Author: MIL OSI Publisher

In 2025, the Commission will focus on scaling up Global Gateway through the implementation of ongoing Global Gateway investment projects and the identification of new sustainable, high-impact investments that will further strengthen EU partnerships with third countries.

The second Global Gateway Forum, to be held in June 2025, will also be a key moment in 2025 to showcase steps being taken to scale up Global Gateway.

The Commission will continue its active engagement with Member States, their cooperation agencies and development financing institutions to emphasise the necessity of building a Team Europe approach to scaling up investments.

The Commission will also continue its work to enhance the coordination of its and Member States financial tools, including those of export credit agencies, and to increase collaboration with the European private sector through investment facilitation mechanisms and business matchmaking initiatives.

The Commission tracks and reports on EU support to Global Gateway investment projects through the annual report on the implementation of the EU’s external action instruments, as well as providing information through a dedicated public website[1].

Global Gateway flagship projects which have been identified by the European Council as projects which showcase Global Gateway, are monitored by the Council’s Working Party of Foreign Relations Counsellors.

In addition, regular exchanges take place between the Commission and the European Parliament, notably the Committee on Development.

• [1] https://international-partnerships.ec.europa.eu/policies/global-gateway_en

The Commission has not received any evidence related to the claims of illegal dumping, which could substantiate possible intervention. Nonetheless, the EU is working on addressing the issue of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) through a comprehensive set of actions.

Certain PFAS are already regulated under the Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) Regulation[1] and the regulation on Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH)[2].

The export of fire-fighting foams containing perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) and perfluorohexanesulfonic acid (PFHxS) or perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) is banned according to the Stockholm Convention[3] and the export ban is implemented in EU legislation as per Article 15(2) and Annex V Part 1 of Regulation (EU) No 649/2012[4].

A proposal to restrict PFAS in all firefighting foams has been published for discussion with Member States[5] and adoption is expected by the end of 2025[6].

The Commission is committed to providing long-term support to Ukraine in its efforts to align with EU environmental and health standards, including the management of chemicals.

This includes assistance in approximating Ukraine’s chemicals legislation to the EU’s Regulation for the Classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures[7] and to REACH, which introduce modern approaches to chemical safety and management.

Ukraine has access to funding and assistance through the Ukraine Facility[8] and other mechanisms, which target post-war reconstruction needs[9], including bilateral cooperation with EU Member States[10].

This support aims to help Ukraine react to the environmental and health incurred damage, particularly in the context of the ongoing Russian military aggression.

• [1] Regulation (EU) 2019/1021 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on persistent organic pollutants (recast), OJ L 169, 25.6.2019, p. 45-77.
• [2] Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), establishing a European Chemicals Agency, amending Directive 1999/45/EC and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 as well as Council Directive 76/769/EEC and Commission Directives 91/155/EEC, 93/67/EEC, 93/105/EC and 2000/21/EC, OJ L 396, 30.12.2006.
• [3] Article 3 and Annex A.
• [4] Regulation (EU) No 649/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 concerning the export and import of hazardous chemicals (recast), OJ L 201, 27.7.2012, p. 60-106.
• [5] in November 2024.
• [6] https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/comitology-register/screen/documents/102503/1/consult?lang=en
• [7] Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures, amending and repealing Directives 67/548/EEC and 1999/45/EC, and amending Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, OJ L 353, 31.12.2008, p. 1-1355.
• [8] https://enlargement.ec.europa.eu/funding-and-technical-assistance/ukraine-facility_en
• [9] Including hazardous waste management, capacity building, and other aspects of safe chemical management.
• [10] For example, a cooperation between the Swedish Chemicals Agency and Ukraine on EU chemicals legislation, on reduction of negative effects of chemicals on health and the environment and conditions for the free movement of goods.

The Commission does not finance private foundations of the United States, including the Bill Gates Foundation. The Commission contributes (as many EU Member States and other major donors) to independent multi-partner global funds and initiatives of which the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation is also often a major investor.

In respect of the EU’s Financial Regulation[1], EU development funding implemented by foundations or other civil society organisations (CSOs) is awarded through competitive calls for proposals. Recourse to an award of a grant without a call for proposals can be justified only in exceptional cases.

All development projects funded by the EU and implemented by CSOs are subject to strict and rigorous monitoring and reporting procedures on an annual basis.

The EU projects, implemented by foundations or CSOs, are subject to audits and/or a specific result-oriented monitoring to ensure the attainment of agreed results. The reporting from all projects at corporate level allows for assessment of their impact through analysis of results and indicators.

• [1] https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/990fe2a6-8f52-11ef-a130-01aa75ed71a1/language-en

The EU Blue Card is an important tool for attracting highly qualified third-country nationals to the EU and strengthening the EU’s competitiveness.

To promote public outreach, the Commission regularly updates the EU Immigration Portal[1] with comprehensive and up-to-date information on the EU Blue Card. Additionally, the Commission regularly convenes the Labour Migration Platform[2], which brings together representatives from Member States, European social partners, and other stakeholders, including employers, to facilitate discussions and cooperation on legal migration and support the effective operationalisation of EU-level initiatives in this area.

The future EU Talent Pool, which will include online information on legal migration rules, including the EU Blue Card, will help promote job opportunities and ensure that the EU remains an attractive destination for global talent.

The Commission remains dedicated to supporting Member States and enhancing the appeal of the EU’s Blue Card through effective monitoring and enforcement, and will continue to explore opportunities to better promote the EU Blue Card.

• [1] https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/migration-and-asylum/eu-immigration-portal_en
• [2] https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/networks/labour-migration-platform_en

By judgment of 21 March 2019 in C-498/17[1] the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) declared that Italy has failed to comply with Article 14 of the Landfill Directive[2] in respect of 44 so called ‘existing landfills’.

Given that by 2022 compliance had not been achieved, as only 32 out the 44 landfills for which Italy was condemned by the CJEU in C-498/17 had been closed in accordance with the requirements of the directive, a Letter of Formal Notice (LFN) under Article 260 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU was issued on 6 April 2022[3]. The landfill CO.BE.MA. in Apulia in Contrada Tufarelle is among the 12 remaining non-compliant landfills included in the LFN adopted under Article 260 of the Treaty.

The Commission is closely monitoring compliance with the Court’s ruling. According to the latest information shared by the Italian authorities, the closure of the landfill CO.BE.MA. in Apulia in Contrada Tufarelle is expected by 15 May 2025.

The Commission is not aware of other landfills in Contrada Tufarelle. In any case, it is for the Italian competent authorities to give correct application to the relevant EU rules. In its role as guardian of the Treaties, the Commission may decide to intervene if systemic issues with application of these provisions of EU law arise.

• [1] https://curia.europa.eu/juris/liste.jsf?language=EN&num=C-498/17
• [2] Council Directive 1999/31/EC of 26 April 1999 on the landfill of waste, OJ L 182, 16.7.1999, p. 1-19, amended by Directive (EU) 2018/850 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018, OJ L 150, 14.6.2018, p. 100-108.
• [3] INFR(2011)2215, https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/inf_22_1769

The Commission has been in close contact with the Greek authorities over the last years to assist them to implement the ruling of the Court in Case C-849 /19[1].

Greece has now adopted conservation objectives for all Special Areas of Conservation. The Commission will take action as appropriate to ensure that Greece also adopts conservation measures to fully comply with the ruling.

Concerning the separate file EU Pilot file EUP(2021)9806 and based on the information available, it was not possible to confirm the alleged in correct transposition of the Habitats Directive[2] and the file was closed.

As regards infringement case INFR(2014)4073[3], the Commission is assessing the replies received by the Greek authorities, following the reasoned opinion. T he objective of this type of infringement procedure is to assist the Member State in bringing the situation of non-conformity to an end.

This case concerns the absence of a national legal framework that complies with Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive. However, this absence of compliant national framework does not mean that wind farm projects based on this framework are also automatically in breach of the above provision.

National administrative and/or judicial bodies are primarily responsible to verify compliance of individual projects with the EU environmental legislation and provide the appropriate means to address the matter.

Citizens are thus invited to use existing national means of redress if they want to contest a specific project for possibly breaching relevant EU law.

In its role as guardian of the Treaties, the Commission will continue monitoring the situation and may decide to take appropriate action.

• [1] https://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=235718&pageIndex=0&doclang=FR&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=76753
• [2] Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7-50.
• [3] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/inf_23_525

The Schengen Borders Code allows Member States to temporarily reintroduce internal border control to address a serious threat to public policy or internal security[1].

The Commission is engaged in an ongoing dialogue with all Member States concerned to ensure that mitigating measures limit the impact on cross-border travel, whilst at the same time encouraging them to use alternative measures, as listed in the Commission’s Recommendation of November 2023[2], to address security threats.

Under the Treaties, there is no possibility to suspend the Schengen rules. Consequently, the Commission does not have the power to propose such a measure The Schengen area guarantees free movement to more than 450 million EU citizens.

Around 3.5 million people cross internal borders daily, and almost 1.7 million people reside in one Schengen country while working in another.

Schengen brings important economic benefits to citizens and businesses, contributing to a smooth functioning of the internal market by enhancing economic activity, creating jobs, and supporting the EU’s competitiveness.

• [1] Article 25a, Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on a Union Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders (Schengen Borders Code), OJ L 77, p.1-52, as amended by Regulation (EU) 2024/1717.
• [2] Commission Recommendation (EU) 2024/268 of 23 November 2023 on cooperation between the Member States with regard to serious threats to internal security and public policy in the area without internal border controls, OJ L, 2024/268, 17.1.2024.

1. The Habitats Directive[1] in its Article 6(3) and 6(4) provides a clear and flexible procedure to address potential conflicts, applicable also in cases between flood protection and nature conservation needs[2]. Article 6(4) allows plans and projects with significant negative effects on a site to proceed for imperative reasons of overriding public interest , in the absence of alternative solutions and if compensatory measures are taken. This can typically apply to flood protection measures that relate to human health or public safety which are explicitly mentioned in Article 6(4), second paragraph.

2. The Commission does not plan to amend the Habitats Directive beyond the current proposal to align the annexes to the amendment of the Bern Convention[3]. Regarding compensatory measures for impacts on Natura 2000 sites in the context of application of Article 6(4) of the directive, it is the national competent authority which decides on the need and character of such measures. The German authorities have a long-standing experience with successfully applying exemptions for flood protection measures[4]. The implementation of these flood protection measures shows the feasibility of such measures and the flexibility of the Habitats Directive.

• [1] Directive 92/43/EEC on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora, OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7-50.
• [2] The provisions of Article 6 of the ‘Habitats’ Directive: https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/11e4ee91-2a8a-11e9-8d04-01aa75ed71a1
• [3] COM(2025)106 final: https://environment.ec.europa.eu/document/8ec6689c-a7d8-422e-829d-c4231fc32872_en
• [4] The Commission has been notified pursuant to Art 6(4) about the following protective dykes, among others: Strengthening of the Rhine flood dyke/right side of the Murg dam (responsible authority: Raststatt/Baden-Württemberg State Council Office), Strengthening and reinforcement of the right-hand Elbe dyke near Fischbeck (responsible authority: district of Stendal/Saxony-Anhalt), Raising and strengthening of the Emden harbour dyke (responsible authority: Lower Saxony State Agency for Water Management, Coastal Defence and Nature Conservation/Lower Saxony).