Speeches

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.

Mr President, the emissions trading system under discussion is one of the most effective climate tools in the European Union. According to studies, it has proven to be a very technology-neutral and market-driven way to reduce emissions. At the same time, with the aim of reducing emissions by 62% by 2030 through this ETS, we must ensure that our companies are competitive and that this does not lead to carbon leakage outside the European Union. Emissions trading will also expand to maritime transport. Here I would like to thank Parliament for taking into account the specific circumstances of Finland. Due to winter navigation, Finnish shipping must always use ice-reinforced vessels that are heavier and consume more fuel. It is great that Parliament understood these special circumstances and that compensation is included in this calculation model. The emissions trading system, including for aviation, will be tightened, and for aviation, as well as for maritime transport, it is important for us to act at international level, because it is not only enough to tighten emissions trading within the European Union for these global sectors, but we must involve the whole world in this. In the future, road transport and buildings will also be included in emissions trading, and their revenues will be used to finance the Social Climate Fund. I have to say that I have been very critical of that Social Climate Fund and still am. We already have funds in the European Union to support the green transition, to support the just transition. It would be essential to use these funds efficiently and not to create new ones.

Madam President, Commissioner, I want to thank the rapporteur and everybody who has been participating in these negotiations. This Data Act is an important piece of legislation, especially in promoting European rights and values in our digital world. Once successful, it will be boosting both innovation and also our data economy in Europe. We know that there is much unused potential with data: despite data being collected in vast quantities, the Commission has predicted that 80% of all industrial data produced is never used, so there is huge potential. I think it’s especially important that with this regulation we can also rebalance the SMEs’ negotiation power and make better access to data for our small, micro- and medium-sized enterprises. It’s particularly important for innovation and also in order to ensure their competitiveness. At the same time, it’s clear that trade secrets of corporations should be protected. And I think we have found a good balance in this regulation with these different sizes of companies. And from the consumer perspective, it’s essential that, as a generator of data, they have also better access to their own data. There must be a possibility for such data to be also transferred to another service provider. The negotiators of the Data Act have found a good, balanced compromise, and I think this is a solid foundation for continuing to the trilogue negotiations.

Mr President, Mr President of the Commission, as negotiator of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy, I would like to thank all those involved in the negotiations. This LULUCF outcome is very much in line with what the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE) outlined in its own opinion. The main goal of the law is to increase Europe's carbon sinks by 15% by 2030. It is a very challenging goal and an ambitious goal, but it is possible to achieve it. It does, of course, require active sustainable forestry and, indeed, consideration of carbon sink farming throughout Europe. While carbon sinks play an important role in the fight against climate change, they must not dispel the idea that the most important thing is to get rid of all fossil fuels very quickly. That is the sustainable solution. At the same time, we need to become more active in increasing carbon sinks, develop carbon sequestration measures, invest in research in this area and also develop technological solutions. It is good that in this reform, the calculation method has also been renewed and clarified, and we can use more recent statistical data as a basis for this.

Mr President, Commissioner, the energy efficiency of buildings can be significantly improved and it is a good goal that the building sector will also be climate neutral in 2050. Can improve the insulation of buildings, can renovate windows, change heating methods. There are many ways, but how can energy efficiency be improved? It should not be defined at European level. This is where the Commission went too far from the outset in its own proposals, setting out in detail how these reforms should be carried out in the Member States. We have such different conditions in different Member States, such different climatic conditions, different building stock, different forms of energy and heating, that it is most sensible to decide on the means at the level of the Member States or in the region. Often, property owners themselves decide what is the most sensible way to improve the energy efficiency of their property. It is a sensible goal in itself that all new buildings will be zero-emission by 2028. This is certainly possible, but how an emission-free building is defined here, i.e. that the heating method should be based on renewable energy sources, does not take into account the fact that we have countries, such as my own country, Finland, where energy production is mainly starting to be emission-free, either electricity produced with renewable energy sources or electricity produced with nuclear power. According to this proposal, electricity generated by nuclear power would not be counted as a zero-emission energy source and that building would not be a zero-emission building. This is not a reasonable starting point. We therefore need to make a number of changes to this legislation before I can think that it would be worth taking this forward as it is.

Mr President, Commissioner, Minister, the Russian invasion of Ukraine at the latest showed that Europe must not be too dependent on one producer. Dependence on Russian fossil energy must not turn into dependence on Chinese raw materials. At the moment, however, we know that both Europe's green transition and digitalisation depend very much on imports, and specifically on imports of raw materials from China. Last year, only 1% of the raw materials needed for solar and wind power production and less than 1% of the raw materials needed for lithium batteries and fuel cells were produced in the EU. Over the next few years, the need for both will increase. It is essential, not only for Europe's security and economy, but also for environmental and social sustainability, that we strengthen our own production and also build partnerships with the rest of the world. We have a lot of opportunities. The Commission has listed 30 critical raw materials where we rely heavily on imports. In my own country, Finland, there are 14 of these critical raw materials in the soil. We just need to speed up the permit processes so that we can start mining. This does not mean that environmental standards are compromised. There is also a need to step up training, research and development and, in addition to the extractive industry, to ensure that processes, processing and recycling in Europe also gain momentum.

Mr President, it will be one year since Russia's brutal and criminal invasion of Ukraine. During this war, the European Union, together with the Western Alliance, has shown unprecedented unity with regard to sanctions against Russia and assistance from Ukraine, but these efforts need to be intensified. Europe was far too dependent on Russian energy for far too long, and it slowed down the imposition of effective sanctions. I am very pleased that the tenth package of sanctions is already being prepared. These sanctions need to be strengthened. Similarly, arms assistance to Ukraine now needs to be stepped up, in particular heavy weapons and tanks, which many Member States have already made promises about. These are urgently needed to help Ukraine. The people of Ukraine are fighting for freedom and democracy and they need all our support. We must support Ukraine in this fight and support their path towards membership of the European Union.

Mr President, Vice-President, colleagues, if we want to be climate neutral by 2050, we have to focus on transport. We know that the transport sector is the only sector in the EU where emissions they have increased. That trend cannot continue. Maritime, aviation, road transport all have an important part to play in this regard. Today we are debating and voting about new CO2 standards for passenger vehicles and vans. And I have to say that I am not fully satisfied about the trilogue outcome. Yes, indeed, we have to cut emissions from road transport, but we should do it in a technology neutral way. We, as politicians, shouldn’t be choosing winners and losers in the industry. This regulation entails that from 2035 onwards, all new vehicles should be electric or hydrogen vehicles. This regulation would phase out internal combustion engines, and I don’t think that this is the right approach. Technology diversity is needed where all technologies, including electrification, hybridisation, hydrogen, but also sustainable and renewable fuels, can play a role. And we should also encourage those innovations. We should set the targets and industry should find out what is the most efficient and best technology to achieve this target. And we know also that for too long we have been focusing only on tailpipe emissions. So I think this is a positive step here that the new regulation will now introduce a common EU methodology by 2025 for assessing the full lifecycle of CO2 emissions of cars and vans placed on the EU market.

Madam President, Presidency, Commissioner, dear colleagues, I am pleased to say that we are discussing enhancing the competitiveness of Europe. However, I want to underline that the way of boosting Europe’s competitiveness is not done by relaxing the state aid rules – not at all. In order to be competitive on the global markets, Europe needs successful companies, industries and jobs. To achieve that, we need to have regulation that encourages investments and innovations in Europe. We have to cut red tape from our businesses, SMEs and industries. Here I find it very positive that Commission President von der Leyen has promised to perform a competitiveness check on all new regulations being introduced. This is an important step in the right direction. Secondly, Europe needs to invest more in research and development. In this regard, we have fallen behind the US and China. And thirdly, we need to ensure that Europe has a skilled workforce. We know that the lack of skilled workforce is a crucial issue, especially in the digital sector, which is a sector essential for increasing our productivity and economic growth.

Mr President, High Representative, the European Union must intensify and strengthen the common foreign, security and defence policy. EU decision-making needs to be reformed. Certain foreign policy decisions need to move to qualified majority voting. Although over the past year EU countries have succeeded in imposing fairly effective sanctions against Russia, too often a Member State has blocked and blocked decision-making. At the latest, this war has also shown that the Member States of the European Union need to invest much more in security and defence. According to the Commission's calculations, in the last twenty years before the war, EU countries had increased investment in defence by only 20%, while at the same time Russia had increased its own investment by almost 300%. We therefore need to strengthen the European defence industry and increase joint procurement. Decisions on Ukraine's arms assistance are now also urgently needed. Ukraine needs heavy weapons, and decision-making now needs to be speeded up, especially on tanks.