In Parliament, the Government was expected to answer questions about Ukraine’s path towards the European Union. Yet the debate quickly showed a broader picture: European integration is now measured not only by negotiations in Brussels, but also by how the state responds to questions about the military, mobilisation, utility bills, internally displaced persons, frontline businesses, healthcare, education and public safety.
During a plenary sitting of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, MPs held a Government Question Hour. Formally, the topic was the implementation of state policy in the field of European integration and the key tasks in the process of Ukraine’s accession to the European Union.
Before this part of the sitting began, Parliament also completed an important procedural step. Following the registration by the Central Election Commission of Andrii Levus as a Member of Parliament elected in the 2019 early parliamentary elections on the list of the European Solidarity party, he took the oath of office before the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.
The presiding officer then reminded MPs and members of the Cabinet that the Government Question Hour was being held in accordance with the Rules of Procedure of the Verkhovna Rada. It was also stressed that the plenary sitting was taking place in open mode, which meant that participants had to avoid disclosing information that could harm national security, state secrets or other restricted information.
European integration is no longer only a foreign policy issue
The Government Question Hour showed that Ukraine’s path to the European Union goes not only through negotiation clusters, draft laws and government plans. It also goes through the state’s ability to answer urgent domestic questions — from mobilisation and military pay to fair utility bills, support for internally displaced persons, the functioning of the frontline economy, healthcare and education.
Negotiation clusters: a political window for Ukraine
The most substantive part of the European integration discussion concerned the EU negotiation clusters. Deputy Prime Minister for European and Euro-Atlantic Integration of Ukraine Taras Kachka stated that there was an understanding at the level of the European Union regarding unanimity on the opening of clusters.
According to the Government, the issue of opening the first cluster had already been considered several times, and unanimous support had been recorded in each case, including from Hungary. The plan announced in Parliament was to hold the second intergovernmental conference between Ukraine and the European Union and to open the first cluster on 15 June.
This, according to the Government’s logic, should allow the European Union to move immediately to preparing decisions on the opening of the other five clusters. The intention to complete decisions on all six clusters in June-July was described by the Government as realistic and practical.
How Ukraine’s movement towards the EU is structured
|
Political decision Opening negotiation clusters between Ukraine and the European Union. |
Parliamentary work Around 100 draft laws of different scope and complexity are ready for consideration by the Verkhovna Rada. |
Government benchmarks Implementation of reforms, roadmaps and commitments under the Ukraine Facility. |
Practical result Moving from political declarations to daily changes in rules and public services. |
SBI reform: the first cluster and a concrete deadline
Another issue raised during the debate was the reform of the State Bureau of Investigation. The Government confirmed that completing the reform of the SBI is one of the benchmarks within the first negotiation cluster.
It was also stated that the same measure is reflected in the updated Ukraine Plan under the Ukraine Facility, with adoption expected by the end of the fourth quarter of 2026. This means that European integration is entering a concrete calendar: the Government must submit a draft law, Parliament must consider it, and the state must demonstrate a real institutional result to its partners.
National minorities: not a separate Hungarian deal, but a European framework
The issue of national minority policy was also raised in the context of European integration, particularly in connection with public statements about understandings between Kyiv and Budapest. The Government explained that the basis for further steps is Ukraine’s current legislation on the protection of national minorities and the action plan approved by the Ukrainian Government.
Taras Kachka stressed that there is no separate agreement specifically on Hungary. Instead, the issue concerns a broader understanding with the European Union on the further development of national minority policy. Practical issues mentioned included duplicate names in areas where national minorities live compactly, the use of minority symbols during commemorative dates, and several specific questions related to the educational process.
Ukraine is trying to move sensitive bilateral claims into the framework of common European rules. This matters for the accession process, because EU membership negotiations cannot depend only on situational political pressure from one member state.
Military personnel, recruitment centres and mobilisation: the sharpest part of the debate
One of the sharpest parts of the Government Question Hour concerned mobilisation, the work of territorial recruitment centres and the financial support of military personnel. MPs raised complaints about the actions of recruitment centres, demanded inspections, asked about the timing of mobilisation reform and called for higher payments to service members.
The Prime Minister stated that the Ministry of Defence is working on a reform that should include increased additional payments to military personnel and a clearer definition of terms of service. The Government also indicated that reform of territorial recruitment centres should be one of the next steps after the issues of military pay are addressed.
The Government’s logic appears to be the following: first, reform of military pay; then contracts for infantry and assault units; after that, changes to terms of service and systemic reform of recruitment centres. However, the main political question remains speed: society expects not only explanations, but a concrete decision.
|
The army Needs stable reinforcement, clear terms of service and financial motivation. |
Society Expects an end to abuse, transparent procedures and respect for citizens’ rights. |
The state Must preserve defence capability while maintaining public trust. |
Heating bills and municipal utility debts
Utility policy was raised in several questions. MPs spoke about the difficult situation between Naftogaz, local self-government bodies and municipal heating companies. The transcript included estimates of major sectoral debts and arrears related to tariff differences.
Separately, MPs raised the issue of heating bills in Kyiv for services that, according to them, had not been provided to some apartment buildings in January. The Government’s answer was direct: if a service was not provided, bills for that service should not be issued, and specific addresses must be checked.
This issue is important not only as a dispute over utilities. In wartime, a bill for a service that was not provided becomes a question of trust in the state. If the authorities demand discipline from citizens, the state itself must demonstrate fairness, control and the ability to correct mistakes.
IDPs and budgets of occupied territories: funds must work for people
MPs from Luhansk region raised the issue of financing district state administrations in occupied territories, the effectiveness of their work and the possibility of redirecting funds to support the military and internally displaced persons.
The Government acknowledged that the current situation requires a reconsideration of how such bodies function. It was stated that the Ministry for Communities and Territories Development had prepared a concept that it was ready to discuss with MPs.
The issue of housing for displaced persons was also raised. The Government said that remaining budget balances of administrations had already been redirected in the previous year to housing support for IDPs through eVidnovlennia certificates. At the same time, it acknowledged that current funding is not sufficient for everyone waiting in the queue.
IDPs are not a peripheral issue in social policy
Housing, access to services, oversight of budgets of occupied territories and transparent use of funds are all part of the state’s resilience. Ukraine must show that it does not leave people alone with the consequences of Russian aggression.
Frontline business: lending as a condition for community survival
During the Government Question Hour, MPs raised the problem of access to credit for businesses operating in frontline territories. They noted that banks assess risks in such areas as much higher, undervalue assets or refuse to accept them as collateral.
The Prime Minister acknowledged the problem and announced a planned meeting with the heads of financial institutions. The Government’s approach is to define frontline territories, energy and defence-related sectors more clearly as priorities for credit support.
For industrial and frontline regions, this issue has practical meaning. Access to credit is not only support for entrepreneurs. It means jobs, taxes, local economic resilience and the ability of people to remain in their communities.
Trade, agriculture and the negative trade balance
The Government also answered questions about trade policy after the expiry of some European Union trade preferences. Taras Kachka said that Ukraine has arrangements with the EU that create opportunities for exporting higher value-added products.
Examples mentioned included dairy products, grain processing, and the free trade agreement with Türkiye, which is important for Ukrainian metallurgy. The Government also expects to submit for ratification the free trade agreement with the European Free Trade Association countries following relevant steps by Switzerland and Norway.
Regarding the negative trade balance, the Government stressed that key import items include fuel and lubricants, unmanned aerial vehicles and components for them. In other words, a significant part of imports is directly linked to Ukraine’s defence capability.
Children’s rights: deinstitutionalisation without mechanical closure of institutions
A separate part of the discussion concerned children’s rights and the transition from institutional to family-based care. MPs asked whether the state had become too focused on fighting institutions while forgetting about the safety and protection of the child.
The Government’s response was cautious: there is no task in official documents to mechanically fight institutions or close them for the sake of closure. Instead, the declared goal is to build a better care system. It was stated that around 700 institutional facilities are operating in Ukraine, and no document contains a direct requirement for their closure.
This is an important political framework. The European requirement for deinstitutionalisation should not be reduced to an administrative campaign. Its real meaning is the creation of a safer and more humane child protection system.
Education, healthcare and roads: basic services as part of European state quality
In the second part of the Government Question Hour, MPs raised questions about education in frontline territories, including the possibility for students in grades 10 and 11 to complete their studies in their own schools, as well as draft laws intended to regulate this issue.
The healthcare block covered implants for wounded defenders, the Programme of Medical Guarantees, centralised procurement of titanium plates, the unreservation of medical workers for the needs of the Medical Forces of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, and the treatment of rare diseases, including Duchenne muscular dystrophy.
Another painful issue was road safety. The Prime Minister and a representative of the Ministry of Internal Affairs supported the need to increase liability for systematic speeding and to expand the number of speed cameras. The Government effectively called on Parliament to return to legislative initiatives aimed at reducing road deaths.
Parliamentary oversight matrix
|
EU Clusters, benchmarks, draft laws, Ukraine Facility. |
Defence Military pay, recruitment centres, mobilisation, terms of service. |
People IDPs, pensions, heating, healthcare, children’s rights. |
Economy Frontline business, credit, farmers, trade. |
Safety Roads, critical infrastructure, public accountability. |
Regional voice
Parliamentary oversight must reach the community level
As noted by Ruslan Shamrin, a member of Kryvyi Rih City Council and member of the Standing Commission on Implementation of the City Development Strategy and Investments, communities should assess the Government Question Hour not only by the number of answers given in the parliamentary chamber, but by whether those answers turn into concrete decisions for people.
In the case of European integration, this is especially important. For regions, the movement towards the EU should not mean an abstract political course, but fair rules, access to finance, support for the frontline economy, protection of internally displaced persons, stable operation of critical infrastructure and clear Government accountability to communities.
What this Government Question Hour means for the country
For communities, especially industrial, frontline and IDP-hosting communities, such a Government Question Hour has practical significance. It shows that European integration is not only about negotiations in Brussels. It is about access to credit for businesses, fair utility bills, housing for IDPs, the ability of critical enterprises to operate, safer roads, real healthcare for the wounded and clear rules for military personnel and their families.
That is why parliamentary oversight should not be assessed formally. It matters not only that ministers came to the plenary hall. What matters is whether instructions, draft laws, inspections, budget decisions and real changes for people follow afterwards.
Ukraine’s European integration increasingly looks less like a diplomatic formula and more like a daily test of state capacity. Opening negotiation clusters is important. But it is even more important to prove that the Ukrainian state can follow rules, protect people, support communities and maintain trust under wartime conditions.
The Government Question Hour showed that the Verkhovna Rada remains a place where the European integration framework meets the country’s real problems. This meeting is the most honest one: the path to the EU goes not only through the adoption of laws, but through the state’s ability to answer the concrete and painful questions of citizens.
