EC Briefing — Friday, 12 June 2026

Key Points

• The EU is closely collaborating with Hungary on migration issues.
• Georgia's visa-free travel status is under scrutiny due to democracy and rights concerns.
• The Commission aims to remedy issues leading to Georgia's visa suspension.
• The President supports amending treaties to enhance EU foreign policy decision-making.
• No formal discussion on foreign policy changes is currently planned within the Commission.
• The expert panel on social media age delay will deliver conclusions by June 12.

Full Transcript

Transcribed automatically from EbS (Europe by Satellite) · English audio track · AI-generated · May contain errors · Verify before quoting

Opening Statement

Now, on Hungary. We are working closely with the Hungarian authorities, including on migration. Contacts are ongoing. But as you know, the government has only been in office for a few weeks now. We are in close touch with them on all fronts, including on migration. Thank you. Markus. Any other questions for Markus? Roland, do you want to follow up?

Hungary migration pact implementation

Q: Thank you very much. This is a follow-up. I was wondering that Hungary did not implement the migration pact. Do you think this undermines the effective implementation of other countries? How much this affects other member states that one member state hasn't done anything? And also, when do you expect any movement from Hungary's side? I mean, I heard what you said. There are contacts. But when exactly do you expect something to happen? And if not, well, your task is to enforce the EU rules. So what do you expect to do to make sure that Hungary or other member states, for that matter, actually implement the rules as you are the guardians of the treaty? Thank you.

Spokesperson: Thanks, Roland. Yeah, that gives me the possibility to reiterate what I've just said. We're working closely with the Hungarian authorities, including on migration. Contacts are ongoing. But as you know, the government has been in place only for a few weeks. We're working with them on all fronts, including on migration.

Georgia visa dialogue status

Q: Yes, please....Georgia yesterday about visa technical meeting. Yesterday, a member of Georgian delegation told me that this dialogue was positive. Then we saw news from Radio Free that the dialogue was rather unfruitful. And today, Georgian Dream Foreign Affairs Ministry issued a statement that they are fulfilling everything, all criterias needed to keep visa free. So what's the official position of Commission regarding this meeting and in general about outcome of this meeting? Thank you.

Spokesperson: Thanks, Tamara, for the question. As a matter of fact, a meeting took place yesterday between the European Commission and a delegation of Georgian officials. This is part of the standard process set out in the visa regulation, which takes place when the visa suspension mechanism is activated. So this meeting and this process follows the decision taken in March this year to suspend visa free travel for Georgian holders of diplomatic service and official passports for initial period of 12 months. We took this decision after the member states had given their approval for this. So the aim of this process that we're in now is to remedy the circumstances that have led to the suspension. And this is Georgia's violation of the commitments taken under its visa free regime in key areas of democracy and fundamental rights. Now, yesterday's meeting was a technical level meeting focused on the issues that triggered the activation of the visa suspension mechanism. The Commission communicated in detail the reasons for its decision, which are focused on democracy and fundamental rights. The Georgian side also laid out their points of view. The discussions took place in a fact-based atmosphere. Both sides agreed to now report back to their authorities and to discuss there the substance and potential next steps.

EU foreign policy structure

Q: Thank you, Markus. Other questions to Markus? No, we can change topic. Jorge. Hello, Paula. This is a question for you. Is the President of the European Commission in favor of amending, revamping, or downright abolishing the European External Action Service and the position of high representative? Thank you.

Spokesperson: Thank you, Jorge. Listen, the External Action Service is part of the institutions that deliver on the EU policies. And therefore, obviously, there is support from our President to it and to the work coming from the External Action Service.

Q: Yes. Yes. The President has spoken several times in favor of amending the treaties and also of moving from unanimity to QMV on foreign policy. Is she in favor of also obtaining other areas or competences when it comes to foreign policy towards the European Commission? Does she favor that to reinforce the Commission's role in foreign policy? Thank you.

Spokesperson: Jorge, the treaties are clear in terms of the competences and who does what. The President expressed her position in terms of decision-making. And the fact that, indeed, on a number of areas, the fact that there is still unanimity, that there's still the possibility of one member state to veto some decisions, has, in some instances, prevented us from moving on. That's something on which the President has stated her position. And it is to be seen in the context, indeed, of decisions simply being blocked and we're not able to make progress because there is still the veto possibility. Henry. Hadn't seen you for a while in the press room.

Q (Financial Times): Thank you. I watch online every day. Henry Foy, Financial Times. Following up on this, Kaya Kallis has said she wants to have a debate at GIMNIC, so that would be informal amongst ministers. Does the President believe there needs to be a college discussion on this topic, too? Thank you.

Spokesperson: For the moment, I'm not aware of any requests to have a formal discussion in the college about this. Jan, you have a follow-up?

Q: Henry, go ahead. Sorry, Jan, do you mind? What about an informal discussion? You have these often in the college. Could this be a topic for one of those?

Spokesperson: For the moment, I have no information of any wish in this sense. Does it have to be on this? No. Okay.

AI expert panel conclusions

Q: Go ahead. It's about the social media age delay and the state of conversations within the expert panel. I don't remember the entire explanation of how we should look at the larks and the woodcocks to work out whether it's summer. But I think to remember that the panel has to deliver its conclusions by the start of the summer. It's the 12th of June. Can we expect the conclusions to be delivered in the next couple of weeks?

Spokesperson: We can indeed. Thank you, Jan. And Thomas will be happy to share with you what are the next steps, starting with the meeting next week, if I remember correctly. Yes, indeed. I won't go into Anarkaisa's summer definition. I will just indeed recall that next week we'll have the third and final meeting on the 16th, so of the panel that will convene for a final time. Next step would be that mid-July on the 13th, if I'm not mistaken, the recommendation will be expected. The final recommendation that will be officially delivered to the Commission and to the President. And then we will, of course, take it from there, and I will not prejudge the next steps before having seen the recommendation and before the final meeting even took place. So there is something to expect on that front, Jan. We'll keep an eye on it.

AI envoy conflict of interest

Q: Yes, David. Thank you, David. It's a question on the Special Envoy for Industrial Artificial Intelligence, if I may. Because I don't know... Yeah. Well, basically, the question is this one. It's about conflict of interest or potential conflict of interest of Mr. Ageman Najnabe. Because even if he has suspended his membership of the Advisory Board of Google and another company, C3 AI, in fact, he has quite an amount of stocks of C3 AI. The value is 4 million dollars. At the same time, he has quite an amount of securities of another company, Bloom Energy Corporation, which is active also in the issue of data centers and AI. So, basically, how could you just justify the fact that he has no conflict of interest? And if I may, a second question on this issue. Until now, you have said that for privacy reasons, data protection reasons, you cannot publicly say which are the safeguards that you have put in place to avoid conflict of interest, which is quite strange to me. Can you explain from a legal point of view which data protection rules doesn't allow the Commission to be transparent of an important issue like conflict of interest of a special advisor? Thank you.

Spokesperson: Thank you, David. You're right, because it's an HR question, it will be taken by Balazs, but Thomas, you also have an angle on this. Yes, just one point, David, before Balazs goes into all the details and legal details. I mean, we're appointing here a special AI envoy, which is a crucial role for the future of Europe. We want to be an AI continent. We have the AI first approach. We have amazing experts working in DigiConnect on all these files. And here we need, and this is where we come to disappointment, someone from the industry, and this is where all these questions come from, but it has to be someone from the industry, to provide additional impetus to be sure that we can maximize the transformative potential of AI, that we get appropriate advice on industrial AI, and that we meet all the objectives that we have set for ourselves, always rejecting new values and fundamental rights. So these legitimate questions that you're asking, and to which Balazs will give you a response in a minute, I just want to emphasize the role that he will be playing, and it is a crucial role for Europe and the future of AI in Europe. Thank you, Thomas. Balazs. Yes, Balazs. If you can compliment on the fact that indeed safeguards have been put in place and any conflict of interest also scrutinized. Indeed, very little I can add to what I've said before. You bring up the issue of the shares, so that is obviously something that we generally look at in such cases. This is being looked at when we carry out the conflict of interest, which we always do. And then, if needed, we put in place specific safeguards. Now, it's true, I'm not aware of those safeguards, they are not shared with me either, so obviously I cannot comment on them. And indeed, there are data protection considerations here, which prevent us as a matter of general practice from getting into the details of those. You ask about the legal background. Let me inquire with my colleagues specifically on what legal terms we can invoke here and come back to you bilaterally. What I can add, however, and maybe that will be a little bit helpful, there are some general, let's say, terms which apply to any special advisors and they sort of come from the staff regulations. So, for example, any special advisor has to carry out duties impartially and objectively with due respect for the duty of loyalty and discretion with regard to the European Union. And be guided solely by the interests of the European Union. There are a couple of examples here. I'm not going to read everything, but let me give you another example. They also have to, in performing their duties of special advisors, they are not to deal with any matter in which directly or indirectly they have any personal interest, such as to impair their independence. So, maybe that's a little bit helpful. And then, on the specific legal terms, I would have to inquire and come back to you. And we need to also add that, and it has been said in this press room, the deliverable of this envoy will be a report. The report will be made public, will be available. And so that's also a tool of scrutiny in terms of any perceived possible conflict of interest. It's important to also emphasize this aspect. David.

Q: Thank you. Thank you. A follow-up on another position of Mr. Ageman Snabe, who is on the board of the investment fund Temasek Holdings, which holds investment across all the digital industry, Amazon, Vidya, Tencent, Alibaba, and so on and so on. Again, it's not just me, it's some members of the European Parliament that are posing these questions. Quite a lot of members of the socialist group, green group, Renew. So, why the European Commission is not asking Mr. Aberman to step down from all the boards where he is sitting right now, and to avoid any perception, which is quite important also the perception, of conflict of interest, because you know very well that even if a report will be published, somebody can basically use the information that he can collect inside this house to basically take advantage of those information, which are not available to the public. So, basically, why the President and Vice President Mirkunen are not asking him to step down from all the boards where he has some potential conflict of interest. Thank you.

Spokesperson: He actually was asked to step down from two boards, and Balazs, please remind us of the details there. Maybe I may make a more, let's say, conceptual point here. Why do we bring in a special advisor? We bring in a special advisor when we look around an institution and we identify a gap in terms of expertise. So, in that sense, we look around and we try to find somebody who can make up, let's say, for that lack of expertise. Typically, at that level, you will get somebody who has done things before, typically in the private sector. Now, when you bring in an individual, we are talking about special advisors here, so, first of all, he is unpaid. He will work up to 70 days, if I recall well, until the end of March 2027. So, it's an unpaid position. So, I think one could observe that it would be, we cannot go as far as asking an individual, an expert of this level, to entirely put on hold his entire career and eliminate and abolish everything he has done before. Now, on top of that, however, we have a detailed look at the situation from a conflict of interest point of view. You saw the measures that have been taken. He has already suspended his membership in two boards. And with regard to his other engagements, specific safeguards, dedicated and very strong safeguards, have been put in place, which address, which are supposed to, which are meant to address all the potential aspects of conflict of interest, including perceived conflict of interest. So, this is where I have to stop. And, as I've said, there are some generic obligations which apply to special advisors emanating from the staff regulations. And then I will get back to you on the legal point that you raised. Let me add, because you mentioned specifically the letter from some MEPs, and I can confirm that we did receive the letter. And, of course, as with any letter from MEPs, we take it seriously and there will be a response addressing the issues raised in that letter. Other topics for Balazs? Go ahead, Khazia.

Q (AFP): Thank you. Razia Akoc, AFP News Agency. My question is a bit more broad. I think the issue in terms of the AI envoy, at least I'll say it from my perspective, I won't speak for my colleagues, was that I think if it was a case alone, one could make the argument that you guys have explained of you need industry perspective, which is a valid point. But I think because there are accusations that certain industries and certain size of industries get better access, there's just this idea, and that's what I'd like to ask you. Would you agree with the criticism that the European Commission has an open door for the bigger industries and companies and not so much for civil society and smaller companies? Thank you.

Spokesperson: No, we really refute that allegation, Razia. Depending on what is needed, depending on the expertise that is needed, that's what is at the basis then of whom we choose. And as it has been shown in many, many different examples, we also ask for the expertise of NGOs, of civil society when we are active in other fields. But even in the field of AI, I will remind you that, for instance, and Thomas just referred to the meeting next week of the panel on AI where we had representatives from across the board, well beyond the industry, and that's just an example which comes up to mind. So really, it depends on the type of expertise that we need. And even though the Commission is filled with extremely knowledgeable experts on many, many fields, at times, indeed, we can benefit from the expertise coming from the industry, acquired in the industry, and especially in an area that we know is innovative, it's developing with great speed, and where we can benefit from somebody who has been working really at the core of this area. Other questions? Jan.

Chinese cafe surveillance concerns

Q: Apologies. It's Friday, so bear with me. I was wondering whether, following the opening of a Chinese-owned cafe in front of the Berlin Wall, equipped with state-of-the-art face recognition cameras, the Commission has issued any internal guideline on whether to patronize or not that cafe.

Spokesperson: You see, I don't even have the time to explore the cafes around the Berlin Wall, so I hadn't spotted that yet. You know that we don't really have restrictions in terms of investments around the Berlin Wall as far as I know. We'll check it out, Jan. We'll check it out. We'll check it out. I'm curious. I'll try to go there this afternoon. Are there non-Friday questions?

Q: No, I see several online questions. Let's see. Okay, Razia, you had the floor. I still need to give the floor to the colleagues online, but we give you the priority. Go ahead.

Spokesperson: It's a question for Olaf. For Olaf. Good. Let's bring Olaf up. I kind of want to throw it forward a little bit because sometimes we're so with the daily news, which is fair. So I have two questions. If you want, I can ask the first because they're two different subjects. What I'd like to know is, we've got the vote by the European Parliament on Tuesday on the US tariff deal, which will be the final hurdle. So I feel like on other subjects related to the EU-US deal, it's gone a bit quiet. So I just kind of wanted to ask how the European Commission sees US-EU trade ties. Like what's next? What is the focus going to be? Steel? In terms of carve-outs, am I getting my wires crossed? There was a point at which we were seeking carve-outs. I say we. The Europeans were seeking carve-outs on drinks and whatnot. Is that still the case? I just kind of want to know what happens. What's next in terms of if there's cooperation to come and whatnot?

EU-US joint statement vote

Q: Thank you for your question, Razia. So indeed, you correctly flagged that the European Parliament plenary will vote on the EU obligations under the EU-US joint statement next Tuesday. We look forward to that vote and we hope for a positive result. And as regards the ongoing discussions between the EU and the US at both technical and political level, I don't have any updates to provide at this present moment, but ask me next week. Razia, follow-up? And so now I want to turn to China, because we had the orientation debate at the college and we expect the EU leaders to have what, do we describe it as a stocktake? I don't quite know what word we use for it. So I'd like to know, because I think that even though there's a bit of disagreement amongst the college, from the words that you've said and others, it's clear that the European Commission believes that we should address the trade imbalance. And the way it looks is we can have a debate about it. So I'd like to ask if the European Commission, as the EU executive, has a message for its member states on the issue of EU-China relations. What would the Commission like to see from next week's debate? Thank you.

Spokesperson: Thank you for your question, Razia. With Paola's permission, I will repeat what our President said most recently on this topic. She said, our general approach to China is very clear, de-risk, not de-couple. What we want is dialogue, but dialogue has to deliver. In the European Union, we embrace competition, but competition has to be fair. So I think that is really a perfect summary of the European Commission's view as to how we would like the ongoing constructive dialogue with China to evolve. And as you have rightly pointed out, the next meaningful milestone is the discussion among EU leaders next week. We look forward to hearing the outcomes of that discussion and we will then take stock to see what happens next. What happens next? Razia. That needs to be briefed, this one.

EU-China trade criticism

Q: Just a quick thing, and you can say that you're not the right person for this, but there are some experts both in China and in Europe that kind of say Europe is criticising China for some of the actions that it itself did and the way that it describes the trade deficit is unfair. Maybe you'd like to comment on whether that's the right point, and if not, would the European Commission make an expert available, because I'd love to have a background chat about EU-China, and a bigger, not just me, with other journalists as well, because I feel that there are some deeper questions to be asked beyond the words of imbalance and whatnot.

Spokesperson: On the technical briefing, Razia will, when the right moment comes, will be happy to offer a technical briefing on more of it. Now, as Olaf says, we're heading into a week of G7, of European Council, where the topic of trade, of imbalances, will certainly come up, so we are still engaging, listening, listening to member states, listening to our G7 partners and explore also common approaches. Anything else, Olaf?

Spokesperson: Yes, thank you, Paula. Just one point to add in response to your question, Razia, and thank you for the question. I will just go back to what I said in response to your first question, and again repeating what President von der Leyen said. In the European Union, we embrace competition, but competition has to be fair. What does that mean concretely? Fair competition means that economic policy, industrial policy, trade policy, investment policy must be in line with the global rules to which we have all signed up, notably World Trade Organization rules. I challenge you and the anonymous commentators you referenced to point out to me a single instance in which the European Union has brought forward policy, industrial, economic, trade or investment that is not fully in line with the obligations that we and all our global partners, including China, have signed up to. Other questions to Olaf? No. Other questions today? Non-Friday questions, please. I still see online some hands. Nikolai.

Russia chess federation suspension

Q (EU Observer): Thank you, Olaf. Can you hear me? Yes. Thank you for the floor. Nikolai Nielsen, EU Observer. Yes, so earlier this week, the International Chess Federation FIDE suspended Russia for its chess links to the occupied territories of Ukraine. Could I get a comment from you on the suspension? And also more specifically, Barkovich, the Russian head of FIDE, is currently facing EU sanctions, given he publicly supported Russia's war in Ukraine. So will this latest suspension by FIDE of Russia in any way affect those possible sanctions against him? Does it have any bearing? Thank you. So I hear two different questions. One on the chess championship. And I'm looking at Eva, who does not have more information.

🔔 Starter subscribers: Manage your topic preferences to receive a personalised alert when your topics are mentioned.