Author: MIL OSI Publisher

Question for written answer  E-001606/2025
to the Commission
Rule 144
Nikolaos Anadiotis (NI)

Critical issues for flight safety in Greece are being raised due to serious malfunctions in the ‘non-operational’ aircraft collision control and warning system, especially in the terminal area of​ Athens airport, which are being denounced by the Greek Association of Air Traffic Controllers (AATC).[1]

The AATC is sounding the alarm due to outdated surveillance and communications equipment, inadequate staffing and other dangerous – mainly during periods of increased air traffic – operational and working conditions. The above conditions potentially jeopardise the country’s compliance with Regulation (EU) 2018/1139,[2] Regulation (EU) 139/2014[3] and Regulation (EU) 965/2012,[4] which require high safety standards in civil aviation and the proper functioning of air traffic systems.

In light of the above:

• 1.How does the Commission assess the complaints regarding the operational status of the air collision avoidance system in Greece?
• 2.Has it carried out (or does it intend to carry out), through the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) and other competent bodies, an updated review of the status of the National Air Traffic Systems in Member States with identified gaps, such as, for example, Greece?
• 3.What measures does it intend to put in place to ensure Greece’s full compliance with the EU aviation safety framework and the modernisation/functionality of air traffic systems?

Submitted: 22.4.2025

• [1] https://www.flash.gr/epistoli-vomva-ton-elegkton-enaerias-kykloforias-tyflo-to-systima-proeidopoiisis-sygkroysis-982188?utm_source=chatgpt.com.
• [2] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:32018R1139
• [3] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2014/139/oj/eng
• [4] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2012/965/oj/eng

Question for written answer  E-001603/2025
to the Commission
Rule 144
Lefteris Nikolaou-Alavanos (NI)

Heightened competition between the EU and Russia and competitive planning by the US are paving the way for further increases in the cost of energy and basic commodities. The implementation of the EU’s green strategy is also marked by the closure, by the Greek Government and Public Power Corporation, of the Meliti and Megalopoli coal-fired power stations and the planned closure of the one in Agios Dimitrios and of the mines that supply them. Power plants harnessing a local fuel, lignite, are being replaced by plants running on imported natural gas. This is depriving the people of access to cheap electricity, while fostering unemployment in Western Macedonia and jeopardising national energy security.

The Commission’s action plan for ‘cheaper natural gas imports’ increases dependence on LNG from the US, which is more expensive, while guaranteeing lower relative energy prices for large industrial groups.

Can the Commission say:

• 1.How does it view the fact that the ‘green’ energy strategy pursued by the EU and national governments is determined by the requirements and interests of business groups?
• 2.What view does it take of the fact that ending dependence on Russian gas, abandoning cheap domestic lignite and shifting towards more expensive LNG from the US and the measures to increase the share of renewable energy sources under the conditions of the ‘liberalised market’ only result in further increases in costs for ordinary households, exploitative labour conditions for workers in the sector and a blight on the people of Western Macedonia?

Submitted: 22.4.2025

Question for written answer  E-001617/2025
to the Commission
Rule 144
Thomas Waitz (Verts/ALE), Lena Schilling (Verts/ALE), Erik Marquardt (Verts/ALE)

Austria plans to introduce a blanket suspension on family reunification for third-country nationals, in violation of Directive 2003/86/EC on the right to family reunification. In a letter of 4 March 2025 to the Commission, the Austrian Minister of the Interior says that the reunification procedures jeopardise the functioning of the Austrian state’s institutions and its most important public services in particular. Austria thus plans to apply Article 72 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

• 1.Does the Commission consider the Austrian announcement to be in line with EU law and, if so, how?
• 2.If the Austrian announcement is not in conformity with EU law, how not?
• 3.How did the Commission respond to the letter from the Austrian Minister of the Interior and what steps will it take next?

Submitted: 23.4.2025

Question for written answer  E-001597/2025
to the Commission
Rule 144
Georgios Aftias (PPE)

Coastal areas in the European Union are in a vulnerable and dynamic situation due to human intervention and natural processes, which change their morphology, but also due to the advantages they bring at a social and economic level. They are greatly affected by coastal soil erosion, as well as by wave activity. The Ionian Islands contribute significantly to trade, transport and tourism, offering a huge range of economic development and professional activity to Greek society.

According to a report by the Region of the Ionian Islands, signed by the Regional Governor, Mr. Ioannis Trepeklis, after long-term research and studies it has been established that the Ionian Islands region is particularly vulnerable to coastal erosion and the most prone to ongoing and strong seismic vibrations worldwide. The islands of Corfu, Kefalonia, Zakynthos and Lefkada are mentioned. The Ionian Islands Region is raising this issue with urgency, as solving the problem also requires immediate European intervention.

In view of the above:

• 1.Will the Commission support the strengthening of the resilience of coastal areas with all financial means?
• 2.Will the Commission finance national initiatives that contribute to the protection of the inhabitants of coastal areas from the effects caused by soil erosion?

Submitted: 22.4.2025

Question for written answer  E-001493/2025
to the Commission
Rule 144
Fernando Navarrete Rojas (PPE), Dolors Montserrat (PPE)

• 1.The Spanish National Employment Service, which reports to the Ministry of Work and Social Economy, does not provide specific, separate figures for the total number of permanent seasonal workers (PSWs), while the status has been used considerably more since the labour reform. In light of that, does Eurostat believe it would be positive, for transparency purposes, to publish PSW figures?
• 2.Given that Eurostat has already revised unemployment figures upwards to include permanent seasonal workers who are not working and are actively seeking work, and in view of the sharp upsurge in that type of contract, what control and monitoring mechanisms will Eurostat introduce to ensure those unemployed people are properly reflected in unemployment statistics, and in view of the revisions resulting from that type of contract, which is particularly common in Spain, does Eurostat not believe that enhanced, controlled monitoring of unemployment figures is needed?
• 3.Considering the economic circumstances of out-of-work PSWs who are not actively seeking work and the extensive use thereof in a number of Member States, does Eurostat plan to revise its methodology to include them in unemployment figures in the future?

Submitted: 10.4.2025

The President of the Commission welcomed the proposal for a ceasefire which came out of the US-Ukraine talks in Jeddah on 11 March 2025, as a positive development that can be a step towards a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in Ukraine. She declared that the EU is ready to take its full part in the upcoming peace negotiations[1].

Similarly, the High Representative/Vice-President, in the statement on behalf of the EU, welcomed the ceasefire proposal, as well as humanitarian efforts and the resumption of the United States’ intelligence sharing and security assistance.

She reiterated that the EU’s objective is to support Ukraine to reach a comprehensive, just and lasting peace, based on the principles of the United Nations’ Charter and international law.

She declared that the EU is ready to play its full part in supporting the upcoming steps, together with Ukraine, the United States, and other partners. She underlined that it is now for Russia to show its willingness to achieve peace[2].

• [1] https://x.com/vonderleyen/status/1899538326438261074
• [2] https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2025/03/11/ukraine-statement-by-the-high-representative-on-behalf-of-the-european-union-following-the-ukraine-us-meeting-in-saudi-arabia/

Question for oral answer  O-000013/2025
to the Commission
Rule 142
Juan Carlos Girauta Vidal
on behalf of the PfE Group

On 23 December 2024, the Prime Minister of Spain, Pedro Sánchez, convened an extraordinary meeting of the Council of Ministers to modify the conditions for the second allocation of NextGenerationEU funds (Reform 6, component 23). The meeting approved the modification of paragraph 10 of the 44th additional provision of the recast General Social Security Law on urgent measures for labour reform, the guarantee of stability in employment and the transformation of the labour market. The aforementioned allocation of funds had been conditional on companies being granted an exemption from paying social security contributions if they provided employees who had previously been affected by temporary collective dismissals with a minimum guarantee of six months’ employment. The new version of paragraph 10 eliminates this guarantee, which had been agreed upon with the Commission, and instead makes exemptions from social security contributions conditional upon companies’ compliance with a longer period, that is, a period of between six months and two years after a temporary collective dismissal.

In the light of the above:

• 1.Can the Commission confirm whether it was aware of the new version of paragraph 10 of the 44th additional provision of the recast General Social Security Law?
• 2.Can the Commission evaluate this modification in the light of the principle of legal security?
• 3.Can the Commission assess whether this modification might entail a deviation of EU funds?
• 4.Can the Commission assess whether this modification might entail a deterioration of Spanish companies, of the situation of Spanish workers and, ultimately, of Spain’s productive sectors?
• 5.Finally, if the Commission is not in a position to answers questions two to four, what measures has it taken (if it answered ‘yes’ to question one) or does it intend to take (if it answered ‘no’ to question one) to investigate and address any possible irregularity, in order to ensure maximum transparency and soundness in the allocation of EU funds?

Submitted: 28.4.2025

Lapses: 29.7.2025