Taxpayers' money would be better spent if Member States developed and used their defence capabilities in collaboration with each other, argues Ana Gomes.

EU-wide defence spending: creating transparency

https://api.multimedia.europarl.europa.eu/documents/20125/12040236/n003-0350-en.srt

but does the threat of terrorism  give more impetus

for Europe to increase  its security and defence capabilities?

A report making its way through Parliament

calls on EU countries  to invest heavily in military tech

so that the bloc can  better respond to international crises.

EPTV met its author, Portuguese Socialist  MEP Ana Gomes, to find out more.

Now when Member States are  scaling back their military capabilities

and already contribute 190 billion euros  to an EU defence and security budget,

what are we talking about in this report?

You're calling for more research and  development, more equipment, technology.

Huge sums of taxpayers' money are spent  often in a totally untransparent way,

with governments invoking national  sovereignty, to not provide accountability.

And they spend it on equipment  that is really not necessary.

For instance, I don't think  nuclear equipment serves any purpose,

because nuclear equipment doesn't deter  anyone at this time. It's not a deterrent.

We know we need for instance  strategic airlifting, transportation.

We know we need equipment  to fight cyber warfare.

We know we need all sorts of equipment  for maritime security

that require a lot of research  and development.

But do we really need an EU defence  equipment market? You advocate that.

If you don't have  a transparent European market,

I am for a joint endeavour. Look at  what is happening in the Mediterranean.

Why don't we have a CSDP mission,  a Common Security and Defence mission

involving navies, coastal guards, air forces,

to save lives and fight the traffickers  in the Mediterranean?

Some people would say that on the back of  the threat of terrorism - and now migration -

the EU is arming itself  and trying to make itself a fortress.

Just the opposite. I'm telling you  I want a military joint mission

to save lives in the Mediterranean, first,  and then to fight the traffickers.

It's actually fighting  the notion of a European fortress -

it's the Europe that lives up to its values,

namely humanitarian  and human rights values.

But wouldn't taxpayers want to think about  disarmament rather than armament?

For instance, in this report  we are calling for

monitoring of the implementation of the EU  states' common position on arms exports.

We want to know. We have rules,  for instance about not exporting arms

And Member States have been totally...  -Would that include Ukraine?

Ukraine and many other countries  that are involved in wars.

There are political decisions  to be made on that.

And again, there is total untransparency.

You talk about fictions and  you've talked about transparency.

There's an idea that has been  bandied around - the idea of an EU army.

I'm a federalist and I would want  to see a European army,

And I don't think it is appropriate  to talk about it at the moment.

Those waving the idea of  a European army around

are those who don't want to  and normally don't do anything

for necessary European synergies  in security and defence.

Our governments are still spending  a lot of money in security and defence.

I'd rather have them spend it  with transparency,

Because I'm persuaded that  if we spend together, in synergy,

Ms Gomes, thank you so much  for joining us on EuroparlTV.