Author: MIL OSI Publisher

Question for written answer  E-001766/2025
to the Commission
Rule 144
Tineke Strik (Verts/ALE)

On 17 April 2025, children’s rights non-governmental organisation Defense for Children International – Palestine (DCIP) reported[1] the death of 17-year old Palestinian prisoner Walid Ahmad earlier this month in the Israeli Megiddo prison after months of untreated infections, prolonged malnutrition, dehydration and intense beatings from Israeli forces. DCIP expressed its concerns that Palestinian child prisoners are systematically isolated from the outside world and face torture in Israeli prisons.

• 1.What is the Commission’s assessment of the current conditions in Israeli prisons, in particular for Palestinian prisoners?
• 2.Can the Commission rule out the possibility that any EU funding has benefited any Israeli detention facilities, either directly or indirectly?
• 3.Has the Commission addressed the death of Mr Ahmad, as well as the general detention conditions of Palestinian prisoners in Israeli prisons with the Israeli authorities, if so, how, and with what effects?

Submitted: 30.4.2025

• [1] https://www.dci-palestine.org/17_year_old_palestinian_child_prisoner_starved_to_death_by_israeli_prison_guards.

The Commission is committed to ensure that there is no place for hate based on religion in the EU. Through its policy instruments to address hate speech and hate crime, the Commission is addressing and monitoring closely the situation on hate based on religion within the EU, including against Christians.

The Commission cooperates with the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) of the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe in the context of the Commission’s High Level Group[1]. The ODIHR provides regular data on hate crimes targeting Christians[2].

Places of worship have been targeted by acts of vandalism and terrorism in the EU, including Christian churches. Such acts are unacceptable and need to be prosecuted as hate crime by national authorities, who are solely responsible for investigations in the Member States.

The Commission supports strengthening the protection of places of worship[3] [4]. A quick guide to support the protection of places of worship has been published in 2021[5] to help assess the risks they face and implement measures that increase their protection, in particular against terrorism.

Moreover, under the 2023 PROTECT call[6] of the Internal Security Fund[7], the Commission will provide EUR 30 million of funding to support transnational and inter-religious projects conducting, among others, vulnerability assessments in places of worship and providing training to faith leaders and communities[8].

• [1]  https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/policies/justice-and-fundamental-rights/combatting-discrimination/racism-and-xenophobia/combating-hate-speech-and-hate-crime_en#the-high-level-group-on-combating-hate-speech-and-hate-crime
• [2]  see https://hatecrime.osce.org/
• [3]  https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52023JC0051
• [4]  https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52017DC0612
• [5]  https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/whats-new/publications/eu-quick-guide-support-protection-places-worship_en#:~:text=This%20guide%20aims%20at%20helping%20smaller%20and%20medium-sized,altering%20the%20nature%20and%20purpose%20of%20the%20space
• [6]  https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/docs/2021-2027/isf/wp-call/2023-2025/call-fiche_isf-2024-tf2-ag-protect_en.pdf
• [7]  https://commission.europa.eu/funding-tenders/find-funding/eu-funding-programmes/internal-security-fund_en
• [8]  https://agenceurope.eu/en/bulletin/article/13598/36

Through the Single Market, the EU has created a way for European companies to have a large home market of 27 Member States, a gross domestic product in excess of EUR 17 000 billion and 450 million customers[1]. This provides economies of scale and scope, necessary for companies to compete on world markets.

The Commission will continue strengthening the Single Market and will continue its industrial policy, including addressing strategic dependencies.

The European Green Deal[2] has put Europe on the track of decarbonisation. By making Europe more efficient in terms of materials and energy, we will increase our open strategic autonomy and become less dependent on imports, including on critical raw materials.

This will boost EU competitiveness and security, while ensuring a healthy environment for EU current and future generations. The Clean Industrial Deal[3] strengthens the business case for investments in competitiveness and decarbonisation.

More specifically, the Commission will propose an Industrial Decarbonisation Accelerator Act that will increase demand for EU-made clean products, including by making use of introducing sustainability, resilience, and ‘made in Europe’ criteria in public and private procurement.

Moreover, the Industrial Decarbonisation Bank[4] will provide industry with the funding required for ambitious decarbonisation projects. Other measures will boost circularity and ensure access to a skilled workforce.

• [1] In addition, the Single Market is well integrated with the European Economic Area as well as with many candidate countries. Further integration is foreseen with the candidate countries.
• [2] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:52019DC0640
• [3] https://commission.europa.eu/topics/eu-competitiveness/clean-industrial-deal_en
• [4] See under Clean Industrial Deal, footnote 3, above.

The Commission is aware of the study by its Joint Research Centre revealing that the deepest point of the Mediterranean Sea has a very high concentration of marine litter[1].

The Marine Strategy Framework Directive[2] requires Member States to monitor and assess quantities and impacts of marine litter and take measures to reduce them so that they do not harm the coastal and marine environment. Under this directive, there is an agreed limit of 20 macro litter items per 100 metres of coastline[3]; threshold values for seafloor macro litter are being discussed with Member States.

In addition, the EU Strategy for Plastics[4], the Single-Use Plastics Directive[5] and the Port Reception Facilities Directive[6] also aim to reduce marine litter from land and sea sources. The regulation on preventing plastic pellets losses to reduce microplastic pollution[7] proposed by the Commission in October 2023 will strengthen the legislative framework.

The Zero Pollution Action Plan[8] sets a 50% reduction target for plastic litter at sea by 2030. According to the recent monitoring and outlook report[9] the EU is on track to meet the target.

The Extended Producer Responsibility provisions are embodied in EU legislation, including the Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation[10], to ensure that producers contribute to this goal.

The EU also supports regional organisations[11], to combat marine litter and developing an ambitious global Treaty against plastic pollution.

EU funds, such as Horizon Europe[12], the EU programme for the environment and climate action[13], and the European Maritime Fisheries and Aquaculture fund[14] finance activities against marine litter[15].

These measures can be effective: a recent report showing that marine litter on the EU coastline is down by almost one-third.

• [1]  26 715 items/km2, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0025326X25000852#bb0640
• [2]  Directive 2008/56/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 establishing a framework for community action in the field of marine environmental policy, OJ L 164, 25.6.2008, p. 19-40.
• [3]  https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/marine-environment/descriptors-under-marine-strategy-framework-directive_en
  Communication from the Commission — Commission Notice on the threshold values set under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive 2008/56/EC and Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848, C/2024/1268, OJ C, C/2024/2078, 11.3.2024.
• [4]  https://environment.ec.europa.eu/strategy/plastics-strategy_en
• [5]  Directive (EU) 2019/904 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 June 2019 on the reduction of the impact of certain plastic products on the environment, OJ L 155, 12.6.2019, p. 1-19.
• [6]  Directive (EU) 2019/883 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on port reception facilities for the delivery of waste from ships, amending Directive 2010/65/EU and repealing Directive 2000/59/EC, OJ L 151, 7.6.2019, p. 116-142.
• [7]  Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on preventing plastic pellet losses to reduce microplastic pollution, COM/2023/645 final.
• [8]  https://environment.ec.europa.eu/strategy/zero-pollution-action-plan_en
• [9]  https://environment.ec.europa.eu/strategy/zero-pollution-action-plan/zero-pollution-targets_en#:~:text=The%20Zero%20Pollution%20Monitoring%20and%20Outlook%20offers%20a,are%20likely%20to%20achieve%202030%20zero%20pollution%20targets
• [10]  Regulation (EU) 2025/40 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 December 2024 on packaging and packaging waste, amending Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 and Directive (EU) 2019/904, and repealing Directive 94/62/EC, OJ L, 2025/40, 22.1.2025.
• [11]  E.g. Barcelona Convention in the Mediterranean.
• [12]  https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-open-calls/horizon-europe_en; https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-open-calls/horizon-europe_en
• [13]  LIFE: Regulation (EU) 2021/783 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2021 establishing a Programme for the Environment and Climate Action (LIFE), and repealing Regulation (EU) No 1293/2013, OJ L 172, 17.05.2021, p.53.
• [14]  https://oceans-and-fisheries.ec.europa.eu/funding/emfaf_en
• [15]  https://joint-research-centre.ec.europa.eu/jrc-news-and-updates/marine-litter-eu-coastline-down-almost-one-third-2025-02-04_en

Priority question for written answer  P-001804/2025
to the Commission
Rule 144
Beatrice Timgren (ECR), Charlie Weimers (ECR), Dick Erixon (ECR), Kristoffer Storm (ECR), Jaak Madison (ECR)

The aim of the directive on the reduction of the impact of certain plastic products on the environment[1] is to curb plastic pollution, including by requiring that plastic caps remain attached to drinks containers. The Commission maintains that the aim is to prevent plastic caps ending up in the natural environment.

However, since the EU requirement was introduced in 2024, the number of plastic bottle caps found on the beaches of Sweden’s west coast has tripled. According to data from the Keep Sweden Tidy Foundation, the number of plastic caps found per 100 metres of beach rose from 46 in 2023 to 144 in 2024. This is the first such increase in several years.

Local beach litter‑pickers think the increase might be down to people expressing their frustration at the ridiculous requirements by pulling off the caps and using nature as a bin. The EU’s rules are therefore potentially causing an increase in plastic pollution[2].

With the above in mind:

• 1.How does the Commission interpret data that show that stricter regulation correlates with an increase in plastic pollution?
• 2.What will the Commission learn from what has happened on Sweden’s west coast, and will the counterproductive effect of the requirement on plastic bottle caps be taken into account when climate and environmental legislation is being prepared in future?
• 3.Is the Commission prepared to review, abolish or adjust the requirement on tethered caps now that it has been shown to be a factor in increasing rather than reducing littering?

Supporter[3]

Submitted: 5.5.2025

• [1] Directive (EU) 2019/904 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 June 2019 on the reduction of the impact of certain plastic products on the environment
• [2] https://www.sverigesradio.se/artikel/trendbrottet-tre-ganger-fler-plastkorkar-vid-vastkusten
• [3] This question is supported by a Member other than the authors: Sebastian Tynkkynen (ECR)

Question for written answer  E-001747/2025
to the Commission
Rule 144
Dan-Ştefan Motreanu (PPE)

The Commission has made considerable efforts to reduce food waste, notably by promoting food donations. Food donations are an important means of redistributing wealth and supporting the most vulnerable people across Europe. A recent report, supported by funding from the ESF+ project Food4Inclusion, analyses the implementation of European food waste reduction and food donation policies across all 27 Member States up to 2024.

A number of important findings have emerged from interviews with both governmental authorities and local food donation organisations.

While mandatory food donation schemes appear to be among the most effective approach, significant challenges remain. These include the lack of harmonisation of national measures, major disparities between countries focusing solely on food waste reduction versus those promoting food donations, inadequate logistics for food recovery and distribution, limited support for local charitable organisations, the absence of an EU-wide VAT exemption for donated products, unclear responsibilities within the food supply chain, high distribution costs and a lack of financial incentives.

In light of these challenges, does the Commission intend to propose a comprehensive EU-level policy and legislation to support food donations and ensure a more coherent and effective approach across Member States?

Submitted: 30.4.2025

Question for written answer  E-001764/2025
to the Commission
Rule 144
Jaume Asens Llodrà (Verts/ALE), Danilo Della Valle (The Left), Mimmo Lucano (The Left), Özlem Demirel (The Left), Vladimir Prebilič (Verts/ALE), Rima Hassan (The Left), Pernando Barrena Arza (The Left), Marc Botenga (The Left), Dario Tamburrano (The Left), Leila Chaibi (The Left), Rudi Kennes (The Left), Carolina Morace (The Left), João Oliveira (The Left)

• 1.Does the Commission plan to urge the European Medicines Agency (EMA) to review treatments and vaccines developed by the Cuban public health system, such as Heberprot-P or CIMAvax-EGF, using scientific – not political – criteria, with the aim of ensuring access to effective and affordable medicines for the European population?
• 2.Does the Commission consider that the US economic embargo on Cuba justifies the EU’s passivity in health cooperation, even when that blockade goes against the principles of sovereignty, global justice and the right to health that the EU claims to uphold?
• 3.Is the Commission planning to include a specific line of cooperation in medical biotechnology, health research, knowledge and technology transfer as a coherent way of protecting the right to health and the health autonomy of the Global South?

Submitted: 30.4.2025

Question for written answer  E-001743/2025
to the Commission
Rule 144
Dan-Ştefan Motreanu (PPE)

A recent study by the Centre for European Policy Studies highlights the urgent need for a European digital services tax. According to the report, a 5 % levy on large digital companies could generate over EUR 35 billion annually – nearly 19 % of the EU’s 2025 budget – providing crucial resources for repaying the NextGenerationEU fund and financing investment in infrastructure, research and digitalisation.

Introducing such a tax would also be essential for strengthening the budgets of Member States, enabling vital investment in infrastructure, education, healthcare, enterprises and job creation across the EU.

The study stresses that waiting for an international agreement through the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development is no longer viable, given the stalled negotiations. Introducing a digital tax would not only strengthen the EU’s strategic autonomy and financial stability but also ensure that digital companies make a fair contribution to the economies in which they operate.

In the light of growing calls from Member States and EU leaders to secure new own resources, and given the urgent financial and geopolitical context, what steps does the Commission plan to take to introduce a European digital tax and ensure that it is included in the upcoming proposals for new own resources?

Submitted: 30.4.2025

Question for written answer  E-001739/2025
to the Commission
Rule 144
Séverine Werbrouck (PfE), Christophe Bay (PfE), Pierre Pimpie (PfE), Aleksandar Nikolic (PfE), Rody Tolassy (PfE), Tomáš Kubín (PfE), Marie Dauchy (PfE), Tiago Moreira de Sá (PfE), Nikola Bartůšek (PfE), Céline Imart (PPE), Jorge Martín Frías (PfE), Mathilde Androuët (PfE), Sebastian Tynkkynen (ECR), António Tânger Corrêa (PfE), Jaroslava Pokorná Jermanová (PfE)

On 15 April 2025, the Commission announced a EUR 1.6 billion aid programme to support the Palestinian Authority and finance projects. It includes EUR 620 million in direct budget support for the Palestinian Authority, EUR 576 million for development projects, EUR 82 million annually for UNRWA, and up to EUR 400 million in low-interest loans for the private sector.

While the Commission’s stated objective is to foster stability and prosperity in the region, concerns remain about the capacity of the Palestinian Authority to ensure that the funds are managed transparently and effectively, among other reasons, because the authority’s governance and efforts to tackle corruption have been criticised repeatedly.

• 1.Can the Commission ensure that the EUR 1.6 billion will not in any way benefit entities linked to Hamas or any terrorist organisation designated as such by the EU?
• 2.What specific checks and monitoring mechanisms have been established to ensure that the funds are allocated in a rigorous, transparent and humanitarian manner?
• 3.Does the Commission intend to make EU aid conditional on clear commitments from beneficiaries on honouring the values of peace, tolerance and non-financing of terrorism?

Supporters[1]

Submitted: 30.4.2025

• [1] This question is supported by Members other than the authors: Marie-Luce Brasier-Clain (PfE), Julien Leonardelli (PfE)