EC Briefing — Thursday, 7 May 2026

Key Points

• The EU remains in contact with member states regarding the activation of the blocking statute for the ICC.
• The Commission supports the ICC but has not committed to activating the blocking statute at this time.
• Russia's threats against Ukraine are viewed as escalatory tactics; the EU will maintain its presence in Kiev.
• The EU has made substantial progress in trade negotiations with the US and expects a final agreement soon.
• The European Union is committed to honoring its trade commitments made in the deal with the United States.
• The next trilogue on trade negotiations is expected to take place this month, aiming for a final agreement.

Full Transcript

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

EU Blocking Statute Activation

Q: Yeah, maybe I'll ask for a second one. But I asked you on the demand of Spain, joined by Slovenia, to activate the blocking statute. Will you do so? And what are the modalities or what is the threshold for you to activate it? How many countries do you have to ask or how does it work? Thank you.

Spokesperson: I think Siobhan has provided our position on the ICC. We have explored and assessed concrete and feasible solutions to support the court. We remain in constant contact with our member states on this matter, on the technicalities of how a blocking statute could be activated. Perhaps I would suggest that you take it off the podium later, since it's quite a technical aspect. David, a question on this?

Q (Radio Radicale): Yes, thank you, David Carretta, Radio Radicale. I will take the liberty to interpret your answer as a no, we will not activate the blocking statute. So, since this request was already discussed in the Foreign Affairs Council, and since it's up to you, up to the European Commission to decide to start the procedure on that, my question is clear. Why not? Why do you refuse to activate the procedure for the blocking statute? Thank you.

Spokesperson: David, I think we have said that we support the ICC. We have explored the concrete and feasible solutions to ensure its staff is allowed to continue with their work. We remain in contact with member states. This is where we are. Then, of course, you can interpret our answers as you see are adequate, but our answer is we are in contact with the member states, and we have looked into what could be done from our side to support the Court in continuing its very important activity. And, of course, we continue to fully support the Court, as both Siobhan and Anwar have said. You have a follow-up.

Q (Radio Radicale): Yes, apologies if I have a follow-up, and apologies if you will repeat what you have said already three times. But the fact is that supporting the Court and supporting its judges and officials and so on, it's something different from activating the blocking statute. And you have done quite a lot to support the Court in terms of statement, in terms of also financing, I guess, and so on and so on. So, the point is it's different. Do you fear a reaction by the Trump administration if you are going to activate the blocking statute? Is this the reason why you see months are passing? The situation of the judges is quite critical. They have testified in the Foreign Affairs Council on that, in the European Parliament. Is this the political reason why you refuse the request by some member states to activate the procedure?

Spokesperson: David, I think we are far beyond the sphere of speculation, so I'm not going to go into that. Of course, our decisions are always motivated by our internal considerations. What our answer here is, is that we remain in contact with the member states on this matter, and we're not going to go beyond that. Still on this matter? No, different matter. Okay, I think we can close this chapter. Perhaps let's stay, since Anwar is here, let's see if it's for Anwar, then go ahead.

EU Presence in Ukraine

Q (Radio Free Europe's Ukrainian service): Thanks, Arianna. Arianna Stepanenko, Radio Free Europe's Ukrainian service. So, my question concerns to the statement of Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova made yesterday. So, she said that a note had been sent to the foreign diplomatic missions calling on them to ensure the early evacuation of diplomatic and other mission personnel from Kiev. So, can you confirm that the EU delegation to Ukraine indeed has received such a note, and what would be your reaction? So, would you work on the early evacuation in details? I don't know if we can call it early, given that there are only two days left to Victory Day, so-called Victory Day in Moscow. Thanks.

Spokesperson: Thank you. No comment on comments, as you know, is our practice here, but let me here reiterate our position on the matter. Russia's public threats to attack Kiev are part of its reckless escalatory tactics. Russia, once again, outrageously tries to put blame on Ukraine for its own war of aggression, Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine. As to us, the EU, we will not change our posture or presence in Kiev. Russian's attacks are, and this, unfortunately, a daily reality in Kiev and elsewhere in Ukraine. Let's also be clear, over the past years, Russia has already caused damages to several diplomatic missions in Kiev, including the EU delegation, with its reckless attacks. Russia attacks Kiev and other cities all over Ukraine, and this on a daily basis, killing innocent citizens and targeting infrastructure. That in mind, in spite of Ukraine's longstanding attempts to call for a ceasefire and for peace, including President Zelensky's recent proposal, Russia has never, never shown any serious intention to stop the war, and instead continues escalating and killing. Thanks, Anuar. You have a follow-up?

Q (Radio Free Europe's Ukrainian service): Yeah, thank you so much, Anuar. You said that the EU will not change your posture or presence in Ukraine. So, given your words, do I understand correctly that you don't assess the current risk as higher than over last four years of the war?

Spokesperson: I think our position has been quite clearly outlined. We will not be changing our posture or presence. Thanks. Other questions for Anuar relating to Russia and Ukraine? Not the case. Yeah, is it for Anuar? Go ahead.

Q: Hi. This is perhaps just semantics, but what exactly do you mean by posture? Thank you.

Spokesperson: Posture means posture, and presence means presence, so we don't change anything.

Q: Maybe we could ask in French then, because that word posture doesn't really exist in French. What do you mean by it?

Spokesperson: Well, you've just used it in French, so we could say it exists. Regardless, though, you can interpret it as being our position, our presence, and that all remains unchanged. I love semantic discussions. I know there are... Anna Kai is a favourite, so let's see if we have another one with her. This one was interesting. Okay. Other questions for Anuar on anything foreign affairs related, since he's also covering for Anita today? Not the case, as far as I can see. Okay. No, not for Anuar. But in any case, let's go to you, Razia.

EU Trade and Tech Sovereignty

Q (AFP News Agency): Yeah, go ahead. Thanks, Anuar. Thank you. I guess this question is going to be for Toma. It's about trade. Razia Akoc, AFP News Agency. I'm going to ask my trade question, but I also have tech questions, but I'll wait for the trade bit to end. Cyprus, which holds a rotating presidency, described progress on a number of elements after Wednesday's negotiations, and so I just wanted to ask whether the European Commission had any words of encouragement for the negotiators, basically. I'm asking whether you're going to tell them to get a move on, and I wondered if the EU Trade Commissioner, Shevchevich, had any plans for telephone chats with the Americans, as I imagine there might be some frustration on the US side, and he's got a LinkedIn post where he talks about close contacts, but I don't know what that means. It's jargon. Thank you.

Spokesperson: Hello. Thanks, Raz. So let me start with the beginning. Last August, we struck a deal with the United States for fair, stable, balanced, and mutual beneficial trade. We are fully committed to delivering on it, because a deal is a deal, and the European Union always honours its trade commitments. As we said earlier this week, we are now in the very final stages of implementing our remaining parts of the joint statements and these commitments. We're working closely with the European Parliament and the Member States in the Council to find an agreement. We welcome the fact that yesterday, during the trilogue, we have made substantial progress towards a final agreement, and we do expect that the next trilogue taking place this month, will deliver, hopefully, a final agreement. These trilogues, and it's important to recall, are fully in line with standard EU legislative practice, and we have always kept and will keep informing our US counterparts about progress that is being made. Our recent agreement on the critical raw materials is a concrete illustration of what the EU and the US can achieve on shared global challenges when we work hand-in-hand, and we will definitely continue in that spirit. On ongoing contacts, there are always ongoing contacts at political level. A meeting took place in the margins of the G7 in Paris between Commissioner Cefcovic and his counterpart, Minister Greer. I will not speculate on potential other contacts. Contact is definitely ongoing.

Q: Questions on this? Go ahead. Good morning. I would also have a question for Thomas related to the recent comments by the US ambassador to the EU, who claimed that the Commission tech sovereignty package might include protectionist measures that are at risk of undermining the EU-US trade deal. Would you have any comment? Thanks.

Spokesperson: We usually do not comment on comments. What I can tell you is that the Commission is indeed working on an upcoming tech sovereignty package. What is this package about? This package is about Europe getting its act together and working on essential strategic sectors for our future. This is not about the US. This is about Europe. Thanks. Thomas, yes? Other questions on the US? Go ahead, Jorge. Or you have a follow-up on this? Sorry, I'll do the follow-up first and then I'll come to you, Jorge.

Q: Yes, as a follow-up, could you maybe answer the claim that the tech sovereignty package might be delayed because of the US ambassador comments?

Spokesperson: We're the ones setting our agenda. It's in the list des points prévus. It's a tentative agenda. If something moves in that agenda, it's because we sometimes may or may not be ready to adopt a decision. This is why the tech sovereignty package, which is a massive package, has been already delayed. We are now fully committed to what is in the LPP and we're committed to delivering in May. But this is a useful reminder that the LPP is just there to give you a tentative indication of when fouls can be expected. In no way it's binding. It's very normal and it happens quite often that fouls move. They're only presented to the college when they are mature enough and when the internal procedures have been concluded. This is why sometimes they move, but purely internal reasons. Yes, go ahead.

Q: Hello, yes, it's on the trade deal as well. The threat that Donald Trump has launched to increase the tariffs on the cars to 25% is based on his claim that the European Union is not complying with the deal. And yesterday the dialogue or the trialogue was a failure, so the legislation to lower tariffs on American products is still not in place. So do you think there's a validity to the claim of Donald Trump, or do you think the 15% all-inclusive cap that you negotiated supersedes any possible delay in the legislation? Thank you.

Spokesperson: Thank you. I would maybe slightly echo also what the Commissioner Cefcovic has just posted. Mentioning a failed trialogue, I just spoke about a trialogue where we have made substantial progress. So here this shows again that we're fully committed, we're working hand-in-hand with our co-legislators, we are acting as the honest broker always in order to ensure progress. So I would not try to interpret the comments made on the other side of the Atlantic. We focus on our work, we're fully committed, and good progress, solid progress has been made, and we're looking forward to a promising next trialogue still in May. And there perhaps I can also refer you to what the President has said herself, I believe, in reply to a question at the margins of the Armenia summit earlier in the week. She has said that both parties are fully focusing on implementing the deal. A deal is a deal, she has recalled indeed, and of course this is done while respecting the democratic procedures that are different and that we have on both sides. On our side, as Thomas said, we're making progress with discussions with the co-legislators. This is a procedure we have and we are in the final stages of implementing the remaining tariff commitments. At the same time the President has recalled, for example, the US has the commitment to align with the agreed ceiling that is still outstanding. We do want mutual gain from this work, cooperation and reliability is important, and this is what we're aiming at. So we focus on the implementation of our part. Jorge.

Q: Yes, thank you. As we recall, the threat by Donald Trump was to implement these tariffs next week, which is now this week. Of course, we don't know what's going to happen because he often changes his mind. But when Savcovich met with his counterpart earlier this week, did he receive any sort of guarantee or assurance that if the legislation is implemented indeed next week, if it's agreed next week, this tariff threat will not materialise? What sort of message did he receive? Thank you.

Spokesperson: Thanks, Jorge. Look, we have never, never commented nor speculated on threats. You say yourself that we have seen a lot of posts coming from the other side of the Atlantic. This is one thing. Then what happens on our side of the Atlantic is another thing. We are, again, and I will repeat it a hundred times if needed, we are fully committed to implement the joint statement. We have procedures in place, we follow these procedures, but this Commission is working day in, day out to deliver on our joint commitments. We'll keep doing that and I will not speculate on threats that may or may not materialise.

Q: Other questions for Thomas with his trade hat? Not the case. Other questions for Thomas with his usual hat?

Spokesperson: Okay, let's go there. Yeah, go ahead. And then Razia and David. Yeah. I think it's Vitaly.

EU-Ukraine Drone Alliance Funding

Q (Freedom TV channel): Vitaly Sisov, Freedom TV channel. I have questions. One question. This week Commission called for funding members the EU-Ukraine Drone Alliance. The goal is to build an anti-drone infrastructure to protect European airspace. Will Ukraine airspace be included in this system too, or Ukraine is just a source of technology and experience? And also, how much money is the Commission planning to spend on this project, and when will it become operational? Thank you.

Spokesperson: Thank you. You're asking if Ukraine is only the source of technology and experience? No, this is a two-way street since the very beginning. We are absolutely, I mean, we have a long track record of everything we have been doing for Ukraine and will keep doing for Ukraine. Now, the reality when it comes to drone is indeed the fact that, and you rightly so mentioned that Ukraine has gained a lot of experience when it comes to drone capabilities and anti-drone capabilities. Now, what are we doing on our side? We have indeed four European flagship projects that we need to deliver on. One is indeed the Drone Defence Initiative, where we are working hand-in-hand with our member states, but indeed also with Ukraine. Now, what will this alliance do? This alliance will create synergies between the European drone defence industry and the Ukrainian drone defence industry. It's a shared interest that we both have on the EU side together with the Ukrainian side. When it comes to the money, I do not have any figure at hand, but I'll get back to you, Vitaly, if I have anything more to share. Okay, thanks. Other questions?

Q: Perhaps let's stay on defence. If there's questions, not the case, then Razia, you had questions on digital, I think?

Spokesperson: Thank you. I had it on good authority that a fine against Google was going to come in late January or early February, and then I now see that my journalist colleagues have been writing about delays in recent weeks. I believe there's one article that has put the blame squarely on the European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. There was also a letter this week from several civil society organisations to Madame von der Leyen to express their concerns over the allegations that she was delaying. What is going on, and what's the truth? Thank you. Thanks, Raz. Let's first be very clear on the first point. There is absolutely no political blocking of cases. When a case is technically ready, solid enough, and a decision can be adopted, the Commission adopts a decision. Now, you're referring to delays. Let's frame it maybe the other way around. If we were in a possibility of delaying a case, then This is in everyone's interest, in the interest of companies, in the interest of European citizens and businesses. We do not want to just issue a fine for a fine. Now, we're in a process where we're advancing on a case. We're not in a habit to communicate and to speak about ongoing cases. We are expecting a company to engage with us, to offer solid commitments, because this is the result that we expect for all of us.

Q: Razia. I guess you would then say that the European Commission is not acting on multiple fronts with in mind the pressure from the United States and Trump. And then, very quickly, I've not paid enough attention to this one, and I know Jan has repeatedly asked about this, so I'm hoping this time I'll do it. What is going on with MITOS and the European Commission-EU? Right now, there's no access, but under the AI Act, am I correct in understanding that the European Commission would be able to demand access as part of the enforcement of those rules? Thank you. Razia, before giving the floor to Thomas on the first question, if I understood it correctly, I think if you look at the track record of decisions we have adopted in the last months, you see that they also relate to U.S. companies. So I think that our track record of decisions proves the case for us very clearly. When we have solid decisions that can be taken, we do take them, and this is irrespective of the nationality of ownership of the companies. We have European companies, U.S., other third nationalities as well. It's a matter of maturity of cases, but Thomas? Exactly. Not a lot to add. Firm enforcement, but always fair and objective. This has always been the case with the Commission, and we'll keep it like that. Now, on your second question, and on MITOS, well, discussion continues with Antropic. We have to be clear on the fact that Antropic has to be transparent. They have to provide reassurance to the Commission. They have to mitigate potential risks that come from their services. This is why the Commission is heavily engaging with the company. It's not a question for now of access or not access. It's a question of we have passed legislation, and such a model shows that the Commission and the EU were right in passing the legislation that we have in place, be it the AI Act, be it the Cyber Security Act that is currently, by the way, on the table with the co-legislatures, the Cyber Resilience Act. The EU is equipped to tackle risks that could potentially emerge from such a model. Now, what we need to be able to assess is we need the complete picture from the other side, and this is the reason why we are engaging with the company.

Q: Question on this? Go ahead. Gianpaolo Piccioli, Bloomberg News. Thomas, just a follow-up on what Razia just asked. Is the Commission the point of contact between the Eurogroup, for instance, and Antropic? Because, of course, we heard that banks are very worried about this, and while US banks were literally summoned to the White House to talk about Antropic, I'm not aware that any European bank so far has access to MITAS. So, did you connect, is the AI office dealing also with this side of the negotiations, or is it something that is independent?

Spokesperson: Indeed, did you connect? On behalf of the European Commission, it's trying to get the complete picture about the risks that such a model may pose to different strategic sectors for the European Union. We do this in the interest of these sectors, of our businesses, and ultimately, absolutely also in the interest of our citizens. We have the competence to do that. This is why we are engaging with the company. I'm not aware, or I do not have a list of organizations, institutes, or banks that may or may not have access. We are engaging with the company, and we are taking it from there.

Q: Razia, a question, and then I see if others want to floor as well. Thank you. When you say engaging with the company, I think it was Politico that had some text between Greer and Shevchevich, and that was actually a question I missed out on asking, or whether Shevchevich was texting Greer or anything like that, but that will be for another day, I guess now. What do you mean by you're engaging? Are there meetings? Are they positive engagements? Because at the end of the day, you can talk to someone, but they can talk to you very rudely, and you can get nowhere.

Spokesperson: That's not how it works with companies, indeed. So when I say there is engagement, we had about four or five meetings, I think, with the company. This shows that you have engagement on our side. We want the complete picture. But this shows that you also have responsiveness on the other side when it comes to Entropic. Now, I will not go into the details of ongoing discussions. Our position is very clear. We want the complete picture when it comes to the risks that MITOS may pose to consumers and businesses in the European Union. Thanks, Thomas. Other questions on digital matters for Thomas? Not the case.

Russian House at Biennale

Q: David, go ahead. Thank you. It's on La Biennale, so not digital, not trade. Thank you for this opportunity. Another question. So yesterday, there was the press conference of the president of Fondazione Biennale. The de facto opening of the Russian house. I don't know how you say it in English. We have seen videos and pictures of Champagne in the house of Russia, the ambassador of Russia there. Two questions. First one, the president of the Biennale Foundation said that basically you are censors. Are you censors? Second question, what are you going to do with the funding for the Biennale since at the end of the day, Russia got what it wanted? Thank you.

Spokesperson: Thank you, David. We'll also have Champagne on Saturday for Europe Day, as EVP Virkunen said, because Europe Day celebrates peace. And on the opening of the Biennale, which happens ironically on the same day, we shouldn't open Champagne because Russia participates and is shining at the Biennale. This is not our intention. So we recall the fact that we're strongly condemning the decision by the Biennale to allow for Russia to reopen its pavilion. I will not go into why. You know it very well. There is a current context happening. Now, what are the next steps? We have sent a first letter, indeed, to the Biennale, saying that according to us there may be a breach of a grant worth €2 million that we're giving in support to the Biennale. The Biennale has until Sunday to respond to us. If the reply is not satisfactory, we have been extremely clear, we will either suspend or terminate the contract. Let me recall, and this is very important, that not a single euro from this grant has gone to the Biennale for now, and this will not go until we do not have reassurance that there was no breach of the current grant. Also, because we do believe that cultural events that are funded by European taxpayers' money should be used to safeguard democratic values, foster open dialogue, diversity, and freedom of expression, all that are values that are not respected in Russia today. And the war in Ukraine is a clear proof of this. Other questions for Thomas? David, yes, and then we'll change topics.

Q: Apologies, a quick follow-up. If I understood well, in another letter you sent to the Italian authorities or to the Biennale, you are saying that the Biennale is providing basically services to the Russian Federation, and so an indirect economic support to the Russian Federation. And this could violate sanctions. Who is in charge of applying those sanctions, and what this authority can do to avoid this violation?

Spokesperson: Look, let's see. I don't know if Siobhan already has an answer on this. I don't know the specifics, otherwise we will get back to you later. In general, of course, it's member states that enforce the sanctions that are adopted at European level. Maybe just to add, David, I will not comment on a letter that is not public. I would also not contradict what you are here saying. Let me just remind that there are deadlines here. Again, you have a 30-day deadline for our counterpart to get back to us, and then based on the reply, we will draw the conclusions and the necessary assessment about the next steps. So we will definitely keep you posted. Question on this? Okay, go ahead.

Jet Fuel Crisis Discussion

Q (EURECTIV): Thank you so much. It's Nikolas Comay for EURECTIV. It's for Anna Kaiser. Moving on to the jet fuel crisis. Thank you. This morning, the transport commissioner, Tzitzi Kostas, told the FT that the jet fuel crisis is not sufficient grounds for cancelling flights without compensation or claiming any sort of force majeure. The energy commissioner said it's the biggest energy crisis ever. It's either-or, right? And secondly...

Spokesperson: To this, first of all, it's not either or. What the Commissioner was explaining to the Financial Times was a little bit what we will be adopting and publishing as guidance to the sector. And this will include guidance also as regards air passengers' rights and how airlines can interpret our current rules that are in place. Importantly, we will not be proposing anything new. We will not be giving any new instructions or anything like this. We are basically just explaining the current legislative framework as regards the sector in the context of the ongoing situation in the Middle East and its consequences to the energy sector. So, I would wait until we actually publish the guidelines, which will give the explanation of what the room of enumeration for airlines is. But it's important to, when we discuss this, is to make the distinction between when we are talking about shortage of fuel and the price of fuels. These are two different things, and airlines are taking decisions based on, for the moment, our understanding is that the raising of the prices of tickets, etc., or cancelling some routes, these are due to the high prices of the fuels rather than shortage of jet fuels. So, therefore, these are two different things, and my understanding is that the two commissioners have also, respectively, been addressing these two different aspects, so they are not contradicting each other at all. So, the use of the A-type aviation fuel will be also part of the guidance, and we should be able to present it tomorrow. And then there was something else you asked as well that I didn't fully answer. No? But if you still want to ask something, go ahead.

Q: A follow-up. Given that you also have an environment hat, my understanding is Type A, Jet A fuel is banned in Europe also due to environmental concerns. Are we sort of slashing our environmental standards by importing this U.S.-made kerosene or jet fuel?

Spokesperson: No. We are already using this jet fuel, in any case, when there is a flight that departs from Europe and flies to the United States, and it refuels there and flies back. So, in any case, we are already using it. So, this is nothing to do with environmental rules at all. Thanks. Other questions for Anna Kaiser? I've always been looking if there's questions of – ah, there you go. Jose, I was starting to fear that there was an issue with online questions, but you are there to reassure me. You have the floor. Thank you. Is everything great? We can't see you, though. We need to have – I don't know why. Wait. I don't know. I guess. Can I do it? It's about public health. Ah, wait, then, because we're tackling first questions for Anna Kaiser. So, I'll ask you to be a bit patient, and then we will open a new chapter. Is it for Anna Kaiser? No? Okay. Then, Anna Kaiser, thank you. Let's come to you, and then we come back to the colleague online, hoping he has sorted his camera issues in the meantime. Thank you.

Hantavirus Public Health Concerns

Q (Japanese Public): Antoine Muto for Japanese Public. This is on public health as well. So, I guess for Eva, this is on the antivirus, the outbreak. So, Dutch authorities have confirmed today that a Dutch national who was not on board of the Honduz ship has been hospitalized and is being tested for the virus. She is said to be a crew member of a KLM flight on which a passenger of the Honduz had briefly been on board. The same passenger would die today later in Johannesburg. Could you please confirm whether you are monitoring the situation, and could you provide us with further details on this matter? And also, are you worried that this could lead to a widespread pandemic? Thank you.

Spokesperson: Thank you for the question, Antoine. Let me first say what is the most important. As the evidence stands, according to the current situation, there is no cause for concerns at the moment. We are monitoring the situation very closely. We are in touch with all necessary authorities. We are in touch basically since the first day when we were notified about the disease on the cruise ship. Since that first day, we are in touch with WHO, with the member states, and we are in touch with our agency, ACDC, European Center for Disease Prevention and Control. On top of that, ECDC has sent already an expert on board of the ship, so he is there doing his job, assessing the situation, monitoring the situation. So currently, we do everything what is necessary not to underestimate the situation and to be ready to react in every stage of the developments. You have a follow-up?

Q: Go ahead. Thank you, Eva. My question was as well more on the KLM flight, this specific case, since this obviously means that concretely there have been passengers of this flight being in Europe for a while now, for some days, some weeks, and also this crew member, this said crew member of KLM has been working after this flight for quite a while with other passengers and other colleagues, which would mean that she has been in contact as well with a lot of people, and she said as well to present symptoms of this antivirus without having been any second or minute on board of this ship. So did something change since yesterday in your mind? Are you more worried or not at all? I guess many people are worried, at least in the Netherlands now. Thank you.

Spokesperson: I have to repeat that according to the evidence that we have at the moment, the risk for the public in Europe, the risk for the Europeans is low. Health of the citizens in Europe is our absolute priority, and this obviously applies also in this case. What I can say that yesterday we had a meeting of the Health Security Committee. It means we were talking together with the member states. We were talking with WHO and with ECDC. Today in the morning there was a meeting with the Dutch and Spanish authorities as the ship is Dutch and now is heading to the Canary Islands or to Spain. And this afternoon there will be again a meeting of the Health Security Committee with all the states whose citizens are on board of Honduras. So as you can see, there is a lot of happening. We follow the situation really very, very closely, and we try to very thoroughly assess every possible risk that would be potentially here for the citizens in Europe. Thanks, Eva. Let's go to Mariana, who has a question from remote, and then I'll come back to you. Mariana, if you want the floor, you need to press on speak. It seems not to be working. You don't have a microphone, it seems. Okay, that might be an issue. Let's do it like that. Let's come to the press room again and let's see if you can sort out your technical issue. Otherwise, of course, you can also reach out bilaterally to Eva later if we don't manage to take your question now. Go ahead. Thanks.

Q (EFE): Laura Zornoza for the Spanish news agency EFE. So it's a follow-up on this. I was wondering, since Spain activated the civil protection mechanism, I'm not sure if yesterday or a couple of days ago, if there have been any assessment of the needs and support that the country may receive, if there have been any offers from other countries that you can update us about. Thanks.

Spokesperson: Yes, you are right. Spain has activated the civil protection mechanism, and we are always here to help if it's necessary. At the moment, as the situation develops, and as I described, we have plenty of meetings, we are assessing the modalities and the needs of Spain, and we are discussing what kind of assistance could be provided. You know how the civil protection mechanism works. Usually, we receive the requests from a certain country, then we need to assess the situation, find out what is necessary, and then we coordinate with the other member states and with the participating states in the civil protection mechanism on the actual assistance. Thanks.

Q: Jorge, you have a question on this? Yes, also on Hantavirus. Eva, you said something about a coordination meeting, I don't know if it's today or tomorrow. Can you tell us a bit more of what is the point of this meeting? Who will be represented there? And are you looking to have a sort of common position? common road map or course of action to coordinate this? Because obviously several member states are affected, I mean the nationals are in this cruise ship and they might want to coordinate to be on the same page. Thank you.

Spokesperson: You were not listening carefully, Jorge. I have said that there was a meeting already yesterday, health security committee meeting together with all the member states, WHO and ECDC. There was a meeting with Spanish and Dutch authorities this morning and there will be another meeting this afternoon in about an hour together with all the member states affected, basically with the member states whose passengers are on board. We will inform you about details because obviously we always try to get you the information that are important for the citizens.

Q: Let's try to go to questions from remote. I see Gerard. You need to press on speak. Hi, hello. It was just a follow up. You said that there was a meeting this morning between Dutch and Spanish authorities as well as with you, the commission. Just to clarify what were the main topics and if you have any specific information regarding the meeting. Do we have any more information or it was just to talk about the situation? Thanks.

Spokesperson: The topic was Hantavirus that we are now having on board of the Honduras ship and the discussion was mainly from the health perspective. As I said, we have experts available. We are in close touch with European Center for Disease Prevention and Control and the experts, scientists, doctors are regularly consulted. Also, this meeting with the Dutch and Spanish authorities was about the situation. You know that some of the people are already on the continent. Some passengers are still on board of the ship. So currently, we need to know also what to do exactly and how we will proceed. So this is a discussion basically day by day about what is going on. Okay, thanks. We have the fire alarm in three minutes.

Common Agricultural Policy Issues

Q: Do we have more questions today? We do have more questions today. Okay, then let's try. For Louise on the Common Agricultural Policy. So a press article today on the cap funds that has gone to the UAE royal family for several properties in Europe to the tune of around 70 million euro. Were you aware of this and how does it all link in with your political guidelines? Is there any problem with this?

Spokesperson: Hello, Adrian. Thank you for your question. Firstly, we take note of the investigation that reveals that the UAE royal family is in a position to receive assistance under the cap. It's important to state that cap falls under shared management. That means that the commission doesn't get involved in the payment of subsidies to the final beneficiaries. That role, that responsibility is incumbent upon the member states and it's for that reason that the commission needs to be targeted and that's reflected in our proposal for the cap for 2034. We're proposing better targeting when it comes to that revenue by member states to ensure those who are most in need receive it, including regressivity. That's a reduction in aid under certain conditions and also a ceiling for the revenue above 100,000 euro per year holding. Also, we've a proposal that holdings of certain size in which agriculture is not the main activity would not benefit from the same aid. That threshold should be fixed at national level. And so the commission is trying to create an attractive sector that guarantees equitable standards of living and enables revenue income opportunities. So nothing specific on the article revealed in the press. Well, I've said that we take note of it and as I've said, if I'm not wrong, this relates to Spain, Italy and Romania. So, as I was saying, after that break for the alarm, we take note of the investigation, the information that has come out in relation to this issue and we take note of it. We also take note of the fact that the commission is trying to after that break for the alarm, we take note of the investigation, the information that has come out in relation to that. We'll be in contact with the relevant member states, but this all falls under shared management. And we can't comment any further for the moment. Thank you, Louise. Further questions for Louise and for us in general today? I don't see any raised hands. So we almost managed to finish before the alarm. We just went a few seconds beyond it. Thank you. Thank you.

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