Aura Salla
Member of the European Parliament · PPE · FI
“Madam President, the debate over EU access to advanced AI is part of a deeper problem: our systemic dependence on non-EU hardware and software. There is clearly a lot of product hype in AI right now, but one thing should be clear to us: European tech sovereignty cannot only be a long-term aspiration – it needs clear action now.”
“It must deliver at least three concrete actions: first, new procurement rules that prioritise European sovereign tech solutions; second, easing smartly our regulatory burden for scaling critical technologies; third, a focus on concrete actions, on harmonisation of our single market and, of course, on our capital markets union.”
“Madam President, the Digital Networks Act has been debated, often with conflicting expectations. I am happy to see that the Commission has chosen a pragmatic approach, leaving fair share and dividing merger control proposals out. On spectrum, the direction is right.”
“I do not think the Space Act is a wise choice for Europe, and this framework helps us to push European alternatives. Reinforcing the single market through passporting is welcome, but it can also add new obligations and this must be avoided. Finally, I remain sceptical about the conciliation mechanism. I do not think this is needed.”
“Madam President, I fully support the proposal we saw today on the Cybersecurity Act, aiming to simplify our overlapping and complex cybersecurity regulation and focusing on reducing dangerous dependencies on high-risk vendors coming outside of Europe.”
“Parliament must keep this proposal strong, as the Council will try to weaken it, because some countries still want the cheapest options and avoid changes. This is exactly what happened with the 5G toolbox and why it failed in the first place.”
The complete record
Every one of 20 lines we hold for Aura Salla, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account.
“It must deliver at least three concrete actions: first, new procurement rules that prioritise European sovereign tech solutions; second, easing smartly our regulatory burden for scaling critical technologies; third, a focus on concrete actions, on harmonisation of our single market and, of course, on our capital markets union. Let's stop reacting in panic and only acting when a crisis hits us, and focus on concrete actions – spelling out the fact that we need to put our European companies first, and make sure that we only do business with US tech companies based on reciprocity, not on dangerous dependencies. 2-0018-0000”
“Madam President, the debate over EU access to advanced AI is part of a deeper problem: our systemic dependence on non-EU hardware and software. There is clearly a lot of product hype in AI right now, but one thing should be clear to us: European tech sovereignty cannot only be a long-term aspiration – it needs clear action now. Sovereignty does not mean isolation. We must engage with like-minded international partners to make a genuine global consensus on advanced AI. We clearly need an alliance of values to start with, yet we cannot lead globally if we bring nothing to the table. Building our own capabilities is a matter of survival and resilience, as well as security and competitiveness. This House has high expectations on the tech sovereignty package coming later this month, as well as the public procurement initiative coming in July.”
“I do not think the Space Act is a wise choice for Europe, and this framework helps us to push European alternatives. Reinforcing the single market through passporting is welcome, but it can also add new obligations and this must be avoided. Finally, I remain sceptical about the conciliation mechanism. I do not think this is needed. We should address the US-platform dependencies through possible tariffs, procurement, cybersecurity rules and forthcoming cloud legislation. As it is an economic, security and sovereignty issue, first and foremost. 3-0295-0000”
“Madam President, the Digital Networks Act has been debated, often with conflicting expectations. I am happy to see that the Commission has chosen a pragmatic approach, leaving fair share and dividing merger control proposals out. On spectrum, the direction is right. Poorly designed auctions, short licence durations and fragmented national approaches have drained capital that should be invested in secure, high-quality networks. By improving predictability, we can unlock investments for 5G and future 6G. The same applies to satellites. EU-level authorisation is strategically important when European services are to scale, and we want to reduce dependencies. Combined with the new Cybersecurity Act on high-risk vendors, this strengthens Europe's security and resilience.”
“Parliament must keep this proposal strong, as the Council will try to weaken it, because some countries still want the cheapest options and avoid changes. This is exactly what happened with the 5G toolbox and why it failed in the first place. We must simply start using European tech when it comes to our critical infrastructure, cybersecurity vendors, cloud services and software solutions. And yes, finding European alternatives and making server interoperability can be more expensive and challenging in the short term, but there will not be long-term European security if we don't start clearly defining and choosing European tech today. 2-0296-0000”
“Madam President, I fully support the proposal we saw today on the Cybersecurity Act, aiming to simplify our overlapping and complex cybersecurity regulation and focusing on reducing dangerous dependencies on high-risk vendors coming outside of Europe. The risk is obvious with China, their state power and big tech companies are interlinked. Huawei and TikTok are frankly dangerous. China is helping Putin in Ukraine. Right now, we also see a risk coming from our long-term ally threatening a sovereign European country, and we must be prepared to act if necessary. Let's keep in mind that the US tech companies can use their kill switch at any time in Europe. The rules for high-risk vendors in our most strategic sectors must be clear and enforceable, not just guidance or best practices.”
“If we want real tech sovereignty, we must finally put our companies first by creating an enabling market, putting European solutions first in public procurement, and finding ways to push American and Chinese companies into doing equal trade with us, not misusing our market. 2-0499-0000 Catch-the-eye procedure 2-0500-0000”
“Mr President, Europe has the talent to lead in AI and deep tech, but we don't have the market. The digital omnibus is a first test of whether Europe can finally become a place where our companies can scale and train their AI models, not just be regulated. Stopping the clock on the AI Act was welcomed by everyone seeking clarity on rules. Simplifying procedures, decreasing overlapping regulations, and fixing cookie rules can strengthen protection by making obligations clearer and enforcement more consistent. And no, this is not about being soft on big tech. It is about giving our companies a level playing field. At the same time, we must find ways to set clear conditions when our data is taken and commercialised by third country companies and have a proper digital tax for them using our market.”
“We need proper digital taxation for third-country companies, harmonise the EU market for real this time, and put our own companies first when choosing critical technology. 1-0126-0000 IN THE CHAIR: VICTOR NEGRESCU Vice-President 1-0127-0000”
“Mr President, today, only 39 % of Europeans trust the media. When traditional newsrooms are starved of revenue, a vacuum opens for disinformation, propaganda and anti-democratic narratives. Geopolitics is tough for Europe right now; caught between Kremlin propaganda and an unpredictable transatlantic partner. We must be able to sustain quality, independent journalism in Europe and this will not happen with small fines, public subsidies or by building public entities. It needs business models that work in the digital age. We must enable our companies to have a fair, competitive environment to realistically push back on big American and Chinese companies. We do not get European alternatives without easing up on regulation for European business. These fines for Google and others are just the cost of doing business for them.”
“Yes, you need to make an effort to choose European cloud software and cyber where we can do that. Let us choose Scaleway, EZ and OnlyOffice. We must hold the Commission accountable that they will not propose any new regulation and stop thinking 'deregulation' is a bad word – it is a necessity in the name of European sovereignty. 3-0339-0000”
“Madam President, the European Commission's AI strategy launched today is yet again repeating the same problems without offering any solutions. It focuses on building apps for farmers, handing public money, and it speaks about simplification and sovereignty but at the same time will propose new regulations on digital fairness. Real digital sovereignty means having the capacity to scale and option to choose European critical technology. For this, our companies need to be able to take a risk. Now, we have a maze of regulation, we do not have a harmonised market and we are lacking risk capital. We must address the real problems we are facing with Chinese and US companies, and stop handing data to them for free. We must put European companies first in our public procurement.”
“Let me be very clear: it will be no to scanners for our messaging services, no to breaking encryption and no to chat control. That is how we protect our children: credibility, open internet and security. 1-0197-0000”
“Mr President, this year's Internet Governance Forum will test Europe's credibility. We say we defend open internet, while Russia and China push the opposite: state control and surveillance by design. And yet, the Danish Presidency and even our Commissioners are supporting this horrific CSAM proposal that points Europe in the same direction. Introducing scanning to our private messaging services, using by default 'the best possible technology', is not saving our children from pornography. The opposite: this is a gift for criminals and authoritarian leaders. There are no backdoors on encrypted services just for 'good people'. The door is open or closed for everyone. And no, you cannot write a law saying 'when technology is ready'. One plus one will never be three.”
“Mr President, the affordable energy action plan has a market-based approach, but execution is the key. We must accelerate investment, cut red tape and ensure that competition – not subsidies – drives our transition. Europe cannot afford to slip into state-driven energy markets. Overreliance on government planning will drive investment elsewhere and hidden subsidies would distort price signals. As the Nordic model shows, a market-based, diverse and clean energy mix lowers energy costs. And yes, nuclear power is one of the key elements in this mix. Europe can do the same: scale renewables, strengthen our grids and develop long-term contract models. We must invest in grids. But this is not a cost; it is a down payment on lower energy bills, cheaper transport and industrial competitiveness.”
“Madam President, the Clean Industrial Deal is not only about sustainability goals; it is about Europe's security and competitiveness. It's about resilience. A strong and sustainable industrial base means scaling up our economy and strengthening our defence industry. Without this, we keep being dependent on others. Let's be clear: we needed to get rid of Russian fossil fuels yesterday. An industry that can't be produced at home can't defend the home. Europe's supply chains for critical raw materials must be secured. We must utilise our key resources better and expand circularity. When it comes to regulation, we must finally build the single European energy market, supported by a free market economy, and ensure that our companies can keep up in the global competition. Weak industry means weak defence.”
“However, we should also not be naive and must consider how prepared the EU is for escalating trade conflicts. I am worried about the EU's Chips Act in practice. What we need is a long-term vision for the EU's chip sector and less national fragmentation, excellence-based approach to funding and investment, right infrastructure and skilled workforce, and put effort into green manufacturing and a plan that works in practice for quantum chip production. Because no matter who is sitting in the White House now or in the future, we need to put Europe's security and competitiveness first. 2-0462-0000”
“Madam President, the only winner from US export restrictions towards its allies is China. Restricting the supply of AI chips to Europe can stifle innovation we need. Of course, if the restrictions are directly towards only some EU countries, moving chips around the EU is not a problem for us. We Europeans will stick together. Nevertheless, we need short-term and long-term solutions. Let's also keep in mind that this is a two-way street. The US needs our manufacturing and the EU remains an important trade partner even to Trump. Our transatlantic partnership remains vital to navigating the geopolitics of today. So let's make a deal that works on both sides of the Atlantic. We should retain and strengthen the TTC, invest jointly in R&D, diversify our supply chains and secure better services and a healthier transatlantic tech ecosystem.”
“In the long run, we need a unified regulatory framework for cable protection, reduced reliance on Chinese companies, develop advanced technologies for cable protection, monitoring and repair, and strengthen cooperation among Member States, NATO and our global allies. 2-0374-0000”
“Mr President, let's face it. Russia is testing us in the Baltic Sea. Europe needs short-term and long-term actions to protect our critical infrastructure. We need more effective sanctions against intentional sabotage, actors that flag and host fleet vessels, and investigations to identify and sanction also shadow vessels' ultimate beneficial owners. The EU and NATO should utilise AI-driven tools to detect suspicious activities near undersea infrastructure and have a strong enough presence in the Baltic Sea. Baltic Sea Member States should also have the right to inspect the cargo and documentation of vessels in their waters to discover the cargo's origin and destinations.”