Speeches

Mr President, I will be very, very brief. Today we vote on the update of the revision of the classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures, which is one of the key pillars of EU chemical legislation. It is also a very, very important component of our chemicals strategy for sustainability. The revision of CLP significantly increases the level of protection of consumers and the environment, as it introduced new hazard classes and thus increased the level of information provided for all products containing chemicals. We made the rules on marketing chemicals simpler and more transparent. Also, we go on with digital labelling, where possible, and provide instructions in order to address risks from online sale. Providing a derogation for some substances containing more than one constituent extracted from plants or parts of plants, we support agriculture and SMEs, and safeguard the sustainability and competitiveness of the essential oil sector. The revised regulation enhances the protection of children and the rights of the consumer, ensures the reliability of products and thus increases the safety of the European way of life. In addition, it introduces specific provisions for refill stations to ensure that risk mitigation measures are applied to minimise the exposure of humans, and provides an adequate period for industry to adapt to the new requirements. I would like to thank all colleagues involved in this report. I would like to thank all of you and particularly ECHA, which provided a lot of information and support to us.

Madam President, dear Commissioner, dear colleagues, when it comes to microplastic leakage, prevention is the only solution. Tackling the unintentional release of plastic pellets addresses a serious problem, not only for our environment, but also for our health. This proposal for a regulation aims to ensure that all operators handling pellets in the EU take the necessary precautionary measures. As the rapporteur on behalf of the ITRE Committee, it is important to highlight that we agree on, first, the non-binding recommendation adopted by the parties to the Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic, which will be taken into account. Second, the period of six months after entering into force to develop awareness-raising and training on the implementation of the regulation. It is also important to highlight that funds will be available to develop training material. Assistance for SMEs (small and medium enterprises) could take the form of specialised management and staff training, organisational and technical assistance. This provision can also be in the form of financial support and access to finance, including the acquisition of equipment required to achieve compliance. Tomorrow we will vote in favour of a key step towards our commitment to reduce microplastics pollution by 30 % by 2030. It is important to have consistency in our policies. As we examined in the single-use plastic case, we need to reduce the lack of alternatives and performance, as well as the low awareness of our citizens, in order to bring sufficient and highly functional alternatives.

Madam President, I followed this debate very, very carefully and I would like to table two questions to colleague in ‘t Veld. The very first one is: do you really believe that we have to start cutting funding to Greece, like we did in Hungary? Do you believe that the Mitsotakis administration is behaving in the same manner like the Orbán administration? And please tell me yes or no, because it is important in this very moment, when Mitsotakis is initiating the same-sex marriage, despite the reaction in his own party, and all media are covering this situation. Second, do you believe that the situation in Greece is the same, like the situation in Slovakia? Is Mitsotakis Fico, who has already shut down the special prosecutor’s office? A lot of mistakes have been made and a lot of steps must be done, but the case in this place is that, in this very moment, this discussion, this debate is irrelevant. This discussion, this debate is misleading, and also the motion for resolution that we will discuss in February. This is because not only it is defaming my home country, it is undermining the credibility of this House, of this institution and it is being instrumentalised ahead of the election. This is the case and you have to say sorry to Greece for this.

Mr President, honourable Commissioner, dear colleagues, the scientific evidence have already confirmed fluorinated gas and ozone-depleting substances which are used in everyday-life appliances, like refrigerators and air conditioners, are highly potent human-made greenhouse gases, with some of the worst global-warming potential, often several thousand times stronger than CO2. By strengthening rules to massively reduce greenhouse gas emissions from fluorinated gas and ozone-depleting substances by regulation, we prevent almost 500 million tonnes of further emissions by 2050, and it is much more than the equivalent emissions from the Netherlands. The regulations we conclude today will provide the European market and citizens incentives to use climate-friendly alternatives, and also contribute to further stimulation of the global market in order to accelerate this path of transition in third countries. It is also important to underline that the implementation of both pieces of this legislation has to facilitate customs and the surveillance authorities to control imports and exports, and to crack down on the illegal trade of gases and related equipment. There is a need for a comprehensive and efficient approach that will cover a broad range of substances and activities, and improve the procedure of reporting and verifying data. We have also to make climate-friendly technologies more widely available to accelerate the replacement of these substances with alternatives. We all know that this year hundreds of thousands of Europeans died prematurely, and many more suffer from heart and lung diseases or pollution-induced cancers. The longer we wait to reduce air and atmosphere pollution, the higher the cost to society. We need urgently to adopt more effective, efficient and immediately applicable measures to improve and protect the quality of our life and the environment.

Mr President, dear Commissioner Dalli, dear Minister, dear colleagues, the agreement in COP28 is a perfect example of European cooperation, coordination and leadership and it is also a powerful demonstration of the value of multilateralism in tackling our planet’s biggest challenges. It is now time to communicate that the crucial part of this historic deal is truly made in Europe. The outcome of the global stocktake has the European footprint with regards to, first, tripling the renewable energy capacity, second, doubling the rate of energy efficiency improvements by 2030, and close monitoring to tackle methane emissions by the end of this decade. The European Parliament is a key partner in European climate action, and so it is in implementing all the commitments made at COP. I would like to recall that in our resolution adopted just before COP, we supported not only a tripling of renewable energy by 2030 and a doubling of energy efficiency, but also a tangible phase-out of fossil fuels as soon as possible, including by halting all new investments in fossil fuel extraction. And above all, we asked for rapid, deep and sustained mitigation efforts to achieve the reduction of 43 % by 2030. Now we have an agreement to deliver. It is the first time fossil fuel production has been directly referenced in a UN climate accord, representing a victory for the High Ambition Coalition of nations. Given that an alliance of petro-states had previously opposed any reference to fossil fuels. Last but not least, this deal represents a significant breakthrough, translated into a clear signal to investors that there is no room, no room for additional investments in fossil fuel. This deal is a catalyst to drive increased investments in the net zero transition as fast as possible. It is now time to increase adaptation on the level of Member States. Accelerate designation for go-to areas in order to increase fast the deployment of renewable energy. It is time to act now. Team Europe, Mr Minister, is in action now.

Mr President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, needless to say that we have to put an end on the dramatic increase of packaging waste generation. But at the same time, we have to take into account the concerns coming from the market. Various stakeholders raised the issue of effective implementation of packaging regulation. According to my opinion, it is critical to clear out that recyclable and reusable options are complementary. Opting for the most circular packaging model should be the key objective of this regulation. Definitions of recyclability and high quality of recycling still need to take into account both scientific evidence and the practical experience of well-functioning recycling system for certain materials. We can’t deal with a circular model if it is not recognised all the associated benefits of packaging made of renewable material. For instance, it will allow bio-based packaging to fulfil its potential. Legal certainty is much needed also with our definition of composite packaging, of plastic packaging, to ensure compliance with the minimum recycling content targets in plastic packaging. Finally, it would also be important for food packaging or packaging used for food ingredients, especially when it comes to SMEs – that should not be subjected to reuse targets, as those cannot be properly sterilised to be reused in safe condition and without incurring cross-contamination.

Madam President, dear colleagues, Commissioner, COP28 is a great opportunity for the EU to enhance and reinforce its leadership towards the climate neutrality until 2050. We are fulfilling our commitments, and the latest concrete example is the recent agreement between the Parliament and the Council on the EU regulation to reduce the energy sector’s methane emissions in Europe and in our global supply chain. As we are preparing to travel to Dubai, it is important to highlight that in the position of the European Parliament has to be reflected that the major emitters should make a fair contribution to the loss and damage fund agreed at last year’s COP27. It is important to collectively deliver and address our climate goals in order to protect our planet, our society and our economies. Only for the European economic area, the so-called climate gap, the bill we pay in order to address the consequences of natural disasters is EUR 12 billion annually after 2020. We are going to see all major emitters in the world to reduce their emissions, as agreed in the former COPs. This applies particularly to China, whose per-capita CO2 emissions are already higher than the EU. We also have to underline the need to support the global energy transition at COP28 by pushing to end fossil fuel subsidies by 2027 and to phase out fossil fuels altogether. In the current geopolitical situation, we can understand that the need for the urgency of cutting dependence on fossil fuels is here, and the need to boost the deployment of renewables is also here. Towards this effort, all actors have to scale up their efforts to mobilise financing from all sources to support climate action and look for effective pathways to facilitate, to direct access to climate finance to local and regional authorities.

Mr President, dear Commissioner Simson, allow me to start by quoting Mario Draghi: ‘Where we need to get our act together is energy. We are going nowhere paying energy twice or three times what it costs in other parts of the world.’ By speeding up all the relative efforts in regard to the implementation of our REPowerEU plan, with all the emerging legislative measures, we have tried to decrease prices and give some relief to households. But now we need to increase the monitor on the procedure of implementation of all this vast amount of emerging legislation with a fast and imminent element. At the same time, the EU needs to continue to ensure affordable and accessible energy for households, decreasing the numbers in regard to energy poverty, while at the same time enhancing the industrial and economic competitiveness of its industries with STEP, with Net Zero Act and facilitating new solid investments. We have to be cautious. When we discuss further actions to Russia in regards to the import of LNG, we have to consider that this kind of sanctions raise critical issues of security of supply, while at the same time jeopardising the fluctuation of the energy prices among Member States. In order to erase our dependence from Putin, we need more renewable, fast deployment, more energy efficiency projects, more renewable fuels as fast as possible. In this direction, and as the winter 2023-2024 is ahead, we have not to forget that, on the basis of collective actions, we can bring concrete results for the benefit of our people and our economies.

Madam President, Commissioner Hahn, dear colleagues, the Strategic Technologies for Europe Platform is a facilitator and also an accelerator to enhance Europe’s global competitiveness by positioning us as a key player in the global technology landscape. But STEP should also be ready to serve as a conduit for cross-sectoral cooperation and dialogue among academia, industry, government and other stakeholders to enhance and reinforce the ecosystem for research and innovation. In this regard, it is very important to secure adequate funding. We have to facilitate steps to reinforce, leverage and steer EU funds, existing and new, to investments in strategic technologies and also in human resources, in people who can implement those technologies into the economy. The Commission’s proposal, dear Commissioner, to allocate an additional EUR 10 billion stemming from an MFF revision to target programmes is a very good start point. But it is not enough. In this House, we support to increase this funding by an additional EUR 3 billion without the use of redeployments under Horizon Europe. We need STEP, we have STEP, now we need the Sovereignty Fund.

Mr President, thank you very much to all colleagues for the vast majority on this report. Mr President, now, based on Rule 59(4), Chapter 3, Section 1 of the Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament, I kindly request the report to be referred back to the ENVI Committee for interinstitutional negotiation. And for that, I would like to ask for your vote.

Mr President, dear Margaritis, thank you very much for the support from the European Commission. Allow me to switch in English because I owe a clarification concerning the issue of essential oil and please note it because it is important. According to the text we have already expressed on in the ENVI Committee, we reached an agreement on the essential oils that the Article 5(3) related to MOCs, which means mixtures, shall not apply – I repeat, shall not apply – to substances containing more than one constituent of renewable botanical origin that are not chemically or genetically modified. By this exclusion – and I repeat the wording, it is an exclusion of the essential oils – we reinforce the sector based mainly on agriculture and SMEs, ensuring safety and sustainability as the main pillars of the production. As already the Vice-President has said, I have taken Kazanlak, which is in Bulgaria, I have also taken Guadalajara, which is in Spain, and I explained to the producers that we are here to protect their jobs and not to destroy their lives. While going on to the next question, which is the articles that we will vote for tomorrow in the amendments, I will now ask you to support three amendments which are now gathering the support from various groups consisting of the so-called ‘von der Leyen alliance’. The first, number 101, is referred to Article 37(2) regarding the grouping of substances, we propose an alignment with the REACH Regulation, clear clear clear certificate criteria which are needed. The second is number 102. The second amendment is related to the reference to the use of the environmental claims in Article 48(2a). This amendment that had been adopted by the ENVI Committee prohibited the use of environmental claims for all CLP-classified substances and mixtures. Now, to mitigate the concerns raised by various stakeholders, we propose to limit this prohibition to the most severe hazard classes, which is needed. And the third one we support is another important amendment regarding the child-resistant fastening. This aims to extend the requirement for a child-resistant fastening to such substances or mixtures which have extreme pH and are classified as serious eye damage category. Concluding, as the rapporteur of this report, I invite you all to vote in favour of these amendments and therefore give me a strong mandate to negotiate in the trilogue with the Council and the Commission.

Mr President, honourable Vice-President, dear colleagues, the EU is the second largest producer of chemicals in the world, with a sales turnover of EUR 594 billion and 15% of the global sales, according to the official data of 2021. The EU chemical industry numbers 29 000 enterprises – big, and also small and medium enterprises. Chemicals are everywhere, improving our living standards, but also many of them have hazardous properties that can harm our health and the environment. Today we debate the revision of one of the two cornerstones of the EU chemical legislation. The revised framework of the Regulation on Classification, Labelling and Packaging will be applied to all industrial sectors, manufacturers, importers and downstream users in order to classify the substance and mixtures of their products packets and label them accordingly before placing them on the market. After six months of fruitful and thorough negotiation – and I would like to thank all the shadow rapporteurs – we achieved to reach an agreement in six compromise amendments that we have adopted by the majority of the political groups in the ENVI Committee. Achieving that, we managed to improve the Commission’s proposal by aligning it with the needs of the European citizens in the industry, providing classification where needed, making it more efficient and implementable and increasing the safety of the European way of life, dear Vice-President. In my capacity as the rapporteur, it is of utmost importance to have a revised CLP Regulation with a focus to ensure the safety of consumers, increase the level of the environmental protection, ensure a smooth transition period for the market and do not distract the market of the essential oil sector – which includes agriculture, SMEs and big industries in various Member States, including France, Spain, Italy, Poland, Bulgaria and my home country, Greece. In this regard, and based on the very good collaboration with the so-called ‘von der Leyen alliance’ political groups, the Commission and the ECA as well, we managed to conclude the report that brings the appropriate consideration to the following issues. First, we focus to increase the level of information to the consumers and facilitate the use of the digital label. We also focus to enhance consumer awareness on the distance sales by adopting the provision that for the sale to the general public of a substance classified as hazardous shall request the user to always read and follow product label information. We reached an agreement on the essential oils: that the Article 5(3) related to MOCs, which are the mixtures, shall not apply to substances containing more than one constituent of renewable botanical origin and are not chemically nor genetically modified. By this exclusion, we reinforce the sector – based mainly on agriculture, as I have already said – and SMEs ensuring safety and sustainability as the main pillars of the production. We proposed a provision of six months for updating the labels to the SMEs. We also agreed to secure the necessary support to ECHA. We included in the scope a reference for the animal testing, in order to promote alternative methods, and with this revision of the CLP and hopefully the revision of REACH when it comes, it will maintain the pioneering role of Europe to make safe and sustainable chemical by design. Dear colleagues, concluding, I would like to highlight that by supporting this proposal with a vast majority tomorrow, we make a significant step forward for the protection of the consumers and the environment. It is critical to increase the level of information provided for all products containing chemicals and also to address risks arising from online sales. It is also important to facilitate our industry and SMEs to adapt and maintain their competitiveness and to provide to ECHA the proper resources.

Mr President, Minister, the climate crisis in my country was reflected as a tragedy in Thessaly and Thrace. Human lives were lost, the unique ecosystem of Dadia was deeply damaged, properties were destroyed and the autonomy of the country's supply was drastically limited. We have agreed here that 30% of the 2021-2027 budget will be allocated to policies to tackle the climate crisis. We must make this commitment a reality in all circumstances. It is evident that projects addressing the effects of climate change do not have the required resilience. We need uniform, high standards of resilience and control of projects on the ground. We need flexibility in the use of resources to rehabilitate those affected and the areas destroyed. Solidarity Fund resources are not enough. Cohesion and Recovery Fund resources can be redirected to infrastructure projects and to this the European Investment Bank can contribute with low-interest loans. Ladies and gentlemen, Greece won the investment grade just a week ago, sealing the correctness of the plan of Kyriakos Mitsotakis' government and rewarding the efforts of the citizens. It is the duty of all partners and allies not to allow Greece now to slide into adventures, attempting to heal the wounds caused by the disaster.

Mr President, Commissioner Simson, severe natural disasters adding up to human and natural tragedies during this summer, around Europe and especially in my home country, Greece have highlighted the need to erase the EU emissions when it comes to the share of renewables in energy consumption to tackle the climate crisis and energy security. That is why here today we are doing a very important debate, because finally we set a comprehensive framework for the deployment of rates across the EU, because we agreed an 42.5% of renewables binding target by 2030 on final energy consumption, following the will of 85% of the European people asking for the EU to invest massively into renewable energies. 27 months after this piece of legislation’s entry to force, the Member States are obliged to designate acceleration areas in order to increase the deployment of RED. It is worth mentioning that high value environmental areas, such as Natura 2000 sites, will be excluded from these acceleration areas. It will be important also to mention that the target of 42% of hydrogen used in industry must be produced from wind, hydro and solar energy. It is also the cross-border… (The President cut off the speaker)

Mr President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, the proposal for a new Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation is, to my opinion, the cornerstone of our single market approach to new environmentally sustainable and circular products. As the rapporteur of the opinion on behalf of the ITRE Committee in this regulation, I would like to underline that we tried a lot to explain the added value of incorporating renewability idea as an ecodesign parameter, and we believe that, in this regard, we are paving the way into a more circular approach. Why is this so important? Because, first of all, beyond products, also the business models that deliver them play a critical role. Rather than simply launching a new product which can improve material and energy efficiency, as it is in the case of linear model, moving to a circular business model requires a complete integration of circular design, as well as collection and redistribution infrastructure. Therefore, we pave the way from the linear model of industrial production to circular model. Government initiatives to advance sustainability have concentrated on product recycling and reuse, waste management, which happens to be the last step of the linear model. Allow me, Mr President, to conclude with this: such a reprioritisation can be performed only on the basis of an updated, efficient and coherent legal framework that paves the new era of the European internal market. Believe me, ESPR is on the right path.

Madam Chair, Commissioner Sinkevičius, dear colleagues, climate crisis is now ongoing and that is why we need the Nature Restoration Law, not as an additional law to the 23 European laws on reinvigoration we have, but as the legal umbrella that will sufficiently accelerate the protection of nature and the restoration of biodiversity. Putting at the core of our attention people’s concern in the amendments we co-signed in the EPP and we have already tabled are addressing various issues to this direction. In my opinion, dear Commissioner, it is the Council’s general approach, which is a good basis for negotiation, taking into account the overriding public interest for the deployment of renewables and defence facilities as well, giving the Member States sufficient flexibility, complementary to the requirement of national restoration plans. In my country, the government of Kyriakos Mitsotakis in Greece has supported nature rehabilitation not only in the Council but also in real practice with various initiatives and projects. In addition, we have to ensure that the proposed financing of measures required by the Nature Restoration Law will not lead to cuts in other budget lines, starting with the common agricultural policy. We need clarifications coming from the Commission, a clear wording. We need a compromise on the basis of the general approach as soon as possible. The Natural Restoration Law should not be a battlefield in view of the upcoming European elections. On the contrary, it is a unique challenge for a real reform to the protection of nature. It is our joint obligation not only to nature but also to the next generation.

Mr President, Commissioner Jourová, the ‘Save Cruelty—Free Cosmetics – Commit to a Europe without animal testing’ European Citizens’ Initiative has gained more than one million signatures from at least seven Member States, and its organisers presented this case in a hearing before the ENVI Committee on 25 May, and you were present, Madam Commissioner. Members of the initiative expressed strong concerns that, despite the existing legislation banning animal testing for cosmetics, in vivo testing is on the rise. The initiative calls on the Commission to protect and strengthen the cosmetic animal testing ban and initiate a legislative change for all cosmetic ingredients without resorting to animal testing, also to transform the EU chemical legislation, in particular REACH, by managing chemicals without the addition of new animal testing requirements. Third, to modernise science in the EU by setting the scheme with a new legislative proposal in order to plot a roadmap to phase out all animal testing in the EU before the end of the current legislative term. While most colleagues in the ENVI Committee supported the initiative, there are concerns focused on the issue of visibility and reliability of the alternatives, particularly with regards to health and pharmaceuticals. The need for more research, of course, before completely phasing out of practice is undeniable, according to my opinion. It is important for us in ENVI to ensure full implementation of existing legislation and to propose new initiatives to promote alternatives to animal testing. We have to increase the uptake and implementation of non—animal methods and also to overcome the default reliance on animal testing, particularly in light of the revision of [inaudible], which is in the pipeline, and also on REACH. We also need to ensure a consistent approach on the question of broadening the scope of the ban of non—EU countries. The Commission has also to do her job to accelerate the transition to non—animal testing by developing the guidelines in cooperation with the OECD and to consider alternative methods in upcoming initiatives. Increased cooperation and investments in the use of innovative technologies in [inaudible] origin is needed. Dear colleagues, the current strategy is not sufficiently and effectively implemented. We need a holistic approach for phasing out animal testing. We also are convinced that animal testing would be phased out in due time, recognising the current limitations, particularly to the pharma sector, for important and rare disease.

Madam President, Commissioner Vălean, dear colleagues, concluding Fit for 55 package, allow me to focus on the FuelEU Maritime Regulation on which I had the honour to be the shadow rapporteur on behalf of the ENVI Committee. According to my opinion, it is an essential stepping—stone towards establishing a forward condition for the energy transition of shipping. However, in order to meet our ambitious target, it is essential for the regulation to foster the production of alternative sustainable fuels. Full decarbonisation of shipping requires alternative low— and zero—carbon maritime fuels and also breakthrough propulsion technologies to become widely available. To this end, close cooperation and action for all relevant stakeholders in the supply chain as it is, fuel producers, energy providers, shipyards and energy manufacturers, ports as well, is required. Allow me to underline that the responsibility for the development and availability of renewable alternative fuels lies with the maritime fuel producers and suppliers, and it is important to stick to set obligations for the development and deployment of these fuels as in the case of road transport and aviation. It is a part of the level playing field, dear Commissioner. Concluding, last but not least, we must always keep in mind that shipping is a global sector which requires global solutions at the IMO level. And in this regard we have to increase the levels we have as an entity, as the EU.

Madam Chair, Commissioner Sinkevičius, dear colleagues, the batteries and waste batteries regulation is a new model of legislation cutting horizontally the whole value chain. And in this regard, allow me briefly to focus on two aspects. The first one is the direct support of the EU value chain. Every single player in the market has to take its own responsibility. And the fact that here in this House we increase the collection targets and recycling efficiency targets later in the period until 2030 sends a very clear, really good signal towards that direction. Secondly, as far as the existing deposits are concerned, we need to increase the level of production of the critical raw materials as they form a strong industrial base producing a broad range of goods and application. We have to keep in mind that the ambition behind this legislation is high. We have to set already the scene, but now it is time to perform. Concluding, I would like to thank Patricia Toia for very good collaboration we have in the framework of ITRE under my capacity as the shadow rapporteur on behalf of the EPP.

Madam President, Commissioner, Mr President of the Republic of Cyprus, the active involvement of the European Union as an entity in the solution of the Cyprus problem and Hellenism is very important. But it is also fundamentally necessary for the Union to play its historic role as an international player. Because there can be no Member State in which the acquis communautaire is suspended in part and no candidate country, namely Turkey, can maintain troops of occupation on European territory. Let me, however, refer to two parameters that have to do with the European involvement of Cyprus. The first is the exploitation of natural resources, especially natural gas, which must be done without delay and with the help of European investments. Cyprus as a Member State has an important opportunity to contribute in practice to the strategic autonomy of the Union. The second is time, Mr President, time is a rival to the exploitation of natural gas deposits. If natural gas does not enter the market from Cyprus in the next five years, its attractiveness will be greatly reduced. Already in Europe with high technology and low prices, we have 40% of the energy mix from renewable energy sources. It is important in the years to come that you turn Cyprus into the future.

Mr President, Commissioner Simson, dear colleagues, it has been identified by the worldwide experts that cutting methane emissions is one of the most effective ways in order to reduce near-term global warming. And according to my opinion, it is a quick win to tackle the climate crisis. With the methane emissions reduction in the energy sector regulation, which we will vote on tomorrow, here in this House, we strike a balance and pave the way in order, first, to improve the accuracy of information on the main sources of methane emissions associated with energy consumed in the EU, second, to ensure further effective mitigation of methane emissions across the energy supply chain in the EU, third, to reduce methane emissions related to fossil energy imported to the EU without putting at stake our security of supply, which is also important and fourth, to avoid any additional cost to the end users, the consumers, SMEs and the industry. At the same time, with our report, with Parliament’s report, we give proper time to Member States to adapt and incentives to companies to invest in methane mitigation technologies as soon as feasible. This provision is another clear message to the citizens in reducing transmission, particularly in Poland, that the EU is ready to facilitate the acceleration of the energy transition without leaving anyone behind – and this is real solidarity. In my opinion, one of the key elements of this regulation is also to provide support to companies in order to achieve performance standards in an optimal manner while fully respecting the polluter pays principle. This is key to avoid too high cost for citizens. Commissioner, dear colleagues, by regulating methane emissions to the energy sector once again, the EU is taking the lead to tackle the climate crisis. We have to stick on our word. We initiated the Global Methane Pledge in Glasgow, binding ourselves to reduce methane emissions by 30% by 2030 compared with the level of 2020 and also involving all the relevant sectors, starting with energy, agriculture and waste management. It is now time to put this legislation into force as soon as possible.

Madam President, I wish to thank Commissioner Simson for accepting our request and being here today to exchange views on the issue of energy storage, which I think it is of paramount importance not only in terms of security of supply, but also in order to address our final goal, which is our strategic autonomy. In this regard I would like to benefit from her presence here to table two questions concerning the issue of storage. The first one is on hydrogen, and I would like to recall our Renew colleague’s approach. Hydrogen is the most abundant chemical element in our world. It emits no greenhouse gas emissions, it presents a tantalising solution for a hard—to—abate sector and it is also an important energy carrier in terms of storage. In what state of play – and could you please give us some details – is the so-called hydrogen bank on behalf of the Commission? And how fast will this bank be launched in order to upscale innovative projects? The second question concerns the IPCEI projects. I would kindly ask the Commission if it is ready to expand the scope of IPCEI projects when it comes to energy storage.

Mr President, dear colleagues, Commissioner Gentiloni – he’s leaving – today’s legislative package is, as we all understand, the cornerstone in order to address our 2030 goal by reducing at least 55 % of greenhouse gas emissions without leaving anyone behind. And in this regard, I would like to focus on three aspects. First, our targets are more ambitious than the initial text coming from the Commission. Through changes that we achieve as EPP in LULUCF and in ETS as well, the de facto final reduction target is roughly 57 %. At the same time, it is of paramount importance that it has been provided sufficient breathing space for the industry by maintaining the indirect cost compensation regime in various cases and rewarding innovation by providing incentives for investments. The Innovation Fund is substantially increased and also the Modernisation Fund is increased with a 2.5 % top up oriented towards clean projects. The second aspect is the specific facility we launched, the European Social Climate Fund, with EUR 86.7 billion. The European Climate Fund is an investment and protection instrument which provides targeted support to vulnerable households, micro enterprises and transport users that are particularly affected by the energy and transport poverty. The third aspect is the adoption and implementation of the ‘Fit for 55’ package as soon as possible by the Member States. Member States will have to submit social climate plans which will cover temporary direct income support to tackle the increase in road transport and heating fuel prices and also long lasting structural measures and investment in the area of building renovation, for instance, or decarbonisation solutions, etc. Only with enhancing our competitiveness in the green and digital sector, while we support the vulnerable households, we can address our strategic autonomy. The implementation of the ‘Fit for 55’ package is another clear message to Putin, but not only to him: that Europe is a global actor, ready and pioneer in the global market committed to tackling climate crisis.

Mr President, coming to scaling up the market, I would like to go to the Hydrogen Valleys. And of course, you are familiar with the joint undertaking. We have a very few number of hydrogen valleys in the EU ground – two or three. And I would like to ask you if the Commission is preparing some action in this regard, particularly in terms of raising awareness at the regional level.

Commissioner Simson, my question is concerning the issue of production of green hydrogen in the framework of how to ensure energy security in the period of 2023. I would like to focus on the issue of the delegated acts that the Commission has already tabled. According to my opinion, and I think that we can share this opinion in this house, the industry needs clarity, needs stability and needs predictability. In this regard, I would like to ask you if the Commission is ready to give some kind of clarification when it comes to the use of hydrogen, the definition of green hydrogen for industrial reasons, for production reasons, for chemical reasons and at the same time for fuel. And secondly, if you are ready to give clarification when it comes to the term of ‘additionality’, which is provided in the delegated acts.