What Henna spoke about.

Mr President, Commissioner, the promotion of women's rights and gender equality is a core part of the EU's fundamental values, and it is important for us to promote this not only within the European Union but also globally. However, there is still a lot of work to be done. Equality is far from being achieved. An estimate was made here that at this rate, gender equality would be achieved in Europe in 60 years and globally at this rate it would take 300 years. It is clear that progress needs to be accelerated. It is good to note that important and important steps have been taken in the European Union in recent years, particularly the decision taken last year by which the European Union finally acceded to the Istanbul Convention, which now includes funding, policy and legislative measures. Similarly, this week agreement was reached on a directive on combating violence against women and domestic violence. This is the first legal instrument at EU level that now criminalises physical violence and psychological, economic and sexual violence against women across the EU, including online. Female genital mutilation and forced marriage are also criminalised as separate offences. It is also important that the new rules criminalise the most common forms of cyber violence, such as non-consensual sharing of intimate images, including forgery as well as cyber harassment, cyber espionage, misogyny and cyber flashes. So much has been achieved, but we still have a lot to do.

Mr President, Prime Minister, two withdrawals from the programme of the Belgian Presidency. Firstly, respect for the EU's fundamental values, the rule of law and democracy. You have promised to continue discussions with Hungary. I encourage you to move forward in this process and to find among the member states that Hungary is seriously and permanently violating the fundamental values of the EU and its right to vote must be suspended. This is necessary to restore the EU's capacity for action and credibility. Another important theme is the EU's decision-making capacity in foreign policy matters. In this international context, the European Union must be able to act quickly, uniformly and effectively. The fact that all foreign policy decisions currently require the full unanimity of the Member States makes the European Union too slow, rigid and uneven. You have also promised to promote the debate on the transition to qualified majority voting in EU foreign policy. This would already be possible if the European Council decided to do so. I encourage you to move forward. This is very important in this international context.

Mr President, thank you to all the negotiators for the excellent result and the speedy handling of this legislation. I regard this initiative to secure critical raw materials as one of the most important initiatives of this parliamentary term. In any critical sector, the European Union must not be overly dependent on an individual supplier, a third country. It is important that we increase the production of critical raw materials in Europe and the processing and recycling in Europe. It would be irresponsible to drive the green transition and try to outsource all its disadvantages to the rest of the world. We know that in Europe we are able to produce, process and recycle these raw materials in a responsible way, both from an environmental and labour perspective. It is equally important to invest more in research and development in this area and to seek substitute, sustainable raw materials and actively engage in partnerships with like-minded countries so that we can be sure that we have the capacity to act in all circumstances.

Madam President, I want to thank my shadow rapporteurs for the collaboration on this file. We have now a broad majority, which I hope will support the Committee on Transport and Tourism (TRAN Committee) result in the vote tomorrow. Why do we need this regulation? I think we all know that transporting people is very different from transporting goods. And this is the reason why the Parliament has asked and the Commission has proposed this revision of the existing driving and resting time rules for the occasional passenger transport sector. At the TRAN Committee, we support the Commission’s view that some more flexibility is needed here, both for the drivers and for the passengers. Occasional passenger transport, meaning usually tourist bus services are characterised by seasonality and changing circumstances during the trips. Flexibility is in the essence of those services, and it is also the reason why the passengers have chosen that service and not the regular passenger service. At the same time, we must continue to always preserve road safety and ensure proper working conditions for the drivers. We should also keep in mind that the regulation on driving and resting times has been revised only a few years ago, as a part of the Mobility Package. Therefore, these regulatory updates should remain limited and concern only the occasional passenger transport sector. With regard to the rules on brakes, the current rules do not, in practice, always match with the natural stops of occasional passenger journeys. Too rigid timetables adds stress to the drivers. In order to be able to provide a good quality transport service, the drivers need to adapt to changing circumstances. The TRAN Committee’s compromise on brakes now allows splitting the daily brake into two breaks of a minimum of 15 minutes each. These breaks can be divided in more flexible manner than in the current rules. On the rules on daily rests, the TRAN Committee supports the possibility for postponing the start of the daily rest with one hour in certain situations. The tourism journeys are usually going like that, that longer distances driven at the beginning and the end of the tour, and by shorter driving time at the place where the touristic activities are taking place. The one extra hour allows the driver to better respond also to passenger needs. The main negotiation point has been the condition of the number of days required to use this derogation. The Commission originally proposed that the derogation can be used on trips lasting eight days or longer. However, tourism trips in the EU on average are much shorter, only 4 to 5 days. For ensuring that the one-hour derogation can sometimes actually be used in practice the compromise brings the condition down to six days. One important objective of the EU rules on driving and resting times is to ensure fair competition within the EU internal market. Therefore, at the TRAN Committee, we support the Commission proposal to allow drivers to postpone their weekly rest up to 12 days on both international and national journeys. The alignment of national and international services also simplifies the enforcement and control of driving and resting rules. We all know that all these rules do not matter if they are not enforced and controlled properly. Already now, in practice, there are big challenges in several member States with enforcement and control of existing rules, both in freight and in passenger transport. Therefore, at the TRAN Committee, we have introduced measures to facilitate the work of control authorities with regards to, for example, digital journey forms and smart tachographs.

Mr President, Commissioner, I am very pleased that, in recent years, the attitude towards nuclear power has also become much more positive at European level. However, despite the fact that more than a third of zero-emission electricity in Europe is generated by nuclear power, the use of nuclear power has very strongly divided the positions of the Member States and the Commission has also been rather reluctant to promote nuclear-related projects. I think that the climate here has now changed clearly, because we need to get rid of fossil fuels and we need efficient, clean ways to produce energy securely and evenly. Nuclear power is just such a solution. This positive attitude is demonstrated by the fact that last week ministers in the Council took the position that nuclear power should be included in the list of net-zero technologies, i.e. to promote nuclear-related technologies. Parliament took a similar position earlier. This attitude is also demonstrated by the fact that this very good report by Mr Bogovič on small-scale nuclear power plants received very broad support in the vote in the Committee on Industry and Energy. These modular small reactors now have a very high international interest at the global level. These investments are smaller than conventional nuclear power plants. We have the opportunity to produce these in series, to locate them more flexibly than traditional large nuclear power plants in different locations, and this production is also easier to regulate. But now much more needs to be invested in R&D to keep Europe in this competition. We, too, have many Member States in Europe that have developed projects in this area, but we need a European framework in which we support research, product development and innovation in this area. Similarly, we need a framework to promote joint licensing and flexible permitting processes so that we can actually start serial production and quickly mobilise investments to effectively reduce emissions in Europe and produce our own energy.

Mr President, Commissioner, Council, over the past period, almost 600 initiatives were included in the work programme of the European Commission. That's a huge amount. While we have rightly promoted Europe's green and digital transitions, the Commission has produced a huge number of new directives, regulations and delegated acts, and I am not saying at all that the European Parliament would have been in any way better at this reduction of bureaucracy. As a result, there has been a huge amount of overlapping, cross-border legislation and obligations on our industry and companies. The administrative burden is enormous for these large companies, but especially when we are talking about SMEs. We need to put a stop to this. We really need to lighten and reduce regulation, and not just talk about it nicely. We are well aware that, at the beginning of this period, the Commission undertook to implement: one in, one out -the rule, that is, whenever there is a new obligation, the second end is lightened. No results have been achieved from this. Now, as new, the Commission has promised to include a competitiveness check, a competitiveness assessment, in every new piece of legislation, as well as the SME test. We look forward to the results. Of course, it is positive that the Commission has now taken up this issue and made it a priority in its work programme for next year. But yes, we must set the goal of strengthening the strategic competitiveness of Europe as a whole for the coming EU term. This means that we need to create legislation that encourages investment and innovation in Europe. The additional administrative burden must be reduced and companies must be given the opportunity to come up with new ideas and create new ones.

Madam President, Madam Commissioner, during November, more than 500 asylum seekers arrived in Finland from Russia. They are mainly young men from Syria, Somalia and Yemen. This is an organised activity where the Russians transport the persons in question by car near the Finnish border, and they cycle to the border. The situation is difficult because it is -20 degrees below zero in northern Finland now. This way, Russia is using migrants as a weapon at the Finnish border, trying to create chaos and confusion. This needs to be stopped. However, the situation at the Finnish border did not catch us off-guard. Fences have been built on the border and now, without delay, the Finnish Government has closed half of the border-crossing points with Russia. The Finnish Government is prepared to take strong actions following national laws and EU and international obligations. This situation underlines the need to reform international rules. We should have a unified EU model to respond to the instrumentalisation of migration. Effective and coordinated monitoring of the EU’s external borders is crucial to prevent neighbouring countries from using migrants for their own purposes, and to safeguard people’s fundamental rights. It’s crucial for the European Union to act together in this matter and make full use of the expertise and resources of Europol and Frontex.

Mr President, Commissioner, it is very important that we reduce emissions in the transport sector. We know that it is the only sector where emissions have only increased and trucks, heavy transport, are responsible for 25% of EU road transport emissions. It is therefore justified to pay attention to this. However, it is important that when we set these targets, we take into account the different circumstances in Europe. I represent the Finns here. You know that Finland has very long distances, sparse population and a cold climate. So it is neither realistic nor even cost-effective to think that we would quickly switch to electric trucks in these circumstances. Conditions are completely different in urban, distribution and bus transport, where electrification may very quickly be ahead. Due to the circumstances, exceptionally heavy, large trucks are used in Finland and this is a cost-effective way for us to reduce emissions, because we are able to produce less carbon dioxide emissions per tonne with a large truck than if we had two or three trucks carrying the same cargo. It is therefore important to take into account the different conditions in the regions when setting these targets. We are now aiming for 90% of new heavy-duty vehicles to be zero-emission by 2040. It is important that these largest combinations are now excluded, but we also need to increase technology neutrality, take biogas, renewable fuels into account and promote a life-cycle-based calculation model. I personally support the addition of the Carbon Correction Factor, a carbon correction factor that allows us to add a neutral dimension to this technology.

Mr President, Commissioner, when we look at the progress of the European Energy Union, we can welcome the many positive steps that have been taken in this regard. In particular, the fact that emissions have fallen by more than 32% since 1990, while at the same time the European Union's gross domestic product has grown by 67%, shows that sustainable growth is possible and that we are able to cut emissions. Similarly, the green transition has now been taken forward in many sectors. At the same time, it must be said that this has created a very heavy administrative burden for industry and businesses. In the coming months, an important task will be to dismantle the overly burdensome regulation and to dismantle the detailed regulation that has now come before us for quite a few green transition initiatives. Similarly, the European Union has succeeded in dismantling a very high level of dependence on Russia for energy. Imports of coal into the EU have been stopped. Oil imports have fallen by 90 per cent, natural gas imports by 75 per cent. But at the same time, liquefied natural gas (LNG) imports have even increased into the EU, and nuclear power has not yet been subject to sanctions throughout the period. There is also activity in this sector. We can say that the countries of the European Union still pay more than EUR 2 billion each month to Russia for fossil fuels alone, and this is unsustainable. We need to stop buying energy from Russia altogether and bring all energy activities under sanctions. The next time the Commission is preparing this twelfth package of sanctions, it will have to be extended to all energy production.

Mr President, Madam Commissioner, thank you for your speech. I can hear that even that you are very new in your position, you are taking this topic very seriously and you are trying to find answers and solutions for these important challenges. The New European Innovation Agenda is a very important idea, because it is supposed to position Europe at the forefront of the new wave of deep tech innovation and startups. Also, it is supposed to help Europe to develop new technologies to address the most pressing societal challenges and to bring them to the market. In this time of geo-economical competition, when we are speaking about critical technologies, this is especially important. The New European Innovation Agenda is rightly also designed to position Europe as a leading player on the global innovation scale. I’m also very happy that the Commission has stated that Europe wants to be the place where the best talents work hand in hand with the best companies, and where deep tech innovation thrives and creates breakthrough innovative solutions across the continent that will inspire the world. I very much agree with this vision, but to reach these targets and this vision, we have to do more. Especially, I want to underline two sectors to where we have to focus: first, fundamental research; and then, an innovation-friendly regulatory framework. First, about fundamental research, because we know that basic research is the basis for all innovations. I am very worried that when we look at our research and development investments in Europe, we are lagging behind the USA, Japan, Korea and even China. So, we have to encourage Member States to invest more in research and development, and a bigger European research programme is also needed. Secondly, we have to have a more innovation-friendly regulatory framework, that kind of framework and regulation that encourages new ideas, innovations and investments in Europe. This is not the case now. We are overregulating our industry and markets, and especially when it comes to startups and SMEs, the regulatory burden for them is too heavy. So it’s very promising that the Commission has now proposed an initiative to cut reporting obligations by 25% from SMEs, and is also committed to a competitiveness check of new legislation. So these are very important steps to include. But more has to be done to boost innovation.

Mr President, digital platforms have a very great social and economic responsibility today. Digital platforms with their own algorithms largely decide what kind of content we see every day. We have found that fake news, propaganda, hate speech and disinformation are spreading through digital platforms at an ever-increasing rate, causing and inciting violence. This has been exploited by Russia, Hamas terrorists and jihadists. It is good that the Digital Services Act (DSA) came into force in August. As a first step, it applies to very large online platforms (VLOPs), for which obligations now need to be complied with. These platforms shall ensure that illegal content is removed immediately. They need to increase their own transparency and continuously carry out risk assessments of their own systemic risks. It is very important that what is illegal in European societies is now up to the level of legislation, and that what is illegal in European societies is also illegal on the Internet. This principle and these rules must now be closely monitored.

Madam President, Commissioner, free independent media is a cornerstone of our democracy and we as politicians have to protect media freedom also in the cases when maybe they are criticising us in the news. Freedom of expression and rule of law are core values of the European Union. It’s a shame that we have Member States where journalists are oppressed or spied on or even murdered because of their work for sharing information. This Media Freedom Act is well needed. We have to protect media pluralism and freedom everywhere in the EU. Digitalisation poses also new challenges for journalism when citizens are often getting their news via social media, and then it’s actually the online platform that decides which content is shown for the users. We already have now the Digital Service Act, which brings more transparency to the very large online platforms. Now, this legislation on media freedom offers additional protection against the unjustified removal of professional media content. And this is well needed.

Mr President, Commissioner, it is good that we now have the ITS directive here to confirm. After all, the current directive dates back to 2010 and during these years, digitalisation has gone a long way and we have also created a lot of new digital services for transport. It is therefore good that we are now able to combine, under the framework of this directive, various information relating to transport infrastructure and different modes of transport and ticket reservation systems. Thanks to the digitalisation of transport, we are able to get much safer, more efficient and also more sustainable transport. Similarly, if we can plan transport well, it will reduce congestion and reduce emissions. In fact, digitalisation is one of the most important ways we can make transport more environmentally sustainable. In this context, as we begin to finalise the legislation of this parliamentary term and look more and more towards the upcoming legislative term, I believe that, in the upcoming legislative term, the EU will have to significantly accelerate the digitalisation of transport. It is now very much the responsibility of the Member States to see how fast the projects are progressing. It is clear that we need to invest more in innovation, research and development in this area, but we also need modern infrastructure to make digital services possible. We know that there is a very large shortage of labour in the transport sector across Europe, and when digitalisation is used efficiently, we can modernise logistics chains, automate, robotise, very significantly transport, and thus gain efficiency, safety, comfort, ease of transport. In the coming legislative term, accelerating the digitalisation of transport across Europe must become an even stronger priority.

Mr President, Commissioner, colleagues, small and medium—sized enterprises represent 99% of Europe’s businesses. They employ over 100 million people across Europe and produce nearly half of Europe’s GDP. The last few years have not been easy, and SMEs have faced many crises. They need our support. I would like to thank the Commission for preparing this SME relief package. It contains many important things, such as improving the current regulatory environment for SMEs. Of course, the package comes very late. In fact, in the PPE we have been urging the Commission to fulfil its promises to SMEs for years about appointing an SME envoy and following the ‘one in, one out’ principle. I am delighted that President Ursula von der Leyen earlier today in her State of the European Union speech was underlining the importance of SMEs to our economy, innovation and competitiveness, and committed to put promises into practice because Europe needs a regulatory framework that encourages investments and innovations in Europe. We have to cut red tape from our industries and especially from our SMEs, because small companies do not have capacity to cope with complex administration. It costs EUR 1 per employee for a big company to fulfil EU regulations, but EUR 10 for a small company. It’s crucial for them that we cut this and reduce the administrative burden for them. So I am welcoming the Commission’s new initiative to reduce reporting obligations at European level by 25% for our SMEs and add a competitiveness check to all our new pieces of legislation. Now it is time to move from promises to actions.

Mr President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, this Critical Raw Materials Act is one of the most important initiatives of the term. The aim is to increase the mining, processing and recycling of critical raw materials in Europe, and this is a very worthwhile goal. We really need investments in this field, and these projects in Europe need to be boosted, otherwise we will not be able to achieve our goals of climate neutrality, when there simply are not enough, for example, batteries, solar cells or wind turbines needed for that. Europe’s green and digital transition is far too dependent on imports, especially from China. Of the raw materials listed as critical, 90% of them come to Europe from one country. So we need to strengthen our own capacity and also diversify our supply chains. It is particularly important to speed up the permit processes required by investments in Europe without compromising on environmental responsibility. I understand that mining raises also concerns; however, it would be irresponsible to push for a green transition and, at the same time, outsource the harms to the rest of the world. Europe must take greater responsibility for the entire value chain. Only in this way can we operate in a sustainable way in terms of environmental, economic and social impacts.

Mr President, Mr Commissioner, SMEs are the backbone of our economy as they make up 99% of all businesses in Europe. Europe must be a place that encourages entrepreneurship, innovating and growing businesses. To make this possible, we need an SME-friendly regulatory framework. The double transition in the field of digitalisation and green transition creates opportunities for our SMEs, but also red tape. I have to say that I have been disappointed that, despite its promises, the Commission has not seriously implemented the ‘one in, one out’ principle. Also, for years now, the EPP has demanded that the Commission appoint an SME envoy to the Commission to co-ordinate SME matters, which the Commission has promised. This has not happened and it’s very hard to understand why this is so difficult. However, we are satisfied that, in the fall, the President of the Commission promised a competitiveness check for all legislation, which would be used to evaluate the effects of the legislation on industry and competitiveness. But we are awaiting concrete steps also on that. The Commission has also promised to reduce the administrative burden and reporting obligations on companies, but these promises have not progressed as hoped. The Commission must now take this important topic seriously and develop a better regulation agenda that aims to reduce the regulatory burden of SMEs by at least 30% in order to decrease cost pressures and promote competitiveness of Europe.

Madam President, dear Commissioner Urpilainen, I would like to thank the Commission for presenting the greening transport package. Of course, it needs to be closely analysed now, but it’s a very important topic, as we know, because we have great challenges in reducing emissions in road transport. But much is already being done and many methods are being developed. There are three points that I would like to underline here when we speak about greening the transport sector. First, competitiveness: it is important to make sure that the methods to reduce emissions are environmentally sustainable, but also economically and socially sustainable. Second, flexibility: it’s important to keep in mind that we have very different regions in Europe and their different conditions need to be taken into account. And this is why Member States need flexibility to their own solutions. And the third is about technology neutrality. We know that many different means are needed for successful solutions here. So the regulation must be made for the long term, be future-proof and also technology-neutral. And in addition to these three points, we also need more investments in digitalisation, automation and modern infrastructure to be competitive in the future.

Mr President, Commissioner, with regard to the climate package that is now being adopted, I would like to highlight two pieces of legislation. Firstly, low-emission fuels in maritime transport – I think the outcome is quite successful. The legislation now takes into account different technologies and incentivises the gradual increase of low-emission fuels in maritime transport on market terms. Regional needs have also been taken into account. An important aspect of my own country, Finland, for example, is that winter shipping has been specifically taken into account here. The fact that ice-reinforced vessels always use more fuel is now taken into account in this calculation. I would like to thank all the negotiators for this. I think the result is very successful. But instead, I criticise the directive on energy efficiency. It is now based on the premise that energy use must be reduced in the Member States, rather than encouraging the use of low-emission energy. For example, those countries that now have very high levels of low-emission energy and want to invest in hydrogen production. The directive is now doing the opposite by emphasising the need for everyone to reduce their energy use, while encouraging energy efficiency and low-emission energy.

Mr President, Commissioner, drought is also an increasingly serious problem in Europe. According to Copernicus, the EU's climate change service, last summer was the hottest in Europe, and the summer that has begun is predicting the same. European heatwaves will become longer and more severe in the future. It means more and more heat records, worsening droughts, wildfires and also floods. It is clear that while we need to act to mitigate climate change, we need to further improve our efforts to adapt to and prepare for climate change at all levels. Today, in particular, we are discussing water. At EU level, emergency measures can provide a rapid response to drought through the Union Civil Protection Mechanism. Europe-wide warning systems already exist, but above all it is important that each Member State now systematically and continuously prepares for water scarcity at national level. This is particularly important when it comes to food security. We're still wasting too much water. The production of food requires much better water reuse. Climate-resilient varieties and the diversity of farming systems also need to be increased. In the energy and transport sectors, too, we now need to be seriously prepared for increasing disruptions, for example in freight waterways, hydropower plants and power plants. We already have bad examples of this from last summer when it comes to nuclear power. We got into a lot of trouble because of the drought. As regards drinking water, it is important to promote water savings in households and also to increase supply and storage infrastructure. Better preparedness is also needed for forest fires. Active forest management plays a major role in this, and this also has an impact on climate change mitigation.

Mr President, Mr Commissioner, it’s an extremely worrying development that illegal surveillance has taken place in the EU Member States. Certain Member States have used Pegasus and equivalent spyware against journalists, politicians, diplomats, lawyers, civil society actors. That is totally unacceptable. That Pegasus Committee has been investigating during last year. Unfortunately, it has been often very challenging because it has been very difficult to collect data for the report from all Member States in appropriate manner. Clear rules are needed here. Spyware surveillance should remain the exception and always require effective, binding and meaningful prior juridical authorisation by an impartial and independent juridical authority. It must be ensured that the measure is necessary, proportionate and strictly limited to cases affecting national security or involving terrorism or serious crime. We know that technology enables access to all data, also retroactively. Therefore, appropriate limitations and safeguards must be in place. All Member State governments and Member State parliaments have not provided the European Parliament with meaningful information about their legal frameworks governing the use of spyware. It is imperative that Member States now resolve these unclarities that have been discovered during this investigation.

Mr President, artificial intelligence has a great deal of potential, and it is important that we create a legislative framework that inspires and encourages investment and innovation in artificial intelligence in Europe. At the same time, it is also important to identify potential risks. It is good that Europe is now the first in the world to put in place rules on where and how AI can be used. In my view, the approach of categorising the use of AI according to risk is justified. Most of the use of AI can be considered a low-risk activity, but when AI starts to make decisions about people's educational choices, access to jobs or bank loans, it is justified that those systems are subject to more detailed audit and supervision. Similarly, it is justified to completely ban a specific use of AI in Europe, such as human control and mass surveillance through AI. However, I consider the exception proposed by the EPP Group to be justified. According to it, we support the Commission in allowing AI to be used by judicial decision in certain situations that seriously endanger human health and safety, in order to safeguard human life and health and thus also to allow the use of real-time facial recognition. I believe that this is a legitimate issue and I hope that a majority in this House will vote in favour of that amendment. Artificial intelligence brings us a lot of opportunities. We in Europe should certainly make use of them. But it must be remembered that AI does not work in a value-free manner. Important are the values on the basis of which artificial intelligence is trained and developed.

Mr President, it is quite clear that business must be responsible and that every business can be responsible for its own operations. The CSR Directive has good objectives, but the obligations of companies go a long way when, as a result of this legislation, companies have to assess their own operations and those of the entire value chain in terms of suppliers, transport, distribution and sales. Companies need to investigate human rights and environmental impacts, and that is a very big task. We talked about international waste. In fact, the legislation is now limited to companies with 250 employees and larger companies, but in any case the obligations will also extend to smaller companies, as there are a very large number of small companies in the value chain of these companies as suppliers, transport, distribution and sales, and as a result all activities will have to be investigated. As a result, this will be a significant administrative burden and major obligations that need to be further alleviated in further work. There is also a need to better assess the impact of the Directive on the financial sector. This has not yet been taken into account. In further processing, it is also an important issue to be assessed. As well as the fact that this goes very far into corporate governance and decision-making, on which the Regulatory Scrutiny Board has already concluded that this is not in line with the principles of good regulation and better regulation.

Mr President, Commissioner, the whole of Europe must urgently increase investments in defence. Ukraine deserves all our help, including heavy weapons and ammunition. Member States have committed to supply 1 million rounds of ammunition in 12 months. For this, we need to ramp up European ammunition production. For decades, many European Member States have disregarded defence spending. Russia’s war of aggression on Ukraine has made it painfully clear how much European defence spending is falling behind others – the USA and especially Russia and China. The act in support of ammunition production (ASAP) presented by the Commission is well needed. Member States have already announced increases in their defence budgets with an additional EUR 200 billion in the coming years. It is clear that we need a new, more coordinated EU approach here. It is also important to increase investments in defence research and development and military mobility, and these should be taken into consideration in the upcoming mid—term review of the MFF.

Madam President, I would like to thank the Vice-President and the Commissioner for presenting the Cyber package proposals. As the package underlines, more efforts are needed to boost digitalisation in Europe. Digitalisation will ensure the competitiveness of our industries and help achieve our climate targets. At the same time, because of digitalisation, we are facing new kinds of challenges in our society. Cybersecurity is and must be a crucial part of our overall security. It should be highlighted that the cybersecurity level in the EU is only as strong as it weakest link. We must ensure a high level of cybersecurity in all areas in our society, including our industry and SMEs. There is currently a number of regulatory initiatives being prepared and adopted that strengthen the overall security and cybersecurity of the EU, including the Member States, EU institutions, critical infrastructure and also businesses. And this is a very positive development. But at the same time, if we had to choose one single area where we should invest more, it’s skills. And it was mentioned here, every third person who works in Europe lack basic digital skills. And at the same time we have a lack of cybersecurity experts. So we have to improve digital skills on a general level in Europe, but we also need more knowledge and expertise in the field of cybersecurity. So the Cyber package presented by the Commission today is very welcome as it speeds up both education for the digital field as well as the knowledge of cybersecurity, and also more investments and funding is needed for research and product development in the cybersecurity field.