Under the new law, adopted by 464 votes in favour to 92 against and 65 abstentions, member states will be obliged to protect media independence and all forms of interventions in editorial decisions will be banned.

Protecting journalists’ work

Authorities will be prohibited from pressing journalists and editors to disclose their sources, including by detaining them, sanctions, office searches, or by installing intrusive surveillance software on their electronic devices.

Parliament added sizeable safeguards to allow the use of spyware, which will be possible only on a case-by-case basis and subject to authorisation by a judicial authority investigating serious crimes punishable by a custodial sentence. Even in these cases, subjects will have the right to be informed after the surveillance has occurred and will be able to challenge it in court.

Editorial independence of public media

To prevent public media outlets from being used for political purposes, their heads and board members should be selected through transparent and non-discriminatory procedures for sufficiently long terms of office. It will not be possible to dismiss them before their contract ends, unless they no longer meet the professional criteria.

Public media will have to be financed using transparent and objective procedures, and the funding should be sustainable and predictable.

Transparency of ownership

To enable the public to know who controls the media and what interests may influence reporting, all news and current affairs outlets regardless of their size will have to publish information about their owners in a national database, including if they are directly or indirectly owned by the state.

Fair allocation of state advertising

Media will also have to report on funds received from state advertising and on state financial support, including from non-EU countries.

Public funds to media or online platforms will have to be allocated via public, proportionate and non-discriminatory criteria. Information on state advertising expenditure will be public, including the total annual amount and the amount per outlet.

Protecting EU media freedom from big platforms

MEPs made sure to include a mechanism to prevent very big online platforms, such as Facebook, X (formerly Twitter) or Instagram, from arbitrarily restricting or deleting independent media content. Platforms will first have to distinguish independent media from non-independent sources. Media would be notified when the platform intends to delete or restrict their content and have 24 hours to respond. Only after the reply (or in the absence of it) may the platform delete or restrict the content if it still does not comply with its conditions.

Media will have the option to bring the case to an out-of-court dispute settlement body and request an opinion from the European Board for Media Services (a new EU board of national regulators to be set up by the EMFA).

Quotes

“The significance of media plurality for a functioning democracy cannot be stressed enough”, rapporteur from the Culture and Education Committee Sabine Verheyen (EPP, DE) said in the plenary debate. “Press freedom is threatened worldwide, including in Europe: the murder in Malta, threats to press freedom in Hungary and many other examples clearly prove that. The European Media Freedom Act is our answer to this threat and a milestone in European legislation. It values and protects the double role of media as businesses and as guardians of democracy”, she concluded.

The rapporteur from the Civil Liberties Committee Ramona Strugariu (Renew, RO) said: “Journalists now have an ally, a set of tools that protects them, boosts their independence and helps them face challenges, interference and the pressure that they are often confronted with in their job. This Regulation is a response to Orbán, Fico, Janša, Putin and those who want to transform media into their own propaganda tools or spread fake news and destabilise our democracies. No journalist should ever fear pressure of any sort when doing their job and informing citizens.”

Background

In adopting this report, Parliament is responding to citizens’ expectations for the EU as expressed in the conclusions of the Conference on the Future of Europe:

– to introduce legislation addressing threats to media independence and enforce EU competition rules in the media sector, in order to prevent large media monopolies, as well as to ensure media pluralism and independence from undue political, corporate and/or foreign interference (Proposals 27(1), (2));

– counter disinformation through legislation and guidelines for online platforms and social media companies (33(5));

– defend and support free, pluralistic and independent media and ensure the protection of journalists (37(4)).

MEPs adopted their first reading position on the proposed revision of the Waste Framework with 514 votes in favour, 20 against and 91 abstentions.

Tougher objectives to cut down food waste

They propose higher binding waste reduction targets to be met at national level by 31 December 2030 – at least 20% in food processing and manufacturing (instead of 10% proposed by the Commission) and 40% per capita in retail, restaurants, food services and households (instead of 30%). Parliament also wants the Commission to evaluate if higher targets for 2035 (at least 30% and 50% respectively) should be introduced, and if so, asks them to come up with a legislative proposal.

Producers to cover costs for collecting, sorting and recycling waste textiles

MEPs agree to extend producer responsibility (EPR) schemes, through which producers that sell textiles in the EU would have to cover the costs for collecting, sorting and recycling them separately. Member states would have to establish these schemes 18 months after the entry into force of the directive (compared to 30 months proposed by the Commission). The new rules would cover products such as clothing and accessories, blankets, bed linen, curtains, hats, footwear, mattresses and carpets, including products that contain textile-related materials such as leather, composition leather, rubber or plastic.

Quote

Rapporteur Anna Zalewska (ECR, PL) said: “Parliament has come up with targeted solutions to reduce food waste, such as promoting “ugly” fruits and veggies, keeping an eye on unfair market practices, clarifying date labelling and donating unsold-but-consumable food. For textiles, we also want to include non-household products, carpets and mattresses, as well as sales via online platforms.”

Next steps

The file will be followed up by the new Parliament after the 6-9 June European elections.

Background

Every year, 60 million tonnes of food waste (131 kg per person) and 12.6 million tonnes of textile waste are generated in the EU. Clothing and footwear alone account for 5.2 million tonnes of waste, equivalent to 12 kg of waste per person every year. It is estimated that less than 1% of all textiles worldwide are recycled into new products.

In adopting this report, Parliament is responding to citizens’ expectations for the EU to apply circular economy principles and promote measures against food waste, as well as to implement without delay an ambitious sustainable textile strategy and increase environmental standards, as expressed in proposals 1(3), 5(8), 5(9) and 5(11) of the conclusions of the Conference on the Future of Europe.

The EU Customs Code needs a thorough revamp due to the exponential growth of e-commerce and many new product standards, bans, obligations and sanctions the EU has put in place in recent years. The reform introduces new tools and puts in place simpler processes to help customs authorities to work more efficiently and focus on checking the riskiest goods, shipments and traders.

New approach to e-commerce

Consumers order more and more goods from third countries online. These goods do not necessarily meet the EU’s safety or environmental standards and legal norms. Additionally, approximately 65% of parcels entering the EU are deliberately undervalued, which leads to a significant loss in revenue.

The new regulation places a bigger responsibility on web platforms, which would be obliged to submit information to EU customs authorities within one day about purchased goods to be shipped to the EU. This leads to a better overview of incoming shipments and enables customs authorities to target their checks, focusing on goods and traders that might not comply with EU norms.

Simpler procedures for trusted partners

Companies and traders who agree to go through rigorous preliminary checks and controls would gain more freedoms in their dealings with customs authorities later. The most trustworthy companies would get a trusted trader status and could then operate with minimal checks and paperwork. This in turn would enable customs agents to focus on riskier businesses and shipments instead.

New digital solutions

The reform establishes a new IT platform called EU DataHub as the main working tool for all European customs authorities. Businesses would find it easier to communicate with and submit information to authorities. Customs authorities would be able to analyse data more accurately, including with the help of AI, to help them check suspicious inconsistencies, potential tax fraud and risks related to certain companies or goods, for example.

Quote

Rapporteur, Deirdre Clune (EPP, IE), said: “There is a critical need for a revised EU customs system. Not only must it guarantee the safety and compliance of goods entering the EU, but it must also function with utmost efficiency for businesses operating within the single market. The proposed Customs Data Hub is a vital step forward, but its swift implementation, alongside other key reforms, is essential to meet growing challenges.”

Next steps

Parliament’s first reading position was adopted with 486 votes in favour to 19 against and 97 abstentions. The file will be followed up by the new Parliament after the 6-9 June European elections.

Background

The Commission presented the proposal to reform the EU Customs Code in May 2023. The package contains three separate legal acts: the main regulation that establishes the EU Customs Code and the EU Customs Authority, a Council regulation on simplified tariff treatment for the distance sales and elimination of the customs duty relief threshold and a Council directive on a special scheme for distance sales of goods imported from third countries and import VAT. Parliament is a co-legislator on the first one.

In adopting its position, Parliament is responding to citizens’ expectations for the EU to reduce bureaucracy, combat counterfeiting and unfair competition and consolidate the Single Market, as expressed in proposals 12(17), 12(18) and 12(20) of the conclusions of the Conference on the Future of Europe.

The update of the Single permit directive, adopted in 2011, which established a single administrative procedure for delivering a permit to third-country nationals wishing to live and work in an EU country, and a common set of rights for third-country workers, was adopted today with 465 votes in favour, 122 against and 27x abstentions.

Faster decisions on applications

In negotiations, MEPs succeeded in setting a 90-day limit for a decision to be taken on applications for a single permit, compared to the current four months. Procedures on especially complex files might get a 30-day extension and the time to deliver a visa, if necessary, is not included. New rules will introduce the possibility for a holder of a valid residence permit to apply for a Single Permit also from within the territory, so a person who is legally residing in the EU could request to change their legal status without having to return to their home country.

Change of employer

Under the new rules, single permit holders will have the right to change employer, occupation and work sector. MEPs ensured in negotiations that a simple notification from the new employer would suffice. National authorities will have 45 days to oppose the change. MEPs have also limited the conditions under which this authorisation can be subject to labour market tests.

EU states will have the option to require an initial period of up to six months during which a change of employer will not be possible. However, a change during that period would still be possible if the employer seriously breaches the work contract, for example by imposing particularly exploitative working conditions.

Unemployment

If a single permit holder is unemployed, they will have up to three months –or six if they have had the permit for more than two years- to find another job before their permit is withdrawn, compared to two months under the current rules. EU states may choose to offer longer periods. If a worker has experienced particularly exploitative working conditions, member states shall extend by three months the period of unemployment during which the single permit remains valid. If a single permit holder is unemployed for more than three months, member states may require them to provide evidence that they have sufficient resources to support themselves without using the social assistance system.

Quote

After the vote, the rapporteur Javier Moreno Sanchez (S&D, ES) said: “Regular migration is the best instrument to combat irregular migration and human traffickers. We need to address irregular migratory flows, foster coherence between the different legal migration instruments and facilitate foreign workers’ integration. The review of the Single Permit Directive will support workers from third countries to reach Europe safely, and European companies to find the workers they need. At the same time we will avoid and prevent labour exploitation, by strengthening the rights of third countries’ workers and protecting them more effectively against abuse.”

Next steps

The new rules have to now formally be approved by the Council. Member states will have two years after the entry into force of the directive to introduce the changes to their national laws. This legislation does not apply in Denmark and Ireland.

On Wednesday, Parliament approved its position on revamped EU rules on toy safety with 603 votes in favour, 5 against and 15 abstentions. The text responds to a number of new challenges, mainly stemming from digital toys and online shopping, and converts the existing directive into a directly applicable regulation.

Ban on harmful chemicals

Focusing on children’s health and development, the proposal strengthens the requirements and bans on certain chemical substances in toys. The existing prohibition on carcinogenic and mutagenic substances or substances toxic for reproduction (CRM) is extended to chemicals that are particularly harmful to children, such as endocrine disruptors or chemicals affecting the respiratory system. The rules also target chemicals that are toxic to specific organs or are persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic. Toys should not contain any per- and polyfluorinated alkil substances (PFASs) either.

Strengthening checks

All toys sold in the EU will have to have a digital product passport (replacing the EU declaration of conformity), detailing compliance with the relevant safety rules. This will enhance the traceability of toys and make market surveillance and customs checks simpler and more efficient. Consumers will also have easy access to safety information and warnings, for example via a QR code. MEPs in their position urge the Commission to support and guide SME toy manufacturers in performing safety assessments and fulfilling the product passport requirements.

Safety, security and privacy by design

Toys with digital elements need to comply with safety, security and privacy by design standards. MEPs say toys using AI falling under the scope of the new Artificial Intelligence Act will have to comply with cybersecurity, personal data protection, and privacy requirements. Manufacturers of digitally connected toys need to follow the EU’s Cybersecurity rules and consider, where appropriate, the risks to mental health and the cognitive development of children using such toys.

Toys must also comply with the recently updated General Product Safety rules, for example, when it comes to online sales, accident reporting, consumer right to information and remedy.

Quote

Rapporteur Marion Walsmann (EPP, Germany) said: “Children deserve the safest toys possible. With the revised safety rules, we are giving them just that. We are protecting them against invisible dangers such as harmful chemicals and ensuring that warnings such as age restrictions are clearly visible online. The newly introduced digital product passport will ensure that consumers have access to information they need. At the same time, trade secrets will be protected – a strong signal for fair competition and that Europe is the place to do business”.

Next steps

The text constitutes Parliament’s position at first reading. The file will be followed up by the new Parliament after the European elections on 6-9 June.

Background

Before placing a toy on the market, manufacturers have to carry out safety assessments that cover all chemical, physical, mechanical, electrical flammability, hygiene and radioactivity hazards and potential exposure. Despite the EU market being among the safest in the world, dangerous toys still find their way into consumers’ hands. According to the EU Safety Gate (the EU rapid alert system for dangerous consumer products), toys were the most notified product category, accounting for 23% of all notifications in 2022 and 20% in 2021.

In his “This is Europe” address to the European Parliament, Prime of Minister of Finland Petteri Orpo focussed on three key factors for the coming years. First, strategic competitiveness, which is important as Europe’s productivity is falling behind that of key competitors. To thrive in a global landscape, Europe needs a fully functioning internal market, investments in innovation and skills, and a more effective use of its budget, said Mr Orpo. The EU also needs to conclude new trade deals, he argued.

Secondly, Mr Orpo emphasised the importance of security. This includes ramping up the defence industry so EU and NATO can complement each other, as well as defending the EU’s external borders against Russian hybrid attacks. The economic vitality of border regions is also crucial from a security perspective, said Mr Orpo.

Thirdly, the Prime Minister raised the clean transition as another key priority. To tackle climate change and phase out fossil fuels while creating jobs, the transition needs to leverage the bioeconomy and circular economy. Mr Orpo argued that climate goals should be reached with more innovation, not only more regulation.

Finally, Mr Orpo underlined that supporting Ukraine is a strategic necessity for Europe. Although Russia has shifted to a war economy, it is not invincible, and its military capabilities are limited. Mr Orpo encouraged Europeans to pool their resources to support Ukraine by accelerating ammunition production immediately, by allocating additional funding to the European Peace Facility, and by extending the European Investment Bank’s (EIB) capabilities beyond dual-use projects.

Reactions from MEPs

In their interventions after Prime Minister Orpo’s address, several MEPs praised Finland’s leadership on climate and digital policy as well as on gender equality. They also welcomed the country’s accession to NATO and called on the EU to rise to the challenges linked to external diplomacy and defence.

Others criticised the Finnish centre-right government’s choice of forming a coalition with the far right at home, stressing the dangers this could pose for Europe. Some MEPs also criticised the Finnish PM for policies they said undermine the Finnish labour market as well as social and worker protection.

You can watch the debate here.

The regulation, agreed in negotiations with member states in December 2023, was endorsed by MEPs with 523 votes in favour, 46 against and 49 abstentions.

It aims to protect fundamental rights, democracy, the rule of law and environmental sustainability from high-risk AI, while boosting innovation and establishing Europe as a leader in the field. The regulation establishes obligations for AI based on its potential risks and level of impact.

Banned applications

The new rules ban certain AI applications that threaten citizens’ rights, including biometric categorisation systems based on sensitive characteristics and untargeted scraping of facial images from the internet or CCTV footage to create facial recognition databases. Emotion recognition in the workplace and schools, social scoring, predictive policing (when it is based solely on profiling a person or assessing their characteristics), and AI that manipulates human behaviour or exploits people’s vulnerabilities will also be forbidden.

Law enforcement exemptions

The use of biometric identification systems (RBI) by law enforcement is prohibited in principle, except in exhaustively listed and narrowly defined situations. “Real-time” RBI can only be deployed if strict safeguards are met, e.g. its use is limited in time and geographic scope and subject to specific prior judicial or administrative authorisation. Such uses may include, for example, a targeted search of a missing person or preventing a terrorist attack. Using such systems post-facto (“post-remote RBI”) is considered a high-risk use case, requiring judicial authorisation being linked to a criminal offence.

Obligations for high-risk systems

Clear obligations are also foreseen for other high-risk AI systems (due to their significant potential harm to health, safety, fundamental rights, environment, democracy and the rule of law). Examples of high-risk AI uses include critical infrastructure, education and vocational training, employment, essential private and public services (e.g. healthcare, banking), certain systems in law enforcement, migration and border management, justice and democratic processes (e.g. influencing elections). Such systems must assess and reduce risks, maintain use logs, be transparent and accurate, and ensure human oversight. Citizens will have a right to submit complaints about AI systems and receive explanations about decisions based on high-risk AI systems that affect their rights.

Transparency requirements

General-purpose AI (GPAI) systems, and the GPAI models they are based on, must meet certain transparency requirements, including compliance with EU copyright law and publishing detailed summaries of the content used for training. The more powerful GPAI models that could pose systemic risks will face additional requirements, including performing model evaluations, assessing and mitigating systemic risks, and reporting on incidents.

Additionally, artificial or manipulated images, audio or video content (“deepfakes”) need to be clearly labelled as such.

Measures to support innovation and SMEs

Regulatory sandboxes and real-world testing will have to be established at the national level, and made accessible to SMEs and start-ups, to develop and train innovative AI before its placement on the market.

Quotes

During the plenary debate on Tuesday, the Internal Market Committee co-rapporteur Brando Benifei (S&D, Italy) said: “We finally have the world’s first binding law on artificial intelligence, to reduce risks, create opportunities, combat discrimination, and bring transparency. Thanks to Parliament, unacceptable AI practices will be banned in Europe and the rights of workers and citizens will be protected. The AI Office will now be set up to support companies to start complying with the rules before they enter into force. We ensured that human beings and European values are at the very centre of AI’s development”.

Civil Liberties Committee co-rapporteur Dragos Tudorache (Renew, Romania) said: “The EU has delivered. We have linked the concept of artificial intelligence to the fundamental values that form the basis of our societies. However, much work lies ahead that goes beyond the AI Act itself. AI will push us to rethink the social contract at the heart of our democracies, our education models, labour markets, and the way we conduct warfare. The AI Act is a starting point for a new model of governance built around technology. We must now focus on putting this law into practice”.

Next steps

The regulation is still subject to a final lawyer-linguist check and is expected to be finally adopted before the end of the legislature (through the so-called corrigendum procedure). The law also needs to be formally endorsed by the Council.

It will enter into force twenty days after its publication in the official Journal, and be fully applicable 24 months after its entry into force, except for: bans on prohibited practises, which will apply six months after the entry into force date; codes of practise (nine months after entry into force); general-purpose AI rules including governance (12 months after entry into force); and obligations for high-risk systems (36 months).

Background

The Artificial Intelligence Act responds directly to citizens’ proposals from the Conference on the Future of Europe (COFE), most concretely to proposal 12(10) on enhancing EU’s competitiveness in strategic sectors, proposal 33(5) on a safe and trustworthy society, including countering disinformation and ensuring humans are ultimately in control, proposal 35 on promoting digital innovation, (3) while ensuring human oversight and (8) trustworthy and responsible use of AI, setting safeguards and ensuring transparency, and proposal 37 (3) on using AI and digital tools to improve citizens’ access to information, including persons with disabilities.