Sittings · Compare
What changed
PA_NonLeg
P10_TA(2026)0079
AMENDMENTS
Tackling barriers to the single market for defence
The Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs submits the following to the Committee on Security and Defence, as the committee responsible :
Committee on Security and Defence
Amendment 1
PE778.252
Motion for a resolution
European Parliament resolution of 11 March 2026 on tackling barriers to the single market for defence (2025/2143(INI))
Citation 13 a (new)
The European Parliament,
Motion for a resolution
– having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),
Amendment
– having regard to the Versailles Declaration adopted at the informal meeting of the Heads of State or Government on 11 March 2022,
– having regard to the Commission notice of 28 August2025 on the application of the sustainable finance framework and the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive to the defence sector (C(2025)3800);
– having regard to the Strategic Compass for Security and Defence – For a European Union that protects its citizens, values and interests and contributes to international peace and security, approved by the Council on 21 March 2022 and endorsed by the European Council on 25 March 2022,
Amendment 2
– having regard to Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/2315 of 11 December 2017 establishing permanent structured cooperation (PESCO) and determining the list of participating Member States1,
Motion for a resolution
– having regard to Directive 2009/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 May 2009 simplifying terms and conditions of transfers of defence-related products within the Community2,
Recital B
– having regard to Directive 2009/81/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 on the coordination of procedures for the award of certain works contracts, supply contracts and service contracts by contracting authorities or entities in the fields of defence and security, and amending Directives 2004/17/EC and 2004/18/EC3,
Motion for a resolution
– having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/697 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2021 establishing the European Defence Fund and repealing Regulation (EU) 2018/10924,
Amendment
– having regard to Regulation (EU) 2023/1525 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 July 2023 on supporting ammunition production (ASAP)5,
B. whereas decades of defence procurement focused on the national level, industrial fragmentation, regulatory barriers, underinvestment, divergent foreign policy objectives, lack of integrated capability planning and aggregated demand, as well as competition over intellectual property, have prevented a fully integrated single market for defence, thereby incurring significant extra costs for the taxpayer while undermining the EU’s ability to protect the safety of its citizens;
– having regard to Regulation (EU) 2023/2418 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 October 2023 on establishing an instrument for the reinforcement of the European defence industry through common procurement (EDIRPA)6,
B. whereas national complementarity remains essential to the resilience and strategic sovereignty of the Union, and whereas decades of defence procurement focused on the national level, industrial fragmentation, regulatory barriers, underinvestment, divergent foreign policy objectives, lack of integrated capability planning and aggregated demand, as well as competition over intellectual property, have limited European cooperation and prevented a fully integrated single market for defence, thereby incurring significant extra costs for the taxpayer and increasing difficulties for EU defence companies in obtaining credit and equity financing, while undermining the EU’s ability to protect the safety of its citizens;
– having regard to Regulation (EU) 2025/2643 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2025 establishing the European Defence Industry Programme and a framework of measures to ensure the timely availability and supply of defence products (‘EDIP Regulation’)7,
Amendment 3
– having regard to Regulation (EU) 2025/2653 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 December 2025 amending Regulations (EU) 2021/694, (EU) 2021/695, (EU) 2021/697, (EU) 2021/1153 and (EU) 2024/795, as regards incentivising defence-related investment in the EU budget to implement the ReArm Europe Plan8,
Motion for a resolution
– having regard to Council Regulation (EU) 2025/1106 of 27 May 2025 establishing the Security Action for Europe (SAFE) through the Reinforcement of the European Defence Industry Instrument9,
Recital C a (new)
– having regard to the Commission proposal of 17 June 2025 for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the acceleration of permit-granting for defence readiness projects (COM(2025)0821), to the Commission proposal of 17 June 2025 for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulations (EC) No 1907/2006, (EC) No 1272/2008, (EU) No 528/2012, (EU) 2019/1021 and (EU) 2021/697 as regards defence readiness and facilitating defence investments and conditions for defence industry (COM(2025)0822), and to the Commission proposal of 17 June 2025 for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directives 2009/43/EC and 2009/81/EC, as regards the simplification of intra-EU transfers of defence-related products and the simplification of security and defence procurement (COM(2025)0823), as part of the Defence Readiness Omnibus package of 17 June 2025,
Motion for a resolution
– having regard to the conclusions of the European Council on European defence, particularly those of 6 March 2025, 20 March 2025, 26 June 2025 and 23 October 2025,
Amendment
– having regard to its resolution of 25 March 2021 on the implementation of Directive 2009/81/EC, concerning procurement in the fields of defence and security, and of Directive 2009/43/EC, concerning the transfer of defence-related products10,
C a. whereas although coordinating on a new defence system or standard may result in short-term adjustment costs, including challenges related to interoperability with existing capabilities, it could generate collective efficiencies and lower overall costs over time;
– having regard to its resolution of 2 April 2025 on the implementation of the common foreign and security policy – annual report 202411,
Amendment 4
– having regard to its resolution of 25 November 2025 on the institutional aspects of the Report on the future of European Competitiveness (Draghi Report)12,
Motion for a resolution
– having regard to the joint communication from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 5 March 2024 entitled ‘A new European Defence Industrial Strategy: Achieving EU readiness through a responsive and resilient European Defence Industry’ (JOIN(2024)0010),
Paragraph 1
– having regard to the political guidelines for the next European Commission for the period 2024-2029, entitled ‘Europe’s choice’, presented on 18 July 2025 by the then candidate for Commission President, Ursula von der Leyen,
Motion for a resolution
– having regard to the report by Mario Draghi of 9 September 2024 entitled ‘The future of European competitiveness’ (Draghi report) and, in particular, Chapter 4 thereof on increasing security and reducing dependencies,
Amendment
– having regard to the report by Sauli Niinistö of 30 October 2024 entitled ‘Safer Together – Strengthening Europe’s Civilian and Military Preparedness and Readiness’ (Niinistö report),
1. Believes that the dramatic challenges faced by the Union and its Member States require a complete rethinking of the way they cooperate on defence matters; underlines that the EU must fundamentally change its understanding of defence industry production by developing a true single market for defence, as called for in the Letta, Draghi and Niinistö reports;
– having regard to the report by Enrico Letta of 10 April 2024 entitled ‘Much more than a Market – Speed, Security, Solidarity: Empowering the Single Market to deliver a sustainable future and prosperity for all EU Citizens’ (Letta report),
1. Believes that the dramatic challenges faced by the Union and its Member States require a complete rethinking of the way they cooperate on defence matters; emphasises that this cooperation should be based on a coherent policy framework that allows flexible cooperation between Member States, promoting synergies in full respect of national competences and the provisions of Article 4 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and Article 346 TFEU; underlines that the EU must fundamentally change its understanding of defence industry production by developing a true single market for defence, as called for in the Letta, Draghi and Niinistö reports;
– having regard to the joint white paper from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 19 March 2025 entitled ‘Joint white paper for European Defence Readiness 2030’ (JOIN(2025)0120),
Amendment 5
– having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,
Motion for a resolution
– having regard to the opinions of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs and the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection,
Paragraph 2
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Security and Defence (A10-0017/2026),
Motion for a resolution
A. whereas decades of defence procurement that focused on the national level, industrial fragmentation, regulatory barriers, underinvestment, divergent threat assessments and foreign policy objectives, lack of integrated capability planning and aggregated demand, as well as competition over intellectual property, have prevented the emergence of an effective and fully integrated single market for defence and have weakened interoperability in Member States’ defence systems, thereby incurring significant extra costs for the taxpayer while undermining the EU’s ability to protect the safety of its citizens, weakening the European defence technological and industrial base (EDTIB) and preventing European strategic autonomy, resilience and competitiveness from being fully realised;
Amendment
B. whereas the Letta and Draghi reports highlight a combination of structural weaknesses affecting the competitiveness of the EDTIB and identify fragmentation, insufficient public defence spending and limited access to financing as core challenges, and therefore recognise the need to build a true single market for defence; whereas the White Paper on the Future of European Defence emphasises that action should focus on rules and procedures for defence procurement, intra-EU transfers of defence products and mutual recognition of national certification permits; whereas the Niinistö report also underlines the need to enhance Europe’s overall preparedness, including the integration of civilian and military resilience, and points out that those needs can also be met more efficiently with a single market for defence;
2. Recalls that enhanced cooperation could lead to enormous efficiency savings of up to 30 % of annual defence spending across the EU, amounting to at least EUR 57 billion annually and significantly boosting the effectiveness of current defence spending; underscores the broader advantages for EU competitiveness, resilience, and strategic sovereignty, promising significant employment opportunities, economic development and technological leadership throughout the EU9 ;
C. whereas a resilient, competitive and innovative European defence industrial base is essential to deliver on the Strategic Compass and to ensure the EU’s ability to deter and defend in the light of the Readiness 2030 agenda; whereas this requires a coherent industrial and technological policy that supports interoperable capabilities, secures critical supply chains, supports small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), and promotes dual-use innovation;
2. Recalls that enhanced cooperation could lead to enormous efficiency savings of at least EUR 57 billion in annual defence spending across the EU annually, significantly boosting the effectiveness of current defence spending; underscores that more synergies can also contribute to EU competitiveness, resilience, and strategic autonomy, focusing on ensuring the independence and resilience of our domestic industry while supporting employment, innovation, and industrial development throughout the EU9, without prejudice to national prerogatives;
D. whereas defence companies established in smaller Member States have been particularly affected by other Member States’ overly stringent approach to intra-EU transfers and export controls in the past, demonstrating how one choke point can undermine EU-wide supply chains; whereas SMEs face particular entry barriers to defence markets; whereas current EU competition rules and State aid frameworks lack tailored provisions for cooperative cross-border defence projects, which risks hindering industrial collaboration and consolidation; whereas no specific block exemption or similar facilitative mechanism exists for defence projects funded by EU financing instruments, creating legal uncertainty for companies engaging in joint research and development (R&D); whereas the lack of an adequate intellectual property and licensing framework for publicly funded defence R&D restricts multi-producer manufacturing of certified European designs and limits the effectiveness of joint procurement instruments;
_________________
E. whereas the European defence industry is facing a severe shortage of skilled workers and an ageing workforce, which threatens to create bottlenecks in production, hindering expansion; whereas different national security clearance requirements for defence industry personnel and companies prevent increased cross-border collaboration by subjecting firms or engineers cleared for handling classified information in one Member State to lengthy, duplicate vetting in others; whereas the rapid adoption and application of innovative technologies by Europe’s armed forces is hindered by lengthy development cycles and a high aversion to risk;
_________________
F. whereas in order to increase public support for these investments, the economic returns and benefits need to be spread across the EU in a balanced and proportional way, taking into account the specificities of national defence industrial bases; whereas cross-border cooperation should also ensure the fair and full participation of SMEs and small mid-caps in the defence value chain and strengthen regional cohesion across the EU; whereas defence investments have the potential to create high-quality jobs across a wide range of regions, thereby helping to achieve cohesion objectives;
9 Ethan Ilzetki, Guns and Growth: The Economic Consequences of Defense Buildups, February 2025.
G. whereas recent events have exposed the risks of supply chain concentration in Europe’s defence sector, with critical defence products and inputs often dependent on a single or very limited number of suppliers; whereas such concentration creates single points of failure and vulnerabilities in times of crisis, underscoring the urgent need for diversification and redundancy in supply sources;
9 Ilzetki, E., Guns and Growth: The Economic Consequences of Defense Buildups, Kiel Report, No. 2, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), Kiel, February 2025, https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/311212/1/1917343442.pdf.
H. whereas according to the Draghi report, European collaborative procurement accounted for only 18 % of expenditure on defence equipment procurement in 2022, well below the benchmark of 35 % agreed on in the European Defence Agency (EDA) frameworks; whereas the EU has set the political objective of sourcing at least half of its defence equipment from European production by 2030;
Amendment 6
I. whereas the objective of creating a single market for defence is ultimately a means to achieve Europe’s security and strategic autonomy, not an end in itself; whereas defence industrial integration should serve the EU’s ability to protect its citizens and values, ensure resilience and deterrence, and uphold its freedom of action; whereas a balance must be struck between market efficiency and the imperatives of sovereignty and solidarity;
Motion for a resolution
J. whereas joint defence capability planning, development, production and procurement in the EU would allow for increased efficiency and effectiveness of public investment and industrial and operational gains, thereby increasing the social and political acceptance of necessary increases in defence investment in times of constrained budgets and significantly improving the ability of the EU and its Member States to achieve full defence readiness before 2030 and a genuine European defence union; whereas such joint action in the EU should be coordinated with NATO planning processes and should avoid unnecessary duplication of actions;
Paragraph 3
K. whereas the Member States will only consider increasing their investment and cooperation in common defence projects if these involve the development of military capabilities of common interest to their armed forces;
Motion for a resolution
L. whereas the EU has presented a number of initiatives aimed at reinforcing EU defence readiness, enhancing investment conditions and incentivising joint action, yet it has not, to date, proposed the transformative measures required for the establishment of a genuine single market for defence products; whereas the EU’s rules on defence procurement (Directive 2009/81/EC) and on intra-EU transfers (Directive 2009/43/EC) have not yet been comprehensively updated despite significant changes in the security environment; whereas stakeholders often find both directives overly complex and Member States’ transposition slow and problematic, requiring disproportionate administrative effort and giving rise to fragmentation of the internal market;
Amendment
M. whereas in the light of growing geopolitical threats, notably Russia’s ongoing war of aggression against Ukraine and its hybrid attacks and provocations against the EU, as well as terrorism and instability in the Middle East and Africa, 90 % of EU citizens rightly expect increased EU cooperation in the area of security and defence, including within NATO and with other like-minded partners, to protect citizens and defend the EU’s interests and values on the global stage; whereas the increasingly unstable security environment in the EU’s immediate neighbourhood calls for a coherent and coordinated response, particularly to ensure the unimpeded movement of defence products and services;
3. Stresses that only a true single market for defence products can provide the means required to truly establish and maintain a competitive and resilient European Defence Technological and Industrial Base (EDTIB) of scale; underlines that a true single market for defence products is essential to close the capability gaps and to re-establish deterrence and is hence a necessary cornerstone of a strong, sovereign and competitive Union;
The vision of a single market for defence in the Union
3. Stresses that only by addressing the remaining market and regulatory barriers that impede capital flows, competition and innovation while fully respecting national prerogatives in security and defence, can the full economic, industrial and financial potential be unlocked and the means be provided to truly maintain a competitive and resilient European Defence Technological and Industrial Base (EDTIB) of scale; underlines that a true single market for defence products is essential to close the capability gaps and to re-establish deterrence and is hence a necessary cornerstone of a strong, strategically autonomous and competitive Union;
1. Recalls that, according to the Draghi report, enhanced cooperation could lead to enormous efficiency savings of up to 30 % of annual defence spending across the EU and significantly boost the effectiveness of current defence spending; underscores the broader advantages of this for EU competitiveness, resilience and strategic sovereignty, since it promises significant employment opportunities, economic development and technological leadership throughout the EU; emphasises that a true single market for defence is crucial for fostering the competitiveness of European companies, not only within the EU but also on the global market, where they have to compete with, among others, US prime contractors;
Amendment 7
2. Believes that the dramatic challenges and threats faced by the EU and its Member States require a complete rethinking of the way they cooperate and coordinate on defence matters; underlines that the EU and its Member States must fundamentally change their understanding of defence industry production by developing a true single market for defence, as called for in the Letta, Draghi and Niinistö reports and in the White Paper on the Future of European Defence; urges the Member States to overcome nationalist reflexes towards their national industrial base, to give greater consideration to the benefits of EU-level defence cooperation in their national defence planning, and to acknowledge the essential role of active support from the EU institutions and agencies in facilitating and coordinating such cooperation, while strengthening mutual trust among all stakeholders;
Motion for a resolution
3. Stresses that only a true single market for defence can provide the means required to truly establish and maintain a competitive, innovative and resilient EDTIB that is able to deliver the equipment needed in the required time periods and at the scale required and to unlock the full economic, industrial and financial potential of the EDTIB; underlines that a true single market for defence is essential to close the capability gaps and re-establish deterrence and is therefore a necessary cornerstone of a strong, sovereign and competitive Union;
Paragraph 3 a (new)
4. Urges the Member States and the Commission to act swiftly to create a true single market for defence, acting on both the supply and demand sides; recalls that the aggregation of demand through common procurement and life cycle management, regulatory simplification and cross-border industrial integration at EU level is urgently needed to address such barriers and reduce reliance on non-EU countries, as outlined in the Letta and Draghi reports;
Motion for a resolution
5. Recalls the importance of ensuring democratic legitimacy, public trust in institutions, accountability and transparency in order to secure the necessary public support for increased expenditure in the field of defence; underlines the importance of guaranteeing a fair and balanced distribution across the EU of the costs and benefits of the surge in European defence spending;
Amendment
Obstacles to a single market for defence
3 a. Underlines that, in the absence of more joint defence procurement and a reduction in market fragmentation, additional demand for defence capabilities may result in price increases;
6. Underlines that the current structure of the defence industrial landscape leads to unnecessary duplication, external dependencies and inefficiencies, and hampers the strengthening of the EDTIB and the EU’s defence readiness; underlines that, coupled with underinvestment and the lack of programming of long-term defence spending, this fragmentation prevents the realisation of economies of scale that could arise from pooling defence equipment procurement and production across European companies; highlights the vital need to overcome fragmentation in the EU defence industrial landscape, exploiting potential economies of scale, and to gather greater insight into the barriers to the single market for defence; emphasises that a single market for defence must guarantee equitable opportunities for participation for industries and research organisations, including start-ups, from all Member States, including smaller economies, and should not result in an overly centralised defence industrial model; underlines that such a market design contributes to economic cohesion by creating high-quality manufacturing and R&D jobs in various EU regions, including less economically developed ones; notes, furthermore, that such geographical diversification contributes to resilience and security of supply and also helps to avoid the creation of monopolies and disadvantages for SMEs and mid-caps;
Amendment 8
7. Deplores the lack of results from current coordinated capability planning and spending on defence products across the EU, which has led to divergent rules and eligibility criteria and inefficient spending of funds, creating legal uncertainty and often leading Member States to prioritise bilateral cooperation with non-EU countries; regrets that nationally determined priorities frequently prevent fruitful cooperation within the EU;
Motion for a resolution
8. Deplores the persistent mutual trust deficit among Member States, which is reflected in, among other things, a reluctance to create regional centres of industrial competence, a limited degree of cross-border cooperation and joint capability planning, an insufficient level of intra-EU procurement of defence-related goods and services, and duplicated or precautionary restrictions on intra-EU transfers of defence equipment, hindering the development of fully integrated European supply chains and posing a significant obstacle to the development of a genuine single market for defence;
Paragraph 4
9. Believes that the current EU legislative frameworks do not provide conditions for procurement of goods with fast innovation cycles, such as in the area of drone development; expresses concern that the single market for defence is still undermined by the insufficiently harmonised application of its rules by the Member States and by disproportionate use of the exemption provided for under Article 346 TFEU, which hampers the push towards joint EU defence procurement; highlights the need for dedicated support for SMEs and small mid-caps to facilitate their involvement in the defence industry supply chain, with a view to increasing innovation while building industrial redundancies that increase the EU’s resilience and security of supply;
Motion for a resolution
10. Expresses concern that the single market for defence is still undermined by the insufficiently harmonised application of its rules by the Member States; is concerned, in particular, by the frequent use of Article 346 TFEU, which the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has ruled in several cases as having been used in an unjustified manner and thus misused; stresses the need to shift towards an approach of safeguarding the EU’s essential security interests, given the current geopolitical situation and the threats to the EU’s unity;
Amendment
11. Considers that the Member States’ full respect for the EU Common Position on arms exports13 constitutes an important pillar of a functioning single market for defence; considers that the absence of a harmonised EU export control system and a lack of mutual recognition of different permits, licences, certifications and security clearances continue to generate obstacles to the functioning of a single market for defence through their impact on intra-EU transfers; recalls that defence production currently relies heavily on integrated cross-border supply chains in the EU, with components sourced from multiple Member States, which, in the event of an export block, creates uncertainty for industry and supply chains; stresses the need for a practical solution that takes into account the reality of present dependencies on non-EU countries, also given the growing importance of critical raw materials for the EDTIB and the potential exposure to coercive measures by non-EU countries; emphasises that, without guaranteed and planned access to inputs such as rare earths, semiconductors and high-grade metals, Europe’s ambitious defence ramp-up and strategic autonomy objectives cannot be met;
4. Urges Member States and the Commission to act swiftly to create the true single market for defence, acting on both the supply and demand sides; recalls that the aggregating of demand through common procurement and management throughout the life cycle, regulatory simplification, and cross-border industrial integration at EU level are urgently needed to address such barriers and reduce reliance on non-EU countries as outlined in the Letta and Draghi reports;
12. Considers coordination between the EU’s and the Member States’ defence capability development processes and NATO’s Defence Planning and Review Process to be essential to ensure coherence and interoperability between Member States and non-EU NATO allies; regrets the lack of a cooperation agreement between NATO and the EU dedicated to the exchange of information on NATO standards (STANAGs), which the EU could then enforce through binding instruments; stresses that the lack of enforcement of standards has led to inefficiencies, duplications and a lack of interoperability in the past decades and continues to pose a problem;
4. Urges Member States and the Commission to act swiftly to create the true single market for defence, acting on both the supply and demand sides, based on flexible and cooperative mechanisms among Member States, respecting national competences and the provisions of Article 4 of the TEU and Article 346 TFEU; recalls that the aggregating of demand through common procurement and management throughout the life cycle, regulatory simplification, and cross-border industrial integration at EU level are urgently needed to address such barriers and reduce reliance on non-EU countries as outlined in the Letta and Draghi reports; calls for the mobilisation of private capital, ensuring that European capital markets play a key role in financing defence innovation, while safeguarding Member States’ fiscal competences, avoiding additional financial burdens on Member States’ budgets and improving long-term predictability for both Member States and industry;
Breaking down the barriers
Amendment 9
13. Urges the Council and the Commission to equip EU defence programmes with sufficient funding under the next multiannual financial framework to effectively incentivise the Member States to engage in joint capability development and procurement and to incentivise their defence industries to engage in closer cross-border cooperation; highlights the potential of new frameworks, such as the European Defence Projects of Common Interest, including the four flagship projects proposed in the Defence Readiness Roadmap 2030, and the Structures for European Armament Programmes, to deliver on those objectives with the assistance of sufficient long-term funding; stresses that funding should prioritise projects with clear European added value, interoperability, long-term industrial sustainability and operational impact;
Motion for a resolution
14. Notes the current limitations in the manufacturing capacity of the European defence industry, which is nevertheless expanding, and calls on the Member States to apply a ‘buy European’ approach, which prioritises the common procurement and increased production of defence products from the EDTIB, Ukraine, European Economic Area/European Free Trade Association (EEA/EFTA) countries and, as an additional complementary layer, other non-EU countries with which the EU has signed a Security and Defence Partnership, as this would ensure a predictable order volume for the EDTIB, drive up private investment in R&D for defence products, and help the EDTIB to deliver innovative defence products in sufficient volumes; calls on the Member States to sign contracts that deliver stable and medium- to long-term aggregated demand signals for European products, thereby creating the investment certainty for the EDTIB to scale up;
Paragraph 4 a (new)
15. Urges the EU and its Member States to treat Ukraine as an integral part of the single market for defence to the utmost extent possible by facilitating industrial partnerships, access to joint procurement mechanisms, and participation in EU programmes, such as the European Defence Fund (EDF) and the dedicated Ukraine Support Instrument under EDIP, to enable Ukraine’s progressive integration into EDTIB supply chains, taking into account the fact that Ukraine’s future lies in the EU and that its integration would provide benefits for both the EDTIB, through Ukraine’s advanced and battle-proven defence technologies and innovative industrial capacities, and for Ukraine’s defence technological and industrial base;
Motion for a resolution
16. Believes that the implementation of Directive 2009/81/EC on defence and sensitive security procurement needs to be significantly improved and calls on the Commission to propose an ambitious revision; underlines the usefulness of allowing Member States to make use of each other’s framework contracts to increase the EU’s defence readiness in the short term, as it allows them to procure faster and more efficiently, while expecting that, in the long term, procurement will be conducted through common or joint framework contracts designed in line with European procurement criteria from the outset; calls on the Member States to make use of different contract forms that provide for innovation, competition and private capital investments, ensuring full compliance with competition rules, integrity requirements and anti-corruption standards, and recalls that European capital markets play a key role in financing defence innovation; further believes that aspects linked to security and defence, such as the presence of civilian components in military goods, should be taken into account in any review of Directive 2014/24/EU on public procurement14; calls, in this context, on the Commission to present an updated version of the defence innovation partnerships in the upcoming comprehensive revision of Directive 2009/81/EC, to better adapt this instrument to the specificities of the defence market and the current challenging security context;
Amendment
17. Underlines that, in the application of EU competition and State aid rules, the Commission must prioritise the unity and integrity of the single market to avoid distortions of competition and to safeguard the level playing field and cohesion between the Member States, paying particular attention to smaller Member States whose fiscal capacities to support their national defence industries are comparatively more limited; stresses that the extensive use of national subsidies to support defence investment risks fragmenting the single market and undermining the level playing field for companies, especially SMEs, across the EU;
4 a. Believes that greater cooperation on and coordination of defence spending across Europe under a coherent policy framework can maximise its economic and industrial benefits, thereby strengthening Europe’s industrial base, fostering technological progress, and contributing positively to sustainable growth and resilience;
18. Calls on the Commission to issue a recommendation for an interpretation of Article 346 TFEU in order to facilitate a harmonised and uniform approach throughout the EU, addressing the need to protect strictly the essential security interests of Member States, and for Article 346 to be used exceptionally, in line with the current reality of an interdependent security architecture in the EU; considers that the Commission should be enabled to assess the overall implementation of Article 346 TFEU, on a case-by-case basis, to remedy any potential structural misuse, in line with the CJEU case-law and with the current reality of an interdependent security architecture in the EU;
Amendment 10
19. Underlines the need to provide targeted support, in particular for the testing of prototypes of new products, and to prioritise investment in emerging and breakthrough technologies; stresses the added value of close cooperation with Ukrainian defence and technological stakeholders in these highly innovative domains; underlines the importance of safeguarding the financial viability of companies, including SMEs, that invest in such innovation; stresses that specific measures should facilitate cross-border SME cooperation, particularly in cyber, AI, and unmanned and dual-use technologies, building on existing excellence centres in Member States;
Motion for a resolution
20. Calls on the Member States and the Commission to establish a European ‘defence innovation accelerator’ initiative, analogous to concept models such as the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) or NATO’s Defence Innovation Accelerator for the North Atlantic (DIANA), that would fund high-risk, high-reward defence research projects and provide fast-track pathways for testing and integrating breakthrough technologies into European defence capability programmes; notes that existing EU R&D instruments, including the EDF, the EU Defence Innovation Scheme (EUDIS) and the Hub for EU Defence Innovation (HEDI), leave ownership of results with beneficiaries and grant the Commission and co-financing Member States only limited, non-production related rights; calls on the Commission to design an appropriate intellectual property regime that is tailored to the sensitivities of the defence domain, while also being sufficiently attractive to both national defence ministries and industry, in order to ensure that the programme can address capability needs and priorities;
Paragraph 5
21. Underlines the need to simplify rules and abolish hurdles related to intra-EU transfers of defence products, including mutual recognition of criteria and certification and a simplification of prior authorisation requests; deplores the limited use of general transfer licences under Directive 2009/81/EC and the wide recourse to individual licences and calls on Member States to make full use of the possibilities for simplifying rules and reducing administrative burdens within the current legal framework; calls on the Commission to urgently present proposals to further harmonise intra-EU transfers of defence products, to ensure more simplified circulation of such products within the EU, in particular by eliminating authorisation requirements for components that are already integrated or are to be integrated into a defence product and cannot be transferred or exported as such; calls, furthermore, on the Member States to work towards that same goal and to swiftly transpose and apply the measures proposed in the Defence Readiness Omnibus as regards intra-EU transfers of defence products; calls on the Member States to fully respect the EU Common Position on arms exports and to explore, wherever possible, further harmonisation of export rules for defence goods; suggests, as possible starting points, harmonising export control systems, extending general transfer licences or using the Aachen Treaty, and strengthening the ICT Directive15 to facilitate the intra-EU transfers of defence-related products;
Motion for a resolution
22. Calls on the Commission, the EDA and the Member States to work on a scheme for mutual recognition of security clearances and certifications, so that clearances issued in one Member State are also accepted in other Member States; proposes the establishment of a voluntary convention on mutual recognition agreements on security clearances among EU Member States, whereby a company or individual holding a national security clearance in one Member State would have that clearance recognised by others that join the agreement, subject to appropriate information sharing and oversight; invites the EDA to facilitate the development of this framework and calls on the Member States to conclude it swiftly;
Amendment
23. Stresses the imperative of strengthening the resilience of the European defence supply chains and reducing single points of failure and exposure to potential coercive measures by non-EU countries, exemplified by China’s threats to limit exports of raw materials; demands that the implementation of the Critical Raw Materials Act16 place specific emphasis on defence needs;
5. Underlines that the current structure of the defence industrial landscape leads to unnecessary duplications and inefficiencies and hampers the strengthening of defence readiness; underlines that, coupled with underinvestment, this fragmentation prevents the realisation of economies of scale that could arise from pooling defence equipment procurement and production across European companies; highlights the vital need to overcome fragmentation in the EU defence industrial landscape;
24. Calls for the Commission and the Member States to create incentives for supply chain diversification, including support for new market entrants and SMEs; stresses that the pursuit of cost efficiency must not undermine national security of supply; calls on the Commission to monitor supply chain risks and identify areas of dangerous concentration, reporting regularly on progress in supply diversification; calls, furthermore, on the Commission to address situations in which sub-suppliers from non-EU countries refuse to deliver materials if they are to be used in military applications; stresses the need for a legal framework ensuring contractual reliability throughout defence supply chains; calls for the Commission to establish strategic stockpiles in line with the EU Preparedness Union Strategy; emphasises, in that regard, the importance of the security of supply regime established under EDIP;
5. Underlines that the current structure of the defence industrial landscape leads to unnecessary duplications and inefficiencies and hampers the strengthening of defence readiness; notes that this fragmentation extends across industrial, financial and governance dimensions, undermining competitiveness, demand aggregation and efficient resource use; underlines that, coupled with underinvestment, this fragmentation prevents the realisation of economies of scale that could arise from regulatory streamlining and pooling defence equipment procurement and production across European companies; highlights the vital need to overcome fragmentation in the EU defence industrial landscape;
25. Underlines the need to ensure that defence industrial production, investment and value creation are geographically balanced and contribute to economic and social convergence within the EU while enhancing resilience through geographical diversification and reflecting the reality of security threats faced by the Member States in their respective neighbourhoods; calls for defence investment planning to be carried out in a manner that strengthens social cohesion within and between regions and Member States, while at the same time enhancing resilience in times of defence crises, provided that this does not undermine the aim of cost efficiency, speed and competition;
Amendment 11
26. Invites the Commission to issue clear guidance on how defence and security considerations are to be weighed in merger control decisions affecting the EDTIB, in line with EU competition policy; further invites the Commission to explore targeted adaptations of EU competition rules to better support the defence industry’s unique needs, such as the introduction of a targeted block exemption for defence R&D projects financed by EU programmes; emphasises that security of supply and reduction of strategic dependencies should be treated as positive criteria when assessing mergers or as aid measures in the defence sector;
Motion for a resolution
27. Stresses the need to develop a more proactive role for the EU in sustaining investment in dual-use technologies and products, in particular when they are part of the supply chains of defence products, as a means of enhancing the EU’s security of supply and resilience to hybrid and emerging threats; advocates the promotion of civilian commercialisation of these technologies as a way to expand market opportunities, create positive spill-overs and strengthen the EDTIB, fostering synergies between military and civilian development; calls on the Commission and the Member States to create incentives to limit to the EU the supply chains of the most critical inputs for defence products, including through a strengthened Defence Equity Facility, focused on late-stage commercialisation, scale-up finance and SME access to testing corridors and cyber ranges; stresses that the emerging ‘new space’ sector and its innovative potential regarding dual-use technologies should be fully exploited with regard to defence and civilian developments;
Paragraph 6
28. Calls on the Commission to assess the legal, procedural and regulatory adjustments that would be necessary to ensure that the EU and its Member States can rapidly adapt defence procurement and production rules in the event of war or a major security crisis and to ensure no disruption of the single market; further calls on the Commission to ensure that such an exercise is aligned with the security of supply regime included in EDIP; emphasises the importance of preparedness in the form of a contingency framework for emergency procurement and industrial ramp-up, which could be activated swiftly if needed;
Motion for a resolution
29. Believes that the EU institutions and agencies should enhance their role of facilitating coordination between the Member States and welcomes the EDA’s contribution, particularly through the Capability Development Plan and the Coordinated Annual Review on Defence, emphasising that its expertise should be fully exploited; underlines the crucial role of the EDA in promoting a single market for defence and calls on the Member States to strengthen the EDA’s mandate and resources in this respect; supports a greater involvement of the EDA in EU defence initiatives and in identifying persisting barriers to the single market for defence; calls for the development and regional deployment of HEDI within the EDA, with a view to expanding its role as a central platform connecting SMEs, start-ups, research centres and prime contractors; firmly believes that reinforcing the EDA will help to foster the mutual trust and cooperation needed to advance the single market for defence, as the EDA is uniquely positioned to bridge national and European interests; welcomes also the contribution of multilateral procurement agencies, such as the Organisation for Joint Armament Cooperation, which promote the harmonisation of equipment among Member States and non-EU partner states;
Amendment
30. Highlights the need for further European funding dedicated to tackling the commercialisation gap in innovation of defence products; calls for strengthened instruments to ensure that SMEs and mid-caps have real and scalable access to private capital and defence programmes, including through streamlined procurement, innovation-friendly rules and cross-border matchmaking support, thus ensuring their increased participation and a fairer allocation of funds; stresses the importance of establishing regional defence tech incubators under HEDI’s umbrella to support cross-border SME consortia, provide mentorship on navigating defence procurement, and facilitate the testing and validation of innovative technologies in collaboration with military end users;
6. Deplores the lack of coordinated capability planning and spending on defence products across the Union, which has resulted in divergent rules and eligibility criteria, creating legal uncertainty and often leading Member States to prioritise bilateral cooperation with non-EU countries; deplores that national priorities frequently take precedence over cooperation within the Union;
31. Underlines the need for the EU and NATO to sign a comprehensive cooperation agreement on capability planning and development to ensure coherent and complementary planning and interoperable defence capabilities, and on standardisation; emphasises that such cooperation must respect the autonomy of both organisations while avoiding duplication and promoting fair burden-sharing; calls on the Commission, in cooperation with the EDA, to prepare a legislative proposal that would create a harmonised EU framework for legally binding technical standards and certification of defence products, drawing on the European Defence Standards Reference System (EDSTAR) and, where appropriate, by codifying selected NATO STANAGs into EU legislation; further calls on the Commission to propose a framework for joint European testing and certification of defence equipment instead of having separate national validation for each defence product, including common testing and certification facilities; calls on the Member States to align their procurement and capability development efforts with NATO defence planning priorities, ensuring full interoperability of systems and avoiding parallel structures; underlines that a stronger and more integrated European defence industry should enhance Europe’s contribution within NATO and transatlantic burden-sharing, while maintaining open cooperation with trusted partners such as Ukraine, EEA/EFTA countries and Security and Defence Partnership states; encourages the implementation of NATO’s Rapid Adoption Action Plan aimed at accelerating national procurement processes and efforts to reform acquisition cycles, testing protocols and certification frameworks, ensuring that military innovation keeps pace with the threat environment;
6. Deplores the lack of coordinated capability planning and spending on defence products across the Union, which has resulted in divergent rules and eligibility criteria, creating legal uncertainty and often leading Member States to prioritise bilateral cooperation with non-EU countries rather than seeking cooperation with other Member States as a priority; deplores the fact that national priorities frequently take precedence over cooperation within the Union due to insufficient incentive-based coordination;
32. Takes note of the defence-related recommendations presented by former Italian Prime Minister Enrico Letta in 2024 in his report entitled ‘Much More Than a Market'; notes that tax obstacles and different procedures on value added tax in collaborative procurement programmes hamper the achievement of the objectives of Defence Readiness 2030, the ramping up of defence industries and the expansion of joint programmes; calls on the Commission to follow up on the Letta report and increase efforts to reduce tax obstacles;
Amendment 12
33. Calls on the Member States to promote careers in defence technology to young professionals, including through awareness campaigns about the sector’s contribution to Europe’s security and technological innovation; encourages the establishment of public-private partnerships between defence companies, educational institutions and governments to create talent pipelines; urges the Member States and the Commission to propose, in dialogue with social partners, including unions, sector-specific skills strategies such as training programmes and opportunities for life-long learning to fill current and future skill gaps in the defence industry; suggests, to that effect, that the Union of Skills agenda explicitly include the defence sector, facilitating the mobility of skilled workers across Member States to where they are most needed;
Motion for a resolution
34. Calls on the Commission to further quantify the potential financial and operational benefits of a single market for defence, including efficiency gains and an increase in collective military capability, through an independent impact assessment; calls for the creation of a single contact point where stakeholders can report obstacles, gather evidence and monitor compliance by the Member States;
Paragraph 7
35. Welcomes the European Council conclusions of October 2025 calling for an annual report on EU defence industrial readiness, and calls for this to be complemented by a ‘defence single market scoreboard’, published by the Commission in cooperation with the EDA; stresses that this scoreboard should track indicators such as the share of defence procurement conducted jointly or through open, EU-wide competition, levels of cross-border industrial cooperation, SME participation rates and reductions in system duplication; underlines that it should also capture the socio-economic benefits of EU defence programmes across the Member States and regions, including job creation and industrial development, in order to guide policy refinement and reinforce public trust;
Motion for a resolution
36. Firmly believes that, in order to guarantee democratic legitimacy and the transparency of EU defence policies in times of hybrid warfare and disinformation campaigns, Parliament must play a central role in the planning, oversight and scrutiny of those policies; underlines that transparency and accountability must be ensured; calls on the Commission, the Council, the Member States and the EDA to ensure secure channels for exchange of classified and confidential information with Parliament, the defence industry and national authorities;
Amendment
°
7. Believes that the current EU legislative frameworks do not provide conditions for procurement of goods with fast innovation cycles, such as in the area of drone development; expresses concern that the single market for defence is still undermined by the insufficiently harmonised application of its rules by the Member States and by disproportionate use of the exemption provided for under Article 346 TFEU, which hampers the push towards joint EU defence procurement; highlights the need for dedicated support for small and medium-sized enterprises and small mid-caps to facilitate their involvement in the defence industry supply chain, with a view to increasing innovation while building industrial redundancies that increase the Union’s resilience and security of supply;
° °
7. Believes that the current EU legislative frameworks do not provide conditions for procurement of goods with fast innovation cycles, such as in the area of drone development; expresses concern that the single market for defence is still undermined by the insufficiently harmonised application of its rules by the Member States and by disproportionate use of the exemption provided for under Article 346 TFEU, which hampers the push towards joint EU defence procurement and funding eligibility rules, and the application of competition and State aid rules to the EDTIB; stresses that Article 346 TFEU constitutes an essential safeguard for the protection of national security interests but that its application must remain guided by proportionality; highlights the need to strategically align European defence investment, from research to deployment, including dedicated support for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and small mid-caps to facilitate their involvement in the defence industry supply chain, with a view to increasing innovation while building a more integrated industrial ecosystem that increases the Union’s resilience and security of supply; stresses that SMEs and mid-caps are a core component of the EDTIB; calls on the Commission and the European Investment Bank (EIB) to simplify access to finance, including through the EIB’s dedicated investment instruments, in order to facilitate better access for start-ups and smaller suppliers, thereby strengthening supply-chain resilience and innovation;
37. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission.
Amendment 13
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Motion for a resolution
Amendment
8 a. Notes that despite recent efforts to improve financing conditions for the EDTIB, access to finance has become a critical challenge for Europe’s defence industry and that companies, in particular SMEs, experience significant barriers to obtaining funding including because of a strict interpretation, by investors, of the EU sustainable finance framework and of environmental, social and governance criteria; notes that many investors treat conventional defence activities as incompatible with sustainability objectives, generating uncertainty and limiting access to capital; highlights that such perceptions within the financial services sector, continue to impede access to capital for defence companies, especially SMEs; is concerned that, according to the Draghi report, the EU suffers from insufficient defence spending, and SMEs and mid-caps face financing gaps of around EUR 2 billion annually, while a disproportionate share of private equity and venture capital flows to North American defence companies;
Amendment 14
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Motion for a resolution
Amendment
8 b. Welcomes the Commission notice on the application of the sustainable finance framework and the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive to the defence sector, clarifying that the EU sustainable finance framework is compatible with investing in the defence sector, and enabling sustainable funds to invest in defence-related undertakings across all industries; highlights that this framework should not impose unjustified limitations on the defence sector; calls on the Commission to further improve communication and provide clearer guidance under the EU sustainable finance framework to help financial institutions assess defence-related projects objectively; calls on the Commission to publicly reaffirm and codify that the EU’s taxonomy for sustainable activities permits investment in defence activities;
Amendment 15
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Motion for a resolution
Amendment
8 c. Notes that cross-border defence funding and oversight in the EU continue to face fragmentation, frequent recourse to national security exemptions and limited competitive collaboration, creating financial and competition-related risks; notes that gaps in reporting, as evidenced by the European Defence Agency’s report entitled ‘Defence Data 2024-2025’1a, hinder the tracking of collaborative funding and the assessment of progress towards a more integrated internal market; notes the risks associated with multinational funding arrangements;
_________________
1a European Defence Agency, Defence Data 2024-2025, 2 September 2025.
Amendment 16
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Motion for a resolution
Amendment
9. Calls on the Council and the Commission to equip EU defence programmes with adequate funding under the next multiannual financial framework to effectively incentivise the Member States to enter into joint capability development and procurement agreements and their defence industries to engage in closer cross-border cooperation; highlights the potential of new frameworks, such as the European Defence Projects of Common Interest and Structures for European Armament Programmes, to deliver on those objectives with the assistance of adequate funding;
9. Calls on the Council and the Commission to equip EU defence programmes with adequate funding under the next multiannual financial framework to address the urgent need for joint investment in defence capacities and effectively incentivise the Member States to enter into joint capability development and procurement agreements and their defence industries to engage in closer cross-border cooperation; warns that, without integrated planning, stable long-term financing and effective implementation under the next multiannual financial framework, fragmentation will persist and limit both the EU’s industrial resilience and its strategic autonomy; highlights the potential of new frameworks, such as the European Defence Projects of Common Interest and Structures for European Armament Programmes, to deliver on those objectives with the assistance of adequate funding;
Amendment 17
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Motion for a resolution
Amendment
9 a. Encourages the Commission, the Member States and the European Defence Agency to develop coordinated frameworks to support and facilitate intergovernmental cooperation structures as pragmatic steps towards more integrated and less fragmented European defence cooperation; notes that existing long-standing partnerships demonstrate the economic and operational benefits of shared capability development; underlines that supporting such bottom-up cooperation would strengthen industrial interoperability, reduce duplication and contribute to a more effective internal market for defence;
Amendment 18
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Motion for a resolution
Amendment
10 a. Underlines the importance of increasing defence expenditure in line with international commitments; welcomes, in this context, frameworks to encourage joint investment in defence capabilities at EU level, as facilitated by the SAFE instrument; recalls that the flexibility of budget lines must not compromise long-term predictability for Member States and industry; stresses that funding instruments should prioritise interoperability, joint procurement, and integrated capability planning to maximise efficiency;
Amendment 19
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)
Motion for a resolution
Amendment
10 b. Calls for greater coherence and transparency across funding instruments to reduce duplication, increase investor confidence, improve the efficiency of public spending and enhance Europe’s capacity to scale up critical technologies and dual-use infrastructure; calls for improved transparency, harmonised risk-management standards and strengthened cross-border oversight to ensure that internal market principles are upheld in EU defence funding; calls on the Commission to simplify award procedures and eligibility criteria and to clearly define overlaps between existing funding programmes;
Amendment 20
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 c (new)
Motion for a resolution
Amendment
10 c. Calls for the EU institutions to treat the EDTIB as a strategic industrial and economic sector rather than a fragmented policy area, by ensuring, in particular, that financial regulation, including the Capital Requirements Regulation1a and the European Central Bank’s (ECB) guidance on leveraged transactions, competition policy, and capital market rules, and the EIB’s strategic priorities enable scale-up, protect strategic assets and strengthen Europe’s fiscal resilience as well as its strategic and industrial autonomy;
_________________
1a OJ L 176, 27.6.2013, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2013/575/oj.
Amendment 21
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 d (new)
Motion for a resolution
Amendment
10 d. Underlines that, in the application of EU competition and State aid rules, the Commission must prioritise the unity and integrity of the single market to avoid distortions of competition and to safeguard the level playing field and cohesion between the Member States, paying particular attention to smaller Member States whose fiscal capacities to support their national defence industries are comparatively more limited; stresses that the extensive use of national subsidies to support defence investment risks fragmenting the single market and undermining the level playing field for companies, especially SMEs, across the EU; takes note of the limited application of the national escape clause under the Stability and Growth Pact for defence-related expenditure; recalls the ECB findings that full utilisation of the national escape clause would worsen debt dynamics, particularly for high debt-to-GDP countries, effectively shifting significant fiscal adjustment from the first planning period to the second period starting in 2029 and risking a deterioration in market conditions;
Amendment 22
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Motion for a resolution
Amendment
11. Calls on Member States to apply a ‘buy European’ approach, which prioritises the common procurement and increased production of defence products from the European Defence Technological and Industrial Base (EDTIB), Ukraine, European Economic Area/European Free Trade Association (EEA/EFTA) countries and, as a close second layer, third countries with which the Union has signed a Security and Defence Partnership, as it would ensure the EDTIB a predictable order volume, drive up private investment in R&D for defence products, and help the EDTIB to deliver innovative defence products in sufficient volumes;
11. Calls on Member States to apply a ‘buy European’ approach, which prioritises the common procurement and increased production of defence products from the EDTIB, Ukraine, European Economic Area/European Free Trade Association countries and, as a close second layer, third countries with which the Union has signed a Security and Defence Partnership while ensuring this does not threaten the national security of any Member State, as it would ensure the EDTIB a predictable order volume, drive up private investment in research and development for defence products, and help the EDTIB to deliver innovative defence products in sufficient volumes; underlines that practices such as unjustified offset requirements, abnormally low tenders facilitated by illegal State aid, and unequal access to collaborative procurement projects risk distorting competition and weakening market access; calls on the Commission to present a framework ensuring that a ‘buy European’ approach remains compatible with the single market and does not result in unnecessary administrative barriers; emphasises that the ‘buy European’ approach must not disadvantage SMEs and innovative mid-caps; stresses that procurement structuring should allow disaggregation, modular participation and partial work packages to avoid market concentration and to better enable SMEs to participate in supply chains on fair and equal terms;
Amendment 23
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Motion for a resolution
Amendment
11 a. Emphasises that a more integrated savings and investment union could help mobilise private capital and improve access to financing;
Amendment 24
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Motion for a resolution
Amendment
13. Believes that the implementation of Directive 2009/81/EC on defence and sensitive security procurement needs to be significantly improved and calls on the Commission to propose an ambitious revision; calls on the Commission to issue a recommendation for an interpretation of Article 346 TFEU in line with the current reality of an interdependent security architecture in the EU; calls on Member States to make use of different contract forms that stipulate for innovation, competition and private capital investments;
13. Believes that the implementation of Directive 2009/81/EC on defence and sensitive security procurement needs to be further improved to ensure greater efficiency, transparency and cooperation, while preserving the prerogatives of Member States; calls on the Commission to propose an ambitious revision focusing on legal clarity, simplification and reduction of administrative burdens that currently deter cross-border participation and slow down procurement cycles; calls on the Commission to issue a clear recommendation on the application and limits of Article 346 TFEU, including in relation to merger control, and competition and State aid rules in the defence sector, reflecting the current reality of an interdependent security architecture in the EU, enabling adequate information sharing between Member States where appropriate, while continuing to protect the strictly defined essential interests of national security, and clarifying that only measures strictly necessary for essential security interests are covered by Article 346(1)(b) TFEU and that such measures must not adversely affect the conditions of competition in the single market; calls on Member States to make use of different contract forms that stipulate for innovation, competition and private capital investments; stresses that a balanced approach, based on mutual trust and the recognition of the industrial and strategic specificities of each Member State, is the best way to encourage innovation, cooperation, and private investment in the EDTIB;
Amendment 25
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Motion for a resolution
Amendment
13 a. Calls on the Commission to clarify the application of sustainability rules to conventional defence activities, in line with streamlined procedures proposed under the Defence Readiness Omnibus; underlines the need for EU financial instruments, including a broad and flexible InvestEU approach and clear guidance under the sustainable finance framework, to remove unintended barriers to capital while maintaining compliance with international arms restrictions; emphasises that such measures would strengthen intra-EU industrial capacity, improve access to finance for SMEs, promote diversification across the Member States and regions, and ensure fair and equal participation throughout the internal market;
Amendment 26
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Motion for a resolution
Amendment
14. Underlines the need to simplify and abolish hurdles related to intra-EU transfers, including mutual recognition of criteria and certification and a simplification of prior authorisation requests; calls on the Commission to urgently present proposals to further harmonise intra-EU transfers of defence products, to ensure simplification for the circulation of such products inside the Union, in particular eliminating authorisation requirements for components that are already integrated or are to be integrated into a defence product and cannot be transferred or exported as such; further calls on Member States to work towards that same goal; calls on the EU Member States to agree on new common export control rules for arms and defence goods;
14. Underlines the need to simplify and abolish hurdles related to intra-EU transfers and cross-border participation in defence programmes, including mutual recognition of criteria, transparent certification and a simplification of prior authorisation requests; calls on the Commission to urgently present proposals to further harmonise intra-EU transfers of defence products, to ensure simplification for the circulation of such products inside the Union, in particular facilitating interoperability of standards and eliminating authorisation requirements for components that are already integrated or are to be integrated into a defence product and cannot be transferred or exported as such; further calls on Member States to work towards that same goal; calls on the EU Member States, where appropriate, to develop common rules for the control of arms and defence equipment exports, without prejudice to the prerogatives of each Member State;
Amendment 27
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Motion for a resolution
Amendment
14 a. Calls for greater coherence and simplification of administrative and professional rules to facilitate the cross-border mobility of technical and specialist defence personnel;
Amendment 28
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Motion for a resolution
Amendment
15. Underlines the need for the EU and NATO to sign a cooperation agreement on capability planning and development to ensure coherent and complementary planning and interoperable defence capabilities; calls on the Commission to prepare a legislative proposal that would allow for the use of legally binding instruments to implement and enforce NATO standards for equipment, ammunition and stocks, once such an agreement is concluded, as it would improve interoperability and set a framework for joint European testing and certification of defence equipment instead of having separate national validation for each defence product;
15. Underlines the need for the EU and NATO to sign a cooperation agreement on capability planning and development to ensure coherent and complementary planning and interoperable defence capabilities;
Amendment 29
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Motion for a resolution
Amendment
16. Stresses the need to develop a more proactive role for the EU in sustaining investment in dual-use technologies and products, in particular when they are part of the supply chains of defence products, as a means of enhancing the EU’s security of supply and resilience against hybrid and emerging threats; advocates the promotion of civilian commercialisation of these technologies as a way to expand market opportunities and strengthen the EDTIB, fostering synergies between military and civilian development; calls on the Commission and Member States to create incentives to localise supply chains in the Union of the most critical inputs for defence products;
16. Stresses the need to develop a more proactive role for the EU in sustaining investment, including in research, in dual-use technologies and products, in particular when they are part of the supply chains of defence products, as a means of enhancing the EU’s security of supply and resilience against hybrid and emerging threats; advocates the promotion of civilian commercialisation of these technologies as a way to expand market opportunities and strengthen the EDTIB, fostering synergies between military and civilian development; calls on the Commission and Member States to create incentives to localise supply chains in the Union of the most critical inputs for defence products; calls on the Commission to strictly monitor spillover effects of the application of Article 346 TFEU in dual-use and civilian markets, and to consider how improved coordination through EU funding instruments could help prevent market distortion, maintain fair competition and the integrity of the internal market, and foster an integrated and resilient EDTIB;
Amendment 30
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Motion for a resolution
Amendment
17. Firmly believes that in order to guarantee democratic legitimacy and the transparency of EU defence policies in times of hybrid warfare and Russian disinformation campaigns, it is critical that Parliament play a central role in the planning, oversight and scrutiny of this process;
17. Firmly believes that in order to guarantee democratic legitimacy and the transparency of EU defence policies in times of hybrid warfare and Russian disinformation campaigns, it is critical that Parliament play a central role in the planning, oversight and scrutiny of this process, including in ensuring that defence market integration enhances efficiency and economic competitiveness;
ANNEX: DECLARATION OF INPUT
ENTITIES OR PERSONS FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR HAS RECEIVED INPUT
The rapporteur declares under his exclusive responsibility that he did not include in his opinion input from interest representatives falling within the scope of the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register1, or from representatives of public authorities of third countries, including their diplomatic missions and embassies, to be listed in this Annex pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure.
INFORMATION ON ADOPTION IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION
Date adopted
3.12.2025
Result of final vote
+ : 41
- : 7
0 : 3
Members present for the final vote
Rasmus Andresen, Stefan Berger, Damian Boeselager, Gilles Boyer, Giovanni Crosetto, Siegbert Frank Droese, Engin Eroglu, Marco Falcone, Markus Ferber, Jonás Fernández, Claire Fita, Dirk Gotink, Enikő Győri, Michalis Hadjipantela, Eero Heinäluoma, Tomáš Kubín, Aurore Lalucq, Rada Laykova, Costas Mavrides, Fernando Navarrete Rojas, Denis Nesci, Luděk Niedermayer, Ľudovít Ódor, Gaetano Pedulla', Lídia Pereira, Pierre Pimpie, Friedrich Pürner, Paulius Saudargas, Pasquale Tridico, Lara Wolters, Stéphanie Yon-Courtin
Substitutes present for the final vote
Marc Botenga, Regina Doherty, Hanna Gronkiewicz-Waltz, Fernand Kartheiser, Janusz Lewandowski, Morten Løkkegaard, Danuše Nerudová, Andreas Schwab, Mariateresa Vivaldini
Members under Rule 216(7) present for the final vote
Vivien Costanzo, Margarita de la Pisa Carrión, Chiara Gemma, Isilda Gomes, Giorgio Gori, Elisabeth Grossmann, Ondřej Knotek, Lara Magoni, Rasmus Nordqvist, Michele Picaro, Thomas Waitz
FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL BY THE COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION
41
+
ECR
Crosetto Giovanni, Gemma Chiara, Magoni Lara, Nesci Denis, Picaro Michele, Vivaldini Mariateresa
PPE
Berger Stefan, Doherty Regina, Falcone Marco, Ferber Markus, Gotink Dirk, Gronkiewicz-Waltz Hanna, Lewandowski Janusz, Navarrete Rojas Fernando, Nerudová Danuse, Niedermayer Ludek, Pereira Lídia, Saudargas Paulius, Schwab Andreas
PfE
Knotek Ondrej, Kubín Tomás, Pimpie Pierre
Renew
Boyer Gilles, Eroglu Engin, Løkkegaard Morten, Ódor Ludovít, Yon-Courtin Stéphanie
S&D
Costanzo Vivien, Fernández Jonás, Fita Claire, Gomes Isilda, Gori Giorgio, Grossmann Elisabeth, Heinäluoma Eero, Lalucq Aurore, Mavrides Costas, Wolters Lara
Verts/ALE
Andresen Rasmus, Boeselager Damian, Nordqvist Rasmus, Waitz Thomas
7
-
ESN
Droese Siegbert Frank, Laykova Rada
NI
Pürner Friedrich
PfE
Gyori Eniko
The Left
Botenga Marc, Pedulla' Gaetano, Tridico Pasquale
3
0
NI
Kartheiser Fernand
PPE
Hadjipantela Michalis
PfE
de la Pisa Carrión Margarita
Key:
+ : in favour
- : against
0 : abstentions