Ms Barbara Nolan:

I thank Deputy Haughey very much for those questions. On the whole Middle East situation, I believe there has been a great deal of noise and voices on this issue, not only in Europe but also here, and this is reflecting the different nuances, in my case, in the 27 EU member states. There are very different views about this issue. However, what is important is to recall that on 15 October, EU leaders in the European Council adopted a statement setting out the EU's Common Position on this matter. That statement basically strongly condemned Hamas terrorist attacks; emphasised Israel's right to defend itself in line with humanitarian and international law; reiterated the importance of ensuring the protection of all civilians at all times in line with international humanitarian law; called on Hamas to immediately release all hostages without any precondition; reiterated the importance of the provision of urgent humanitarian aid and support for civilians in need in Gaza; stressed the importance of preventing regional escalation; and expressed commitment to a lasting sustainable peace based upon a two-state solution. It also underlined the need to engage broadly with the legitimate Palestinian authorities as well as regional and international partners who could have a positive role to play in preventing further escalation. That is the EU position.

I remind everybody that tomorrow another European Council is starting and we are expecting to see a new statement coming out from the Heads of State and Government. We will wait to see, as the situation has evolved, what comes out there. Just to recall, this is the EU position, regardless of all of the other voices out there.

On the migration pact, as the committee members will know, there are very different attitudes and there are front-line states which are probably the most exposed to arrivals from North Africa and from other parts of the world. There are other member states that have a completely different experience, shall we say. We are making progress on it but there are obviously still some issues where we have to reach a situation where everyone agrees that if a country is not going to take a fair share of migrants, for example, that it then pays towards helping to support them. Not everyone agrees with that. In September of this year, the European Parliament and the five rotating Presidencies of the Council signed a Joint Declaration, a roadmap, with a timeline for the adoption of the proposals with a view to concluding negotiations by February 2024. We are at the inter-institutional stage and the aim is to conclude before this Commission finishes its mandate. It is moving, very slowly, but it is moving forward and it is critical to get a deal on this because we cannot continue with the current situation where we have a vacuum with regard to what happens.

I did not answer Deputy Harkin's question so I will answer it now. On electric vehicles and China, the whole approach now is to de-risk our relationship with China but not to disengage. We need China and China needs us. It is a big trading partner and we are big trading partners. It is a case of proceeding with caution.

We have launched an anti-subsidy investigation to determine how Chinese vehicles can be sold much more cheaply in the European market than the ones made here. We are looking into these matters. Where we find risks of unfair trade, we will pursue them. The idea is to continue engaging with China, but perhaps with more open eyes than was the case before.

Turning to enlargement, as the committee knows, countries are queuing up to join the EU. We are in a situation now where we must look at how well prepared we are to take in new countries, especially in the case of a big enlargement, without reforming ourselves and making our own machine leaner. This is where we are at. There will be an attempt to look at this context. Looking at the calendar, EU leaders at the December meeting of the European Council will discuss the recommendations of the European Commission on the enlargement package presented in November. This will probably deal primarily with Ukraine, Moldova and, possibly, Georgia. Let us recall that there are eight candidate countries now. Georgia and Kosovo are potential candidates.

I mentioned the rule-of-law scrutiny for the most advanced candidates. A major screening process is required of the candidate countries to get to the stage where we put forward a proposal for enlargement. They must meet many different chapters in terms of how they are adapting to EU policy and legislation. It is a major process, with many milestones to be achieved. In 2024, we are promising to forward a communication on pre-enlargement reforms and policy reviews to examine the challenges we expect to have in an enlarged Union, including in different policy areas. I already mentioned agriculture as one such area.

On treaty change, the Commission is not in the lead on this matter. It gives its opinion on a consultation by the European Council. The Heads of State and Government are the ones who take the lead on this issue, and then we give an opinion. The Commission, though, is not the driver of this treaty change process, just to recall the formal process.