shared here with us this morning.
The perspective of the Parliament are essential as we work together to ensure that the European Union's consumer protection framework remains effective, modern, and fit for purpose in a rapidly evolving marketplace. Today's discussion has highlighted the importance of some very significant initiatives, including the revision of the Consumer Protection Cooperation Regulation and the proposed Digital Fairness Act, which there was great interest in. These files are particularly important as consumers increasingly engage with digital services and online platforms in their everyday lives. Citizens rightly expect strong protections, transparent commercial practices, and effective enforcement of their rights, regardless of whether they're shopping on a high street or online. Equally, businesses benefit from a clear, coherent, and predictable framework that promotes trust and confidence across the single market.
The Irish presidency regards these initiatives as important elements of a broader effort to strengthen consumer confidence in the digital economy and to ensure that our regulatory framework keeps pace with technology and market developments. Effective cross-border cooperation between enforcement authorities and robust consumer protections are essential to maintain a fair and competitive marketplace throughout the EU. As we take this work forward, this presidency is committed to fostering an open and constructive dialogue with the European Parliament, the Commission, and of course member states.
We recognize the valuable expertise that this committee brings to these discussions and the important contribution it will make to achieving balanced and effective outcomes. I'd like to assure members that the views, concerns, and recommendations expressed here today will be carefully considered as discussions progress. Continued cooperation between our institutions will be critical in delivering measures that are both ambitious and practical and which strengthen the trust in the European single market for consumers and businesses alike. Once again, thank you for your engagement and for your commitment to these important issues and I look forward to continuing our cooperation in the months ahead. Go raibh maith agat.
Anna Cavazzini
Thank you so much to the two ministers for coming here and I think I can speak for the whole committee that we're also looking forward to the cooperation with you in the various files, be it when they're still in the pipeline and you for example heard what also parliamentarians want from the stuff that is still in the pipeline, but of course also files that will end up in trilogues. So we will see each other probably in a round of night sessions. So I wish you a lot of success to your presidency and conclude this agenda item five. We do a one minute technical break and then we continue with number six. Thank you.
So dear colleagues, I suggest we reconvene after a short change of scenery here on the panel.
And probably bilateral discussions can be led outside of the room because we want to address an important file that our committee is working on and is doing an opinion on, the Digital Omnibus Data. One of the several omnibuses that are now in the European Parliament. Our rapporteur for the opinion is, as you know, Mr. Saliba, and today we have the opportunity to discuss the amendments. 408 amendments were tabled in IMCO on the draft opinion, and let's see how the discussion goes. We first have the rapporteur and then the shadows, of course, as usual.
So Alex, you start.
Alex Agius Saliba
Thanks, dear chair. Thank you for giving me the floor on this very important file when it comes to the future of digital and also data policy within our Union. As rapporteur, I am happy that many political groups took a lot of effort when it comes to presenting a fair number of amendments for me as rapporteur to work on, so we can give the best input possible when it comes to the main committee ITRE and also LIBE on this file.
This is especially important on the matters that we were in the past, these elements were totally within the IMCO competence, so exclusive competence. So it's really important to have a strong opinion, although we are not lead committees on this file, but it was really important to have a strong opinion also when it comes to these elements. Elements like the cloud switching rules and also the platform-to-business regulation. And exactly on this point, when it comes to the platform-to-business regulation, it is essential for many SMEs, especially when it comes to the hospitality sector, that fear to lose part of the protection they enjoy from EU rules against the imbalance of the power position of the major online platforms. On other points like important elements of the Data Act, we will work also to find common ground between ourselves.
It should be our aim with this file to support a European way of data sharing, and this is a point that we are reiterating throughout our opinion. Players like data intermediaries can play an important role to unlock the potential of European data for European tech companies.
In reality, data and data governance have only yielded the right results, so we have the opportunity to keep what works and at the same time to improve the legal framework beyond mere simplification exercise. This is why I introduced the concept of data expert representative as a specific category of data intermediation service that could provide us and provide us consumers with advice on the use of their data and also an actor that could collectively negotiate to arrive at a better and for fairer terms of data use. For a large part of the digital omnibus, it is also about changes to the GDPR and also to privacy rights for us as Europeans. We should acknowledge the role of the LIBE committee has to play in this regard, but at the same time we cannot, and I reiterate this point, we cannot shy away from the elements that have a consumer protection or internal market element to them, such as rules on cookies and other forms of tracking people. We now have a proposal on the table that will replace the annoying cookie banners with automated signals to give consumers more control when it comes to their data.
It is time to kill the cookie banner and move to a new and more meaningful system of consent to data use. Voters keep saying they do not want to be tracked.
We need to respect that and find real simplification in this regard. On AI, the IMCO committee has been one of the leading voices of the European Parliament and we will not give that up in the digital omnibus. Again, I would like to thank all the shadows, all their teams, for the very constructive work that we had during the past weeks and look forward to continuing again in this spirit to find middle ground that will send a strong signal towards the leading committees to defend the interests of consumers and SMEs in the data economy. Thanks a lot.
Anna Cavazzini
Thank you so much. A lot of shadows are not here. I see David Cormand from the Greens.
David Cormand
Oui, merci Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le rapporteur, bonjour, merci chers collègues. Notre enjeu dans cette affaire, c'est de promouvoir un modèle numérique européen cohérent avec nos valeurs fondamentales. Qu'est-ce que ça veut dire ? Ça veut dire un modèle qui refuse de livrer la vie privée des citoyennes et des citoyens européens et de saborder leurs droits fondamentaux au profit de firmes internationales avides de nos données.
Le RGPD est un standard qui protège tout en permettant une innovation compatible avec nos principes fondamentaux. J'ai noté, et merci pour cela, quatre modifications lors des dernières réunions techniques qui vont dans le bon sens. 1, le texte souligne l'importance du Conseil européen pour l'innovation en matière de données et de la représentation de la société civile, de chercheurs en son sein. 2, il maintient l'intégration d'experts indépendants pour conseiller nos concitoyennes et nos concitoyens sur leurs données personnelles et défendre leurs intérêts. 3, pardon, il inscrit une définition stricte et protectrice des organisations altruistes dans le texte.
4, enfin, il mentionne l'évaluation de l'impact de cette réglementation sur les petites et moyennes entreprises ainsi que sur la protection des consommatrices et des consommateurs et de leur vie privée. Pour autant, nous devons refuser l'idée reçue selon laquelle le prix de la réussite de nos entreprises serait de les autoriser à piller la vie privée de nos concitoyennes et de nos concitoyens. Un texte qui ne permettrait pas la protection du consommateur face aux bannières publicitaires et aux signaux de navigation ne saurait être un service d'innovation allant dans le sens du progrès et de l'intérêt général. Le capitalisme de surveillance n'est pas un modèle compatible avec la démocratie. Il ne peut donc pas l'être avec les valeurs de l'Union européenne.
Maria Guzenina
Thank you so much. I want to support everything that my colleague Ayuso here earlier said. And I want to emphasize also that this matter is most urgent. And if we look at what is happening in the US at the moment, on 26th of August, Meta agreed to pay up to 16.68 billion and substantially redesign Facebook and Instagram for teenagers in the US case. Europe is falling behind and we need to step on it.
And this legislation is part of it. Thank you.
Anna Cavazzini
Thank you so much. This concludes the round of MEPs and I welcome the Commission representative Björn Juretzki, Head of Unit from Data Policy and Innovation, DG CONNECT. Welcome.
Björn Juretzki
Thank you, Chair. Thank you to the IMCO Committee, the rapporteur and all MEPs who have tabled amendments on important elements of the proposal within the committee's remit.
On behalf of the Commission, I would like to offer a few initial reflections, particularly on cookies and the Data Act, where most amendments are concentrated. On cookies, our objective is to reform the rules on cookies by bringing the processing of personal data under the GDPR, and we welcome the fact that the amendments maintain this overall direction. The new rules should give businesses greater flexibility for certain low-risk purposes while preserving a fundamental principle: access to a person's device should generally require consent. This is ultimately a question of trust. We are open to including, to give one concrete example from your amendments, third-party audience measurement under the M5 exemption, provided that the exemption remains narrowly defined and low-risk.
On the Data Act, our objective is to unlock the full potential of the Data Act and make more data available for use. We should not restrict its scope: both business-to-business and business-to-consumer relationships must remain covered. The Data Act reflects a carefully negotiated balance between data holders and data users. Access should not be unnecessarily difficult for the user, and providing access should not impose a disproportionate burden on the data holder, and this balance is also reflected in our rules and our proposal on trade secrets, and we would caution against further changes that could upset this carefully constructed balance. Regarding the GDPR, the most significant amendments in the draft IMCO opinion concern the definition of personal data and pseudonymization, AI development and operation, scientific research and data breach notifications.
And some of the amendments that we've seen risk falling short of the Commission's objectives of greater legal certainty and genuine simplification. Maybe let me dive a bit deeper into one concrete example, that of personal data and pseudonymization. Businesses need a harmonized interpretation across the single market. They need greater legal clarity on when pseudonymized data no longer constitutes personal data. And this legal certainty is necessary to enable secure data sharing.
And we therefore encourage the co-legislators to preserve the Commission's proposal's balance between protection, innovation, and competitiveness. On the platform-to-business regulation, we take note of the near consensus in IMCO against the proposed repeal of the platform-to-business regulation, and we also understand the concerns expressed by members. Nevertheless, we remain convinced that the Digital Services Act and the Digital Markets Act provide more effective enforcement of comparable protections for business users. We remain available to engage further on any specific issues that you may want to discuss with us. And for the time being, I thank you for your attention.
Anna Cavazzini
Thank you so much. And with that, I give the floor back to the rapporteur.
Alex Agius Saliba
Thanks a lot, Chair. Not a lot to add.
First of all, thanks to all the shadows who have participated also today. Again, Maria raised also a very important point when it comes to taking up this opportunity as an important opportunity, at least to maintain our lead position when it comes to protecting not only minors, but the most vulnerable within our society. And I think that this is a good opportunity that we have in front of us. It should not be used as a point for deregulation. It should be used as a point for simplifying some of our rules, streamlining our rules, but at the same time as an opportunity to give more protection when it comes to data and data protection for millions of users throughout our Union.
So thanks a lot, and let's continue to work together.
Anna Cavazzini
Thank you so much, dear Alex, and everyone's success with this file. Now we come to agenda item seven. It is another opinion and another omnibus, I guess, or simplification point about the medical devices regulations. And our rapporteur for the opinion is Ms. Gousenina. So today we have the opportunity as well to discuss the different amendments.
And I am not sure, I don't have the number of amendments, but probably you know. But the vote in IMCO is scheduled on the 15th of October, this I know. So the floor is to the rapporteur.
Maria Guzenina
Thank you so much, dear Chair. We haven't actually entered yet the negotiations between shadows, so I think this is a bit premature, but I'll still go through what the file entails. This file answers a very simple question: how do we make sure patients can trust medical devices and how do we ensure that the companies are not buried in red tape unnecessarily? I have met with dozens and dozens of stakeholders, from manufacturers to notified bodies to patient organizations and national authorities. And everyone agrees that safety cannot be compromised, but also that the current system is slow, disproportionate, and often works against its own goals.
So we need less unnecessary bureaucracy without compromising safety. I'll start with certificates.
A medical device that looks safe on paper doesn't always stay that way once it meets the real world. Performances can shift in ways initial testing simply doesn't catch. And that's the problem with the Commission's proposal for indefinite validity. It locks in approval before we've had the chance to see how a device actually behaves in use. Therefore, I propose a more cautious path: a first certificate valid for up to five years, followed by reassessment before a device earns unlimited validity.
I believe that trust should be earned, not handed over blindly. Then we come to the second point: oversight. Robust market surveillance is the backbone of patient safety, and unannounced audits are one of the most effective tools.
So stakeholders have consistently underlined that the credibility of our conformity assessment system depends on manufacturers knowing that compliance can be verified at any time, not only when they expect it and prepare the coffee and cake. So I propose keeping unannounced audits at least every five years as an important safeguard for patients, while modernizing the process by allowing remote audits where appropriate. And third, artificial intelligence, which is something that here in the Parliament seems to affect every file. The Commission proposes removing medical devices from the scope of the AI Act and regulating AI requirements separately through sectoral medical device legislation. And I think here we need to be careful.
Artificial intelligence should be governed through one coherent European framework. Creating separate rules for medical devices could increase complexity, create legal uncertainty, and risk fragmentation. And this is something that we actually want to avoid. And then fourth, costs and transparency. The cost of providing conformity with our rules should never block small innovative companies' access to our market.
But many notified bodies are SMEs too, and limiting their fees too aggressively can endanger their ability to do rigorous assessments. So this isn't about choosing sides, it's about a balance that lets both notified bodies and MedTech SMEs function optimally in the European market. And as I said, Chair, the negotiations are underway. Our first shadow meeting is scheduled for Thursday next week in Strasbourg. But at this point already, I want to thank my colleagues for good collaboration, and I'm looking forward to carrying the good collaboration spirit with us throughout the upcoming discussions.
Thank you.
Anna Cavazzini
Thank you very much. Great. And I give the floor now to the political groups, and we have Mr. Štefanec for the EPP.
Tomáš Zdechovský
Madam Chair, your pronunciation is so nice. Also, I think that you learned during the summer the Czech language, and it's very perfect. But in Duolingo, there is no Czech. It's a pity, but I hope so that thanks to our initiative, we will improve it.
Thanks, Madam Rapporteur, for your work and for overview about your report. Our shadow cannot be here, but he told me that he very appreciated your work and he would like to congratulate you for great job what you did. We as EPP, we are every time constructive group, most constructive here in European Parliament. And we are prepared to work with you next week in Strasbourg in shadow meetings. We will bring our position, what will be some of things will be very close to your heart.
And we hope so that we will find many compromises what will be suit especially for SMEs because they need less administration, less bureaucracy. They need to have it clear, clear legislation. And this is the way what you proposed. And I really was very positively, positively surprised with all your work what you did on this issue. And we as EPP very appreciated that you are in the way what is very close to our position.
Thank you very much.
Anna Cavazzini
Okay, this concludes the round of MEPs, and I give the floor to the Commission representative Flora Giorgio, head of unit from the Medical Devices Unit of DG SANTE. Welcome.
Flora Giorgio
Thanks a lot. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you to the rapporteur and the members of the honorable members of this committee. And let me start by as well welcoming the draft report and the amendments and also the opening, the presentation from the rapporteur. I think we actually all have the same objective in this file. I think as as Ms. Gutseneina said, we need to make sure that devices are trusted, are safe, and they are available.
And that's the important starting point where this Commission proposal comes from. You may recall that we had to extend, and this house has kindly has agreed to extension of the transitional provision for this framework in the last years four times because this framework, the way it's been applied and the way it's been agreed, is too complex and too burdensome.
And that's where the Commission proposal comes from. The Commission proposal comes from an initiative aiming at reducing burden, make the system more cost-effective, more proportionate, without of course jeopardizing the patient safety, which is, as the rapporteur said, is actually sometimes, you know, is the objective of this whole exercise. But we also should remember that we are here to simplify, to reduce burden and to improve the cost-effectiveness of the system. So let me come back on any and this unavailability of devices does not only have a negative impact on patient safety, because of course no device on the market means bad care and impairing the care of our patient in European hospital, but also has a negative effect on competitiveness of the sector. Europe remains to be a major innovator in MedTech.
We are the second sector filing patent in Europe, but we don't have a mechanism that helps the companies, the innovators to place their product on the market. And that's where we are. And that's why I ask the members of the committee to keep this in mind in terms of the objective of simplify without reducing patient safety. Let me come back on some of the point mentioned, recertification.
Recertification is a very good example. We are trying by removing the date of validity on the certificate, it's not removing the act and the oversight that correctly we all want to maintain, but really the act, the validity on the validity date. And we foresee in our proposal some periodic review that de facto substitute the fixed five years assessment in order to ensure that, as the rapporteur said, we actually the trust is earned. This periodic review should be focused where we have problems or we expect problem and not horizontally. But we are of course open to see also how this common objective can be achieved because again, we are trying to have a system which is more proportionate and targeted to the risk management.
Not one things for all, but really even even more risk-based than it is today. The resources are scarce and we need to focus when it's needed and to ensure that where there is more scrutiny, the scrutiny is focused and not and reward the ones, as the rapporteur said, that have good track record, good history and where devices have no signal of safety. The second point, unannounced audit. It's a bit the same same approach. Currently it's on a fixed limitation, on a fixed schedule.
And what we are trying to achieve is a more adaptive framework.
So when necessary, and could be even more, could even more frequently than five years if there are signals that this provider or this manufacturer doesn't comply as it should, or there are notified bodies that signal that something is not right. So I think that's a bit the approach. I think we have the same objective in many of these amendments, but it's the way these objectives are spelled out and somehow drafted in the text. And there where we are very happy to work together, continue to work together, because we see that little wording can be implemented very differently. We had an example, and I'll close with the last point on AI, but you know, currently in the proposal it says that a report should be provided at least once a year, and this report is asked now four times a year, because the proposal says at least, and four times a year report means cost for everybody and diluting resources.
So let's try to get the wording right, and the Commission is very open and of course keen to provide also the insight we have had because we came from this proposal learning from ten years of implementation of this. So we know quite well all the little trick and tricks that the misunderstanding that can be had. But I think the objective is shared.
The last but definitely not least point on the AI. I think again here everybody agrees that AI is key and the Commission has no intention to lower or compromise or reduce the scrutiny on medical device with AI component. On the contrary, we want exactly to achieve a more streamlined process. We have a framework under the MDR which is highly developed. Is one of the is the only one if you look at the other sector in the section A of the AI Act which has a system which is basically equal in terms of structure and requirement to the AI Act.
Risk management, quality management, technical documentation. These are all requirement already scrutinized and addressed. What we want to achieve with the move is to make sure that the AI specific requirement which are like human oversight, data integrity and data logging which are not already covered are actually integrated in the MDR because we want to have again the same objective. One framework. But who is but we are having one framework for medical device and is a subset of medical device which has an AI component.
So we consider more proportionate to have one framework from operators that under the MDR where the clinical context of the device is prior well is prioritized is the framework and the AI specific component are actually assessed in that framework. That of course would require that the notified bodies which are already assessing MDR medical device with AI component have the necessary expertise and are subject to the scrutiny mechanism and level that AI Act foreseen already. So I think again we have the same objective, how we can do that in our assessment, in our experience also looking at the implementation of the MDR and the journey of the implementation of the AI Act, having a framework which is already developed, which is open for changes so we can easily include this requirement, the AI requirement in the current reform is something that we consider in the spirit of simplification. We have learned the lessons with the MDR transition from the directive to the to the regulation. Only to recertify all the notified bodies took four years and create a major bottleneck.
Now existing notified bodies that already are assessing these products would need an addit an another designation through different authority on a national level.
In the MDR we have- we are more on a joint assessment process. So we see a lot of benefit in this integrating. But again the objective is not jeopardize the level of scrutiny the AI Act has correctly brought to Europe and where we should defend and uphold. So it's really again a matter of how things can be done and we are also open to see how this can be more clearly spelled down and maybe imp- you know brought forward in the in the process. So I'm sorry for being a bit longer but I hope that was helpful.
Thanks a lot.
Anna Cavazzini
Thank you so much for your valuable explanation. Before I give the floor back to rapporteur, Virginie Joron wanted to comment. Yes.
Virginie Joron
Oui, merci Madame la Présidente. Merci également à la rapporteure et aussi à la Commission. Alors nous parlons aujourd'hui de simplification des règles applicables aux dispositifs médicaux et aux dispositifs médicaux de diagnostic in vitro. Sur un premier point, je voudrais saluer la volonté d'intégrer davantage l'intelligence artificielle, notamment en faisant évoluer les annexes de la législation sur l'intelligence artificielle. C'est suffisamment rare pour être souligné.
Sur ce point, je suis d'accord avec la Commission européenne et je regrette que Madame la rapporteure, dans son rapport, s'y oppose. Je regrette également que nous ne l'ayons pas fait au moment de l'omnibus sur l'intelligence artificielle. Nous avons déjà perdu du temps et nos industriels en ont perdu encore davantage.
Or, nous avons précisément besoin de simplifier. Pourquoi ? Parce que derrière ces réglementations, il y a des entreprises qui doivent pouvoir innover, recruter ou se développer. En France, par exemple, c'est 93 % des entreprises du secteur des dispositifs médicaux sont des PME, 84 000 emplois directs. En 2021, il y avait 1 476 entreprises, il n'y en a plus que 1 396.
Et les industriels me l'ont dit très concrètement : certains ingénieurs quittent même leur entreprise parce qu'ils passent davantage de temps à remplir des documents qu'à faire le travail pour lequel ils ont été recrutés. Voilà le paradoxe auquel nous devons mettre fin, nous avons besoin de nos ingénieurs pour innover, pas pour remplir de la paperasse. Enfin, un dernier point me semble essentiel : la Commission souhaite renforcer l'interopérabilité entre Eudamed et certaines bases de données nationales, alors que ces bases restent aujourd'hui facultatives. Je dis attention, parce que la Commission justifie cette mesure par un objectif de simplification et de réduction des doubles déclarations. Très bien, mais simplifier ne doit pas conduire à étendre les compétences de l'Union européenne et surtout de Bruxelles.
L'article 168, paragraphe 7 du TFUE rappelle clairement que l'organisation et la fourniture des soins de santé relèvent de la responsabilité des États membres.
C'est d'ailleurs précisément le point soulevé par le Sénat français dans son avis sur ce texte. Alors nous avons déposé 35 amendements avec un double objectif : préserver la compétitivité de nos entreprises dans le secteur des dispositifs médicaux et garantir la souveraineté des États membres dans l'organisation de leurs systèmes de santé parce que pour nous simplifier c'est supprimer les contraintes inutiles tout en respectant les compétences de chacun. Je vous remercie.
Maria Guzenina
Thank you so much. At this point I thank everybody for the constructive opinions and I'm looking forward to the negotiations next week. Thank you.
Anna Cavazzini
A lot of success to you. This concludes agenda item 7 and we come to agenda item 8, the Digital Networks Act, where we as the committee do an opinion to the lead committee which is ITRE. Our rapporteur for the opinion is Stéphanie Yon-Courtin and today we have the opportunity to discuss the draft opinion but also of course the amendments. So we start with the rapporteur, please.
Stéphanie Yon-Courtin
Danke, Präsident. Merci, Madame la Présidente et chers collègues. Les dernières semaines ont révélé encore un peu plus les dépendances de l'Europe : des nouveaux modèles d'intelligence artificielle surpuissants, un marché cloud toujours plus verrouillé, des grandes plateformes qui bafouent encore et toujours nos règles.
Et l'Europe ne peut pas être la grande perdante de ces évolutions majeures. Nous ne pouvons pas rester des spectateurs. Nous devons reprendre notre destin en main. Et c'était précisément l'objectif du DNA lorsqu'il a été pensé au mandat dernier, notamment sous l'impulsion de l'ancien commissaire Thierry Breton : nous adapter à l'ère de la fibre et de la 5G, simplifier et libérer le potentiel du marché européen des télécoms tout en conservant nos acquis. Pourtant, nous avons déjà eu l'occasion de discuter des faiblesses de la proposition de la Commission européenne : un règlement fleuve, un mille-feuille de plus de 200 articles qui complexifie plus qu'il ne simplifie.
Et nous avons désormais sur la table près de 1200, 1200 amendements déposés dans notre commission, ce qui est énorme. Et donc ça dit beaucoup de la densité de cette législation, de son importance et du fait qu'il y a beaucoup de choses à modifier. À ce stade de nos travaux, je tiens à insister sur plusieurs points. D'abord, de façon générale, je me félicite de la volonté des groupes de remettre l'objectif de concurrence au cœur du DNA et de renforcer le rôle des autorités nationales face à la volonté de la Commission de s'octroyer davantage de pouvoirs, y compris de veto.
Nous convergeons aussi sur une simplification de la procédure de passeport unique pour l'autorisation générale des fournisseurs de services et de réseaux de télécommunications, et c'était important pour les opérateurs. Par ailleurs, je note que nous sommes majoritairement d'accord pour préserver les principes clés de la neutralité du net et de l'obligation de service universel, et pour ma part, je continue de soutenir l'introduction de certaines flexibilités, notamment pour les services spécialisés de la network slicing. Sur les droits des consommateurs et des utilisateurs finaux, je souligne les orientations divergentes entre d'un côté une harmonisation maximale et de l'autre une possibilité laissée aux États membres d'introduire des dispositions les plus protectrices. Sur ce sujet, je crois qu'on doit préserver l'acquis et ne pas niveler par le bas des garanties pour les consommateurs et les utilisateurs finaux. Mais je crois aussi que l'objectif d'harmonisation va de pair avec le principe du marché unique et qu'il est donc risqué de laisser la porte ouverte à la fragmentation.
Et enfin, s'agissant de l'introduction d'un mécanisme de conciliation, je constate que nos approches sont différentes. Vous connaissez ma position : je ne crois pas qu'une suppression pure et simple de la proposition de la Commission soit la bonne voie, je pense au contraire qu'il faut la rendre plus robuste. Sur ce sujet, je crois qu'on doit travailler à définir une approche équilibrée pour conserver le principe de la conciliation, garantir des conditions équitables vis-à-vis des plus grands acteurs qui occupent la majeure partie du réseau d'interconnexion, tout en apportant des garanties aux plus petits acteurs.
Les négociations techniques viennent de démarrer. Nous aurons éventuellement l'occasion, et plus qu'éventuellement, évidemment l'occasion de rentrer plus en détail dans ces différents sujets dans les semaines qui viennent. Je voudrais remercier les shadow rapporteurs pour la très bonne coopération jusqu'ici. Merci aussi au secrétariat pour son soutien et je suis bien évidemment à votre disposition. Dankeschön, geehrte Präsident.
Anna Cavazzini
Bitteschön, dankeschön. With that, thank you so much. I give the floor to the round of shadows. We start with the EPP with Ms. Virkkunen.
Henna Virkkunen
Thank you, Madam Chair, dear colleagues, and thank you to Madam Rapporteur for her introduction to the subject. I would like to start where this file started, with the Draghi report, which put the figure in front of all of us. Europe needs an additional investment effort of around 750 to 800 billion euros a year to close the gap with its competitors, and in connectivity alone, close to 200 billion euros is still missing to reach our 2030 targets.
The report also told us why the money is not coming. A market that's fragmented into 27 pieces, operators earning less than their cost of capital, and rules that reward caution over deployment. That is the point of the Digital Networks Act. It was written to unlock the potential of the single market and to put resources back into Europe's networks. Every amendment we consider today should be measured against this test.
So, what must we deliver? I'll start with competition. Effective competition is what had given European consumers the prices and the choices they have today, but effective also means workable in the hands of the authorities who know their own markets with an EU overview. Then, I will point to stability and predictability. The industry is being asked to build for the next decades and deliver state-of-the-art infrastructure.
It cannot do that while the ground keeps moving without clear targets and clear dates. This clarity and the fair business environment are not a courtesy to the players on the market, but a precondition for investment. In the end, the beneficiaries of this investment will be the consumers and the businesses in the EU.
But all the mentioned things have a cost. Infrastructure is expensive. Excellence in customer care is expensive. Ability to build secure and resilient systems is expensive. The cost is high and that is precisely why we must let technological development carry part of it by allowing the sector to develop genuinely new services for citizens and above all for European businesses.
Regulation that only distributes what already exists will not close the gap the Draghi report described. Regulation that lets the sector grow will. Thank you very much.
Alex Agius Saliba
Dear Chair, dear colleagues, first of all thanks to the rapporteur for her very constructive work and allow me to highlight some of the priorities that are very important for my political group that we believe should also feature heavily in this very important opinion that we have in front of us.
The Digital Networks Act proposal touches on many different elements that are essential not only to the single market but are vital elements when it comes to protecting our consumers. One problematic element we addressed in our amendments relates to the limitations on national authorities to act and to take pro-competition measures in their national markets. The DNA could, if not adjusted, change the delicate balance in the telecom market where independent authorities safeguard the competition and compliance with consumer rights. Therefore, we need the telecom regulators that can enforce measures without a Commission veto. We should be extremely cautious to give more power to the Commission in overruling the national telecom authorities because we have seen in the past that this held back authorities that wanted to act in the interest of consumers and small businesses.
It is essential that telecom regulators remain totally independent.
I am also not convinced of the arguments that we need to create a European champions in the market, undermining competition with the smaller member state I am coming from, Malta, ending up with fewer choices, higher prices, and a worse service. We need investment in networks, but not over the back of our consumers, that in the end will ultimately be footing the biggest bill. We don't want the US model, we want the European model. I also want to stress the need to ensure a high level of consumer protection, including for persons with disabilities. The DNA cannot lower the level of protection and all the good work done at national level.
I sincerely hope that we can find compromise on this important matter with all political groups. Let me also shortly mention other smaller elements, but important elements that I hope that will be also included in the opinion. On fiber networks and copper switch-off, it is a socialist priority to make sure that we do not leave anyone behind. When it comes to net neutrality, we see it as an essential part of the EU's digital acquis that we need to safeguard. There are other important issues for me, like the provision of radio in cars, universal access provisions, and emergency communications.
Therefore, I am looking forward to work with the rapporteur and all the shadows. Let's put competition, let's put the interest of consumers in our opinion at top priority when it comes to the digital network sector. Thanks a lot.
Anna Cavazzini
Thank you so much. For ECR, the shadow is Mr. Cavazzini, you want to replace him? Yeah.
Gheorghe Piperea
Thank you, thank you, Chair, just a few words, but in Romanian. Amendamentele care se propun pentru Digital Network Act trebuie să se concentreze pe asigurarea unor schimbări care să simplifice reglementarea și să ușureze viața consumatorilor. Dar este extrem de important, pentru cel puțin în viziunea noastră, ca această nouă reglementare să-și păstreze neutralitatea tehnologică și, de asemenea, să evite alte și alte inutile reglementări care să îngreuneze și mai mult povara celor din domeniu. Și mult mai important, în opinia noastră, este ca această reglementare amendată să păstreze în limitele principiului subsidiarității competențele Uniunii Europene. Două lucruri mai sunt de spus aici.
În primul rând este vorba despre comunicații în principal. De cele mai multe ori în ultima vreme comunicațiile se asigură prin rețele digitale și mai puțin prin televiziune, presă și așa mai departe. Și dacă este așa înseamnă că ceea ce se comunică trebuie să fie liber. Liber de cenzură, liber de idei greșite din punct de vedere ideologic, pur și simplu liber pentru că oamenii în felul acesta ar putea să aibă în mod corect și la timp acces la informație, informație atât în calitate de cetățean cât și în calitate de consumator. Și a doua chestiune este de asemenea extrem de importantă să lăsăm în competența statelor membre modul în care își organizează aceste reglementări în așa fel încât să fie adaptate specificului național, regional, local și numai dacă este în regulă din punctul acesta de vedere conform scopului acestei reglementări să permitem intervenția Comisiei Europene, în general a Uniunii.
În rest ar trebui așa cum am spus și închid cu asta respectat principiul subsidiarității.
Anna Cavazzini
Thank you very much. The Green shadow Alexandra Geese cannot be there but she asked me to read her speaking notes points.
Thank you very much to the rapporteur. So on behalf of Alexandra, we would like to welcome the rapporteur's and her office's work on the first batches of compromise amendments. We appreciate the efficient and cooperative approach and are overall pleased with the direction of travel. However, we have not yet started work on the crucial bits of the Commission proposal and are therefore waiting to see the suggestions as the amendments tabled are going into many opposite directions. As a reminder for our group, there will be four main priorities that we need to get right.
First, we need to maintain an open and neutral internet. Second, we need to maintain strong end-user and consumer protection rules. Three, we need to ensure a governance mechanism that is not politicized, but that is efficient, predictable and finally, fourth, we need to ensure a competitive digital ecosystem without intransparent voluntary conciliation mechanisms that would harm smaller players in the market. So this was the points from Alexandra Geese from the Greens/EFA.
No one from the Left or ESN, and that means I give the floor, if there's no catch-the-eye, back to the Commission, or I welcome the Commission representative, Kamila Kloc, Director for Digital Decade and Connectivity from DG CONNECT. Welcome.
Kamila Kloc
Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Thank you very much to the Madam Rapporteur and all Shadows for their comments. I will jump quickly to the main elements of the amendments, which are indeed many, so I will try to concentrate on the main ones. Maybe I will start with a short introduction saying what the DNA is about, because sometimes there is a bit of different view what we are trying to bring with this proposal. We are trying to bring what is extremely needed, Draghi report was also mentioned here, competitiveness to the sector.
Telecom sector is basically building the competitiveness of other sectors and it's very important to keep it striving. Single market dimension is very important, hence the changes in some provisions where we considered necessary to try to create the European market, which cannot be done only by national authorities. There, there is a role for the European authorities and here in particular we would like to work closely, as you know, with the new BEREC and ORECE system.
Then simplification, which is extremely important, so that we are really trying to make sure that we are regulating where it's necessary and we are not regulating where it's not necessary and not create additional burdens. And legal certainty, which is very important for investment. So these were the principles that were guiding the preparation of this proposal. I will jump quickly to the main elements of the amendments if I may. We noted that the most significant amendments came on the open internet rules and ecosystem.
So I would like to quickly comment to make sure that we have similar understanding. I think on the open internet, the most important comment that we have is that the reason why we proposed in particular implementing act is to bring and facilitate development of innovative specialized services, which could be very beneficial for the entire economy without undermining the net neutrality rules. Just short clarification, BEREC guidelines, which are envisaged in the proposal as well, would be very important and guiding for us how we will prepare the implementing act, but just to make sure BEREC guidelines are not legally binding, hence cannot help the companies to provide specialized services in front of the courts. This is about open internet.
Then very briefly on ecosystem. I think what is very important to underline that we tried to find here very flexible and open platform that would allow for the cooperation between different players which are in the sector. On one side we have electronic communication providers, but very importantly other digital actors, for example cloud providers are entering this market and we need to make sure that there is a good cooperation between them. So our proposal we consider is balanced and proportionate. We are not regulating any commercial relationships where there is no demonstrated regulatory intervention.
We decided not to propose any regulatory intervention per se, but we rely on the expertise of national regulatory authorities, BEREC, to develop guidelines to help this ecosystem to work together and this is the main and very important element of the of the process. On the voluntary conciliation mechanism, again we give the trust to the national regulatory authorities to provide solutions, to find solutions together with the operators on voluntary basis. We also don't think they are the best place and we really think that could help the functioning of the of the ecosystem. So we consider that ecosystem cooperation is important. On the copper switch-off and access, I just have three very short comments.
What is extremely essential is to admit that we all committed, including the Parliament, the transition to fiber is the shared objective in the EU through the digital decade policy program. We recognize also together that there are very different situations in different speeds in which member states are getting there. Voluntary nature of the current provisions is not bringing all the results that are necessary. What we need, and we consider that we really need them, are plans, end date, and not to complicate too much the procedure that is offered. On access provisions, where there were also a lot of comments from amendments from the members of the Parliament, I just want to say that we very much rely on the continuation of the current system.
We are not proposing significant changes. And on the comment made by the shadow rapporteur that veto decisions by the Commission were interfering too much into market, I just want to give you two numbers. There were 20 vetoes out of 2,638 decisions of regulatory authorities that the Commission took. 20 out of 2,638. I don't consider it too much of intervention and it's rather proportionate and justified on the merits.
Last but not least, I would like to mention general authorization where there were also a lot of comments from the members of the Parliament. We really consider it's extremely important to create this possibility of single passporting and we really consider that it's very, it would not be good to maintain parallel national and cross-border procedures. It would be contradicting, it will not go into simplification and it will not allow us to create the single market. So that was in very, very quick speed, but we really appreciate the work done by all the members of Parliament, all the amendments, and we are very much willing to work with you together to make sure that this proposal is very good for consumers, end users, and provides sufficient safeguards under universal service obligations. Thank you very much.
Anna Cavazzini
Thank you very much. With that, I give the floor back to the rapporteur.
Stéphanie Yon-Courtin
Merci, Madame la Présidente. Merci aux collègues qui se sont exprimés. On voit bien qu'on a des priorités communes, mais également des divergences. Comme je l'ai dit, 1200 amendements montrent à la fois l'intérêt et le fait que chacun ait besoin de s'exprimer. Je crois qu'il ne faut pas qu'on perde de vue l'objectif premier du DNA et sur lequel, à mon avis, on sera tous d'accord : moderniser, simplifier, accélérer les investissements dans les infrastructures de réseau et renforcer aussi le marché européen des télécoms.
Donc comment on arrive à trouver un équilibre entre le fait qu'on n'ait pas un marché trop fragmenté, mais qu'en même temps la Commission, je l'ai dit, n'aille pas trop loin dans sa volonté de tout s'accaparer. Ça, ça me semble extrêmement important. Et je nous invite aussi à garder à l'esprit qu'on parle d'un avis parlementaire. On n'est pas ici sur un rapport législatif et que notre objectif sera de peser sur la commission ITRE sur les dispositions clés qui concernent notre commission. Donc je suis à votre disposition et je serai ravi de poursuivre les discussions sur ce texte dans les semaines qui viennent.
Et j'ai bien entendu également la question de la subsidiarité qui était aussi importante.
Merci beaucoup. Vielen Dank, sehr geehrte Präsident.
Anna Cavazzini
Very nice. Thank you so much. This concludes agenda item eight and also to you, of course, and all the shadows, a lot of success. And that leads us to our last point before the coordinators' meeting, agenda item nine. We commissioned as IMCO committee, as you know, a study on online fraud and fake web shops.
We know it is a very serious consumer issue. We have a lot of consumers complaining about it. And I think the question is extremely interesting, what to do about it, and to check if the current EU legislative framework is fit for purpose. Is it an implementation problem?
What can we do more? Because, yeah, consumers are suffering and sometimes, very often, don't recognize it's a fake shop and then don't get remunerated afterwards, or like the damage is not getting paid back, so they are left alone. So we are very much looking for the study presentation. I welcome Professor Monika Namysłowska, professor of law and head of the Department of European Economic Law at the University of Łódź in Poland, who is a highly distinguished academic in the fields of consumer law and unfair commercial practices by online actors. And then also I welcome the two of the authors from Visionary Analytics.
They are connected online, Dr. Žilvinas Martinaitis and Viktorija Kravčik. So we are looking forward to the presentation. I think in total around ten minutes, and then of course we have the opportunity for the members to ask questions and get in. So we start with Professor Namysłowska.
Monika Namysłowska
Thank you, Madam Chair. Honorable members, if one of us buys from a fake webshop today, EU consumer law already prohibits almost everything the fake shop is doing, like misleading advertising, giving false identity details by the trader, and when there is no delivery. We have the right to delivery, withdrawal, and a refund. And they may still not help us. Because when the authorities, when they look for the trader, what is there is a domain registered a few weeks ago, an advertising account, and a payment route.
And before they can trace any of it, the shop is running under a new name. Next slide, please. So the law exists, it cannot be exercised. And I have watched consumer rights improved for many, over 20 years. The people finding ways around those rights have improved too, much faster.
And now nearly half of EU consumers encountered fraud or scams online in 2024. In Germany, one of eight online shoppers was hit by a fake shop within two years. The study I am presenting today looks at online fraud through one route in particular, the fake web shops. So it is a site or seller listing that presents itself as a legitimate online retailer but is designed to deceive consumers. And we investigated the fake shops but with the scam advertising, search manipulation and phishing that lead consumers to it, and fake reviews, false discounts and refund obstructions that keep them there.
And the study has four key findings. The first one, the hard part is often not proving the infringement, it is finding someone to hold responsible. Consumer rights, they assume a trader who can be identified and reached.
Fake shops are designed to defeat that assumption. And they move fast. Next slide, please. In German-speaking countries, the consumer centers' database holds more than 60,000 fake shops and grows by over 1,000 a month. Well, 1,000 a month, it means more than 30 a day.
We take down websites, but the fraudster replaces them. So enforcement has to reach the operation, not the page. Second finding, our strongest preventive check does not reach standalone fake shops. That check is Article 30 of the Digital Services Act, of the DSA, marketplace trader verification, but it works only when a marketplace exists. So there is no EU duty to verify who is behind a paid advertisement before it runs.
The third finding: the fraud operates as one system and enforcement does not. Consumer authorities, digital services coordinators, payment providers, advertising platforms, registrars, each sees one part. One removes the ad, the domain stays indexed, the host keeps the site up, the operator relaunches. Across borders it is worse. One operation on Facebook drew close to 1,000 complaints in four Nordic countries, in each one the numbers looked too small.
Only when the four pictures were joined, it was clear this was one operation. And the fourth finding is that the fraud is the same, but the recovery is not. Pay by card and chargeback may be available. Pay by transfer and once the trader disappears, there may be no route back. So then we knock on four doors: the trader, the trader's gone; the platform, not our seller; the payment provider, you authorized it; the authority, not our jurisdiction.
So nobody owns one fraud. And the study makes six recommendations.
Next slide, please. The first recommendation: make enforcement less dependent on reaching the operator. Use the intermediaries we can reach: hosts, registrars, advertising platforms, and payment providers. And well, that is the CPC revision among others. Second recommendation: move protection upstream before the consumer pays.
Treat related domains and accounts as one operation, not separate content problems. And new duties need legislation. Third recommendation: match responsibility to the infrastructure provided. Risk-based verification of paid placements directing consumers to online shops. And well, it can be modeled on Article 30 of the DSA.
And it should be treated as due diligence, not general monitoring.
And it, well, it, we should also clarify Article 30 best efforts, best efforts standard, well, maybe in the Commission guidance. Fourth recommendation: coordinate enforcement as tightly as the fraud. Joint operational protocols, one consumer escalation pathway across the trader complaint platform, dispute, and payment route. The existing actors have to connect. Fifth recommendation: let recovery follow the fraud, not the payment method.
In the PSR review, the Commission should assess whether recourse should extend to victims of merchant fraud with safeguards against moral hazard. Sixth recommendation: use consumer awareness to support these reforms, not replace them. The awareness about consumer rights, refund routes, warning systems is important, but awareness cannot replace and cannot enforce a right against someone who has disappeared. So why legislate if much of the law already exists?
Because a right is worth little if whoever owns the duty cannot be reached. This is not a new layer of obligations, it is the duties we already have pointed at the actors we can reach. And my test for any measure is three questions. Next slide, please. Are consumers protected before they pay?
Can we disrupt the infrastructure faster than it rebuilds? And do consumers have a realistic route to recovery? Today the answer is no. But this committee, this committee built the instrument that works before payment, Article 30 of the DSA. And what remains is to extend it to where the fraud begins.
And two proposals coming to you this autumn, the Digital Fairness Act and the CPC revision, are where this committee can act first. Thank you.
Anna Cavazzini
Thank you so much. Do your colleagues also want to come in or not?
No, you're the only speaker. Thank you so much. Okay. I mean, for me, your recommendations make complete sense. But of course, let's also see what the members are saying, the other members.
So Dora and then Virginie.
Dóra Dávid
Thank you very much. I found the start of your slide very worrying that rights exist but cannot be exercised. And we all see from the study that the issue is the huge volume and how we have the resources to go after fraudsters. I agree with that we have the majority of the laws and we need to enforce these effectively and authorities obviously need to have the resources to do so. We've called for in the EPP for better resourcing in this regard.
But you mention with regard to the DSA that it already has a trader verification duty for platforms to verify or identify the traders selling on their platform. But of course this only applies to platforms. So what about websites and web shops where there's no platform intermediary that you mentioned? How do you deal with them? I didn't quite understand your suggestions on this.
I presume you can go after the web host, but that's after the fact, after the consumer has suffered the harm.
And how do you ensure that these websites then don't keep popping up? And maybe this is related to your third recommendation about aligning intermediaries' duties with the infrastructure they provide. But I'd be curious to hear a bit more about that because I didn't quite understand it. Thank you.
Virginie Joron
Merci Madame la Présidente et merci pour cette présentation sur les fausses boutiques en ligne. Alors après avoir lu votre étude, mon premier sentiment est celui du soulagement parce qu'on voit que l'on peut constater que l'Union européenne dispose déjà de l'arsenal juridique nécessaire pour lutter contre ces fausses boutiques qui arnaquent nos concitoyens. Alors on va rappeler rapidement tout ce que nous avons : une directive qui est relative aux pratiques de commerce déloyales, directive relative aux droits des consommateurs, le DSA, le règlement relatif à la sécurité générale des produits et le règlement relatif à la coopération en matière de protection des consommateurs.
Mon deuxième sentiment, c'est l'exaspération quand même et je sais pas si dans cette étude je l'ai pas vu, vous avez pris en compte un phénomène qui prend de l'ampleur, moi je le vois en France, ça s'appelle les jumeaux numériques. Là on s'est concentré sur les fausses boutiques en ligne. Est-ce que dans cette étude vous êtes allés plus loin dans cette cette problématique qui prend de l'ampleur ? Qu'est-ce que c'est un faux numérique ? Un jumeau numérique, c'est pas que des boutiques e-commerce en ligne, c'est qu'on prend votre fiche d'identité, votre société.com, on crée la même chose et on fait croire que c'est une société identique et que vous pouvez passer commande auprès de cette cette société et en France ça explose.
Est-ce que vous avez pu voir dans vos dans cette étude ce point et est-ce que ça touche que la France ? Je pense aussi que par rapport au DSA, donc on peut légitimement se demander s'il est utilisé à la hauteur de son potentiel, c'est un peu ce qu'on voit dans votre étude. On a les outils mais apparemment l'application on a un décalage par son application. Donc en fait pour finir, c'est peut-être le principal enseignement de votre étude, c'est que nous avons besoin pas de nouvelle législation si j'ai bien compris, mais plutôt bien d'appliquer les textes. Et est-ce que pour vous ces trous dans la raquette ils peuvent être complétés par des mesures nationales ?
Voilà, je vous remercie.
Anna Cavazzini
Merci beaucoup. I was also shocked by by this number that you showed at the beginning or by the first slide, but also because you say that the number of fake shops is increasing and increasing and increasing. Do you what's the reason for that ? Like what's behind that ? Is it just that the opportunity is there or why like 10 years ago we didn't have so much fake shops and now why is it exploding right now ?
It's probably also important to understand then for the policy recommendations and for the options.
I think that was all of us, so the floor is yours again.
Monika Namysłowska
Thank you so much for the questions and allow me to start with the answer to the last question, why the number of fake shops is growing. Well, there are many factors that are important, but fake shops are multiplying because they are cheap to build, cheap to advertise and almost free to lose. And nothing in the current framework raises the cost of starting the new one.
And we heard today, I heard today listening to your speeches that a sentence, a key sentence, that artificial intelligence is key. And the same here in this case because, well, thanks to the artificial intelligence systems, or they, artificial intelligence systems, they do speed up the building of the fake shops and so they increase the speed and the scale of the web shops. And well, now we need a few minutes probably to build a new fake shop, a new site, and not weeks. And if we want to fight against the fake shops, we have to be faster. And how?
Because we have some regulation, for example NIS2 regulation, but there we have 72 hours to give the details of the domain. So 72 hours, I mean, we need well, some minutes, seconds even to close a shop, a site, and to start a new one. So yes, we do have a lot of EU provisions, but currently we, well, they do not help.
They are on right on papers. So let me answer the first question. The first question was that we have laws, yes. What about shops with no intermediaries? So we do have Article 30 of the DSA, and it works because there is somebody to put the duty on.
And for standalone shops, and yes, we did analyze this case in our report, in our study, for a standalone shop, that somebody is the advertising platform, the registrar, the host, the payment provider.
And today, none of them has to check anything before the consumer pays. So we have to move this obligation before this, so before we pay, we as consumers. And yes, probably we do need new legislation, but this new legislation will have or may have exactly the same logic as the existing one, like for example this Article 13, but one step earlier. And the next question, well, we have the UCPD, DSA, CPC, and okay, digital twins.
So, a digital twin, it is the clearest case, well the clearest case there is impersonation is already prohibited, the shop is illegal from the first click, and there is still nobody to enforce against. So better implementation cannot close that gap, and national measures cannot either, because in this field member states are not free to invent the missing, the missing duty. So, no, we have to act at the EU level, definitely. Thank you.
Anna Cavazzini
Yeah, thank you so much. We will definitely look in depth again at your recommendations and also of course discuss possible follow-ups. So thanks so much for your study and also of course to the members and to the policy department I guess who organized everything. Thank you so much. This concludes agenda item nine, and if there is not any other business I can only announce the next meetings, but of course you are aware of them.
So we meet again next week on the 14th of September in Strasbourg and then again on the 28th of September, this is in Brussels again, and we have the coordinators meeting scheduled for 12 o'clock and we stick to the scheduled time. So the coordinators meet here again at 12. Thank you.