Empower your business with lead to opportunity conversion in European Union

How to create outlook signature

At her inauguration as EU Commission President in 2019, Ursula von der Leyen made a declaration of war. Anyone who wants to help me strengthen and grow Europe to help make it flourish will have me at his or her side as a passionate fighter. But anyone who wants to weaken and divide Europe and strip it of its values will find me a fierce opponent. In 2022, Italy, the third strongest economy in the EU, elected its first female prime minister, Giorgia Meloni, leader of the right-wing nationalist party Fratelli d'Italia. In her campaign speeches, she had made it clear who should call the shots in Europe: The capital of Italy is Rome. And Rome should be the capital of the European Union. I would like to bring this demand to the European Parliament. A meeting between Von der Leyen and Meloni in July of 2023. Is this how two opponents greet each other? Again and again, the two appear together, acting like allies. Has Meloni moved to the center or von der Leyen to the right? Supposedly, these two women represent two opposing political visions about Europe’s future: a stronger, more centralized EU or a decentralized union featuring more powerful nation states. About 350 million Europeans will elect their representatives to the EU Parliament from June 6th to the 9th. Polls predict that right-wing parties will gain ground, which could significantly change the course of the EU. How much compromise can Europe tolerate? Where is the political “red line”? The European Parliament in Strasbourg, France. MEPs are voting on a final set of proposed laws and regulations before the upcoming election. These regulations will affect the lives of people across the continent. Vote is closed. In favor? Rejected. Of course, new regulations only have a chance if proponents can find the votes needed to pass them. The different political camps must reach an agreement in advance. Only a united Europe has a chance to survive in the world of tomorrow. Europe must be given the means to act, to have the agency of a normal state. However, alongside supporters of a strong Europe, there are nationalists for whom many European regulations go too far. The problem in the last few years is this attempt to remove competences from the nations. So, our view of the European Union is an alliance of free nations. EU opponents are even further to the right. Initially, they wanted to abolish the EU. Now they are aiming for a radical change of European policy. We don’t want this union, this bureaucratic monster with its negative effects for Germany, but a confederation of European nations. Right, left and center all represent legitimate political positions. But the more radical the stance, the less willing its proponents are to compromise. Journalist Eric Bonse has lived and worked in Brussels for 20 years. The European Union is a union of 27 sovereign member states. These states are holding elections, and the shift to the right we see in the results cast a long shadow. We have already had right-wing victories in some large EU countries, like Italy, Sweden, Finland and now most recently the Netherlands. This is already having an impact. In the European Parliament, MPs do not sort themselves by national parties, but into groups with similar political platforms. The pro-European camp still has a majority, consisting of the center-right, liberals, center-left and Greens. The parliament contains two right-wing factions: one is hard-right, with strong EU skeptics or opponents of the union. Its members come mainly from France and Germany. Members of the other faction describe themselves as 'moderately right'. They include representatives from Giorgia Meloni’s party or Polish MPs from the PiS party With citizens facing inflation, high energy costs, war and a flow of refugees, those offering simple solutions can score political points. All the polls say that there will be a shift to the right. This means that nationalists, right-wing populists and some post-fascists will make gains and the pro-European camp could become weaker. Rightwing MEPs blame economic problems on EU policy and want to strengthen national interests. They favor a policy of hardened borders directed against migration. In France, for example, self-declared 'French patriots' are taking to the streets in protest, boosting the standing of far-right leader Marine Le Pen. She claims migration is leading to a disintegration of national identity and says France would be better represented in a 'loose confederation of states'. She is calling for the election of her EU candidate. We must all stand behind Jordan Bardella. He will represent the voices and aspirations of millions of patriots who reject this Europe. The situation in France is worrisome because Marine Le Pen and her “National Rally” party are ahead in the polls. Le Pen's niece, Marion Maréchal, is running for another right-wing party in the European election campaign: Reconquête 'Reconquest'. Its platform calls for reclaiming power from the EU and the country from foreigners. Against Islamization, insecurity and unrest. Long live France! These days, campaigns play out on social media. Maximilian Krah, lead EU candidate for the AfD, a party being monitored by the German domestic intelligence service, is very active online. Krah was too radical even for French and Italian hardliners, who voted to kick the AfD out of the right-wing ID parliamentary group. The AfD is not against Europe. It is against the EU, which is flooding us with bureaucracy, putting the country into debt and leading us into war. Krah keeps his videos short and simple. He avoids complexity and targets his viewers’ emotions. Without context, his messages cannot be verified and initially appear plausible. In Germany and France, right-wing parties have high poll ratings but are not yet in government. Not so in Italy. The right-wing prime minister is very aware of her public image. I am described as a danger to democracy, to Italian, European and international stability. Giorgia Meloni has been head of government since October 2022. Her party lays out a 'new nationalism', billed as traditional, Christian-conservative and critical of Islam. For her, national interest trumps that of the European community. In her election campaign speeches, she made it clear that Italy would set the tone and not allow the EU to dictate anything. The capital of Italy is Rome. And Rome should be the capital of the European Union. I would like to bring this demand to the European Parliament. To understand why the European election campaign is all about climate policy, migration and the future of the EU, you have to look back. When Ursula von der Leyen took office in 2019 before the pandemic, the war in Ukraine and the economic crisis she addressed the issues of the day. Dear members of parliament, in July, immediately after my appointment, I placed climate protection at the heart of my political program. It was the people of Europe who called on us to take decisive action against climate change. It was Europeans who raised their voices on the streets and at the ballot box. It is for them that we are here today, and it is for them that we are presenting such an ambitious Green Deal for Europe. The Green Deal is the EU’s answer to the catastrophic consequences of climate change. It stipulates an end to Europe’s greenhouse gas emissions. The EU wants to funnel one trillion euros into sustainable power generation, effective building insulation and new mobility concepts for the transformation of industry and society. The Green Deal sets out the guidelines which parliament and member states are to implement. MPs in the European Parliament have been working since 2019 to implement von der Leyen's climate program. One of them is French MEP Aurore Lalucq, a Social Democrat. The financial expert is looking for a fair way to finance the climate agenda. We need money to drive ecological and social change. It requires astronomical amounts of public investment to prevent people from becoming unemployed and to enable industrial transformation. In short, we need public money. Lalucq’s idea for how to finance the Green Deal is to tax the rich. She wants to introduce a European tax on wealth. Taxation is about social justice. Basically, the very rich today are taxed much less than the middle class and the poorest, which we think is completely unjust. They avoid paying taxes even though they have the means to pay them 100, 200 or 300 times over. She says there was, at first, a basic consensus across the political camps on the priority of the climate program, but that consensus is now falling apart. Today there is an increase in the number of climate skeptics in Europe. I am really worried about that. EU critics and right-wing populists such as Marion Maréchal from France criticize the European climate program and reject any regulation. Maximilian Krah even doubts there’s an urgent need for a climate program at all. Climate nonsense! They believe the world will end because it's getting warmer. Italian voices are joining those critical of the plan: Georgia Meloni! In June 2022, shortly before taking office as prime minister, Giorgia Meloni attacked von der Leyen's climate program during a speech in Spain ... Fondamentalismo climatico del pacto verde. calling it "climate fundamentalism.” Meloni has yet to lay out her version of a climate policy that would not affect jobs or economic growth. Von der Leyen reacted strategically. The Italian flood disaster in May 2023 provided her with a template: show support and at the same time use these occasions to narrow the gap on matters of climate policy. A winning strategy? In the European Parliament, Italian MPs are trying to put the brakes on climate policies that don't suit Giorgia Meloni. Meloni's man in Brussels is her right-wing nationalist party colleague Nicola Procaccini. He is one of two leaders of the European Conservatives and Reformists, or ECR for short. He led the successful effort to torpedo legislation restricting the use of pesticides and protecting biodiversity and consumers. On the use of pesticides: Let us note with great satisfaction that the proposal that was put to a vote, which would have massacred Italian agriculture, has not been passed. The EU wants to halve the use of chemical pesticides by 2030, but Italian MEPs and other right-wing and conservative parties reject passing binding regulations. Like Meloni, Procaccini is in favor of prioritizing national over EU-wide interests. Critics fear that other member states taking up the Italian approach would lead to a growing gap of interests, leading to conflicts that cannot be resolved. One of them is MEP Aurore Lalucq from the Social Democrats. She says the attitude of the Italians already seems to be rubbing off on other members of parliament. The center-right is moving further to the right. That is the fear, and we are already feeling it. Because we have seen that a far-right government in Italy has already changed the positions of the European right. Since then, the European right has become much more climate-skeptical and rejects proposals that would have been adopted in the past. Her accusations are aimed at the center-right, that is the conservatives, and, with that, at perhaps the most powerful MEP, the head of the largest parliamentary group: Manfred Weber. In Europe, he is the party and parliamentary group leader of the European People's Party, the EPP. In Germany, he is the deputy party leader of the Christian Social Union, the CSU. The majority of Weber's parliamentary group joined the rightwing Italians around Nicola Procaccini and voted against von der Leyen's pesticide restrictions. Is Weber's group reaching out to the right and extreme right? Weber says the EPP has drawn up clear guidelines. What is not acceptable is that those who bear responsibility here in the European Parliament reject the project as such, reject the European idea of a democratic Europe working together. That is the red line. That is the firewall we need. For the EPP, there are three central criteria. First, everyone we work with must accept today's Europe in its structures and want to help shape it. The second is anyone who wants to be a partner for us today must work with Ukraine, must support Israel, must ensure that we support those who stand up for our values. And the third principle: we must defend the rule of law. That means supporting independent media and an independent judiciary. I rule out cooperation for my party with the AfD, with Kaczynski, with the PiS in Poland or with Le Pen in France, because these people cross those red lines. It’s a clear rejection of the extreme right’s opposition to Europe. However, there *is* a convergence between the interests of the EPP and those of more ‘moderate’ right-wing MEPs such as the Italian nationalists around Nicola Procaccini. Both have downplayed the importance of climate issues in their election campaigns. The center-right is partly adopting the stance of the right-wing camp. It even supports efforts to reverse enacted climate policy decisions. Von der Leyen's Green Deal is under fire. The President needs to adapt her agenda. With the parliament’s shift to the right, migration has replaced climate change as the issue at the top of the priority list. How is European policy changing in this area under the growing influence of the right? In 2020, von der Leyen rejected right-wing politicians and their isolationist policies. We are convinced that each human being has a solemn dignity that can never be touched. Independent where this individual does come from. And obviously the extreme right has a different view. But hate has never given any good advice. So we will always insist on the fact that this this makes you angry. This makes him angry because we got him on the point, where he sees that we are on a different soil, where that is concerned. And that is democracy. You have to bear with that. MEPs applauded her speech back in 2020. But the EU's stance on a common asylum and migration policy will be a major point of contention in the coming years. Italy's Meloni was unequivocal on the subject during her 2022 election campaign. No to mass migration, no to Islamist violence, yes to secure borders! Responding to pressure from her supporters, Meloni tried to reach a bilateral agreement with Tunisia. Most of the migrants and refugees who make their way to Italy leave from there. But negotiations showed Italy alone does not have enough money to offer and the talks were abandoned. All the while, more and more people crossed the Mediterranean into Europe. Between 2022 and 2023, irregular entries into the continent increased by 50 percent. Public perception of the issue became a challenge for governments across Europe. Ursula von der Leyen traveled to Tunisia in July of 2023 to sign an agreement on behalf of the EU, a deal much like the one Meloni was unable to achieve for Italy alone. She invited Meloni to join her, allowing the Italian prime minister to follow up on her first meeting with the Tunisian president. We will work with Tunisia on an anti-smuggling operational partnership. We will also increase our coordination on search and rescue operations and we agreed that we will cooperate on border management, anti-smuggling, return and addressing root causes in full respect of the international law. Thank you very much, Ursula, for your tireless work on that. It was a solution very much in Italy's interest. The EU promised Tunisia financial aid of up to 900 million euros. The new EU pact on asylum and migration focused on cooperation with countries of refuge or transit. Although the approach followed that of previous agreements, such as the one with Turkey in 2016, critics note the EU’s growing tendency to seal itself off, a tendency they attribute to the continent’s political shift to the right. Shortly after the agreement was signed, in September 2023, conditions on the Italian island of Lampedusa go from bad to worse. With ever more refugees arriving from Tunisia, Ursula von der Leyen promised to help by deploying Frontex, the European Border and Coast Guard Agency. Meloni insisted she would take tough action. I will not allow Italy to become Europe's refugee camp. The agreement caused much discussion in Brussels, partly because parliament was not involved. Tunisia had recently attracted attention for human rights violations and even rejected some EU financial aid. It remains to be seen whether the agreement will hold. Critics fear the deal forged with a “whatever it takes” mentality will undermine EU values. When Ursula von der Leyen took office, she promised everyday people, the citizens of Europe, would be given more ways to take part in efforts to shape the future of Europe. To this end, EU o fficials organized a convention in 2022 in which 800 randomly selected Europeans came together to develop their ideas for the future of Europe. At the same time, it sent out large-scale citizen surveys. The results of these efforts were clear: people wanted more rights for the European parliament and less nationalism. In September of 2023, in her last State of the Union speech before the election, von der Leyen took stock and outlined the path forward that European voters had called for. Vive L'europe! Long live Europe! Lang lebe Europa! As with any election, it will be a time for people to reflect on the State of our Union and the work done by those that represent them. But it will also be a time to decide on what kind of future and what kind of Europe they want. Von der Leyen, a member of the conservative CDU, is comparatively progressive in her policies and supports developing the EU further. And I will always support this House and all of those who want to reform the European Union to make it work better for citizens. And, yes, that means including through a European Convention and Treaty change if and where it is needed! Von der Leyen supports reforming the EU, which would require treaty changes. Since its beginning, the European idea has been based on a comprehensive set of treaties. Every step towards greater cooperation has been based on new treaty regulations that define exactly who has what power. Treaty amendments are massive interventions in a complex set of rules and require the consent of member states and their heads of government. An EU summit of government leaders is held in Brussels at least four times a year. The EU currently has 27 member states: as stipulated in the treaty agreements, that means 27 heads of government have a say in key European issues such as finance, foreign policy and security. Because decisions must be unanimous, agreements usually take a long time to reach. I'm not a big fan of these late-night meetings, but sometimes they’re necessary. Because we know we can't leave here tonight without a result. Because then Europe would be at loggerheads and would have nothing to show for its efforts. One person responsible for many a long night is Viktor Orban, the right-wing conservative Prime Minister of Hungary. In December 2023, he used his veto to stop EU aid for Ukraine. Critics see this blockade as an attempt to exert pressure on the European Union. This is the status quo with "only" 27 member states. Were the EU to grow even further, the unanimity principle might well make the union ungovernable. Among other things, a reform of the EU with more power for Parliament and the Commission would mean replacing this principle with a majority principle. The nationalists among the heads of government such as Orban for Hungary or Meloni for Italy oppose this change. The turbulent crises in recent years have already softened the rules. Because ad-hoc solutions were needed to react quickly, relevant treaties were interpreted creatively. During the pandemic, the EU stood united behind von der Leyen, developing and distributing vaccines in record time. The commission has negotiated the broadest portfolio of vaccine candidates so that vaccinations can start immediately. Member states followed suit, knowing full well they were stronger together and would not be able to handle the situation better on their own. We had vaccine procurement and health policy at the EU level. We’d never had that before. It's not in the EU treaties. In his twenty years as a European reporter, Eric Bonse has never seen such an expansion of powers within the European Union. Von der Leyen is pulling the strings, to put it bluntly. She rules over Brussels like a queen. Under von der Leyen, we’ve gotten a bigger Europe. We have something like a double budget. In addition to the regular EU budget, we have the budget of the COVID Recovery Fund. It means more power for the EU Commission, which controls disbursement. And then there’s defense, armaments and so on. With the start of war in Ukraine, von der Leyen found herself at the center of foreign and defense policy for Europe, which is also not part of her authority under EU treaties. Until recently, the EU Commission was primarily an administrative body, responsible for regulatory issues relating to the internal market and the budget. Power politics was seen as a purely national matter, reserved for the governments in the capitals. But von der Leyen is now standing alongside major players against Russia, giving Europe greater visibility on the world stage. We have systematically worked on putting together a large sanctions package. And by “we”, I mean the European Commission along with the US, the UK and Canada. For the nationalists among member states, this goes too far. They fear a strong EU leadership means a loss of power for member states. They do not want any EU treaty reform that would give the union even more power. Nicola Procaccini, Giorgia Meloni's man in Brussels, gave an important press conference the day before the European Parliament voted on whether to tackle changes to the EU treaties. Procaccini and his right-wing allies want to prevent this at all costs. The possibility of being outvoted on important EU issues and transferring further national power to the EU is unacceptable to them. Procaccini is in the same parliamentary group as his Polish colleague Saryusz-Wolski. He believes that, were the EU to gain even more power, it would become a "European superstate" and that Poland would disappear. It can be resumed in one sentence. We are against hijacking Europe by this antidemocratic, antifederal project to turn EU as we know into a superstate. The right-wing nationalist Nicola Procaccini also thinks the core issue is a simple question of direction, pitting nation states against the EU. For our group this battle is the mother of all battles. This is something that we will face now, in the next European elections and forever. The day of the vote. Parliament was being asked to decide whether to follow Ursula von der Leyen's vision of "more Europe" or follow the right-wing alliances to block this effort. During the last few minutes before the decisive vote, MEP Aurore Lalucq and her team were getting ready. Alongside possible EU treaty amendments, there were many other issues on the docket. Lalucq knew how she wanted to vote on her bills but needed to be briefed by her team on the many efforts spearheaded by her colleagues. We will work together because I have been following economic issues, such as taxation. So, I’ll say to my political group: here is what I advise you to vote for on economic and fiscal issues and vice versa. But the big question of the day was whether to allow the EU treaties to be changed, thereby opening the door to more centralized European power. Lalucq's answer was clear: “yes” to new treaties and a more powerful EU. In my opinion, the construction of Europe must always move forward. We must never give up on it. All 705 MEPs in the House headed to the same destination: the plenary chamber. Manfred Weber, leader of the Conservatives, had voiced his support for a more powerful EU parliament. Nicola Procaccini, his 'moderate' right-wing faction, and the extreme right in parliament had come out against the initiative. Okay guys, follow me. I follow you The chamber’s video control center is in the media room located high above the MEPs. All meetings are recorded with several cameras. The day was going to be a voting marathon. Who is against, who abstains? Rejected. Who is in favor, who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. 369 Who is in favor, who is against? Who abstains? Adopted. Let's check 369. Vote is open. 369. Doing this for 3 hours, it's really, really hard. You have to be very careful, very focused, because you have a list and you must be very careful you don't make a mistake. The all-important vote on the EU treaties. The majority of parliament is still pro-European. The result? Vote is closed. Adopted. The parliament voted in favor of allowing changes to the treaties. It was a defeat for Nicola Procaccini, but one that could be reversed down the road. The vote had decided nothing in terms of content and had only authorized that treaty negotiations could begin in principle. Further votes will take place after the European elections, and Procaccini hopes these will tip the balance of power in his favor. ing to forecasts, his parliamentary group could grow from 68 to almost 90 seats. And so we think that this power we can use it to achieve the goals of our agenda. And I know very well that the Italian delegation could be one of the most one of the biggest in this parliament. Or maybe the biggest. But I think we have this opportunity to show that another European Union is possible. He is aiming for an alliance whose foreign policies would protect EU borders and whose domestic policies would protect EU markets. He hopes states can otherwise pursue their own interests. Nicola Procaccini’s parliamentary group describes itself as 'moderately right'. Supporters of Giorgia Meloni's coalition partner in Italy the more radical Lega party belong to the extreme right-wing Identity and Democracy group in the European Parliament. It also includes France’s National Rally party and used to include the AfD. Because the representatives of the Italian delegation differ in their radicalism, it is difficult to draw a strict boundary line for cooperation. This is because the European Parliament’s center of power is expected to shift after the election: the two right-wing groups could be the big winners. The moderate right-wing ECR is expected to grow, and the extreme right-wing ID faction could become parliament’s third strongest force. The pro-European camp with the center-right group, the Liberals, the center-left group and the Greens will likely lose seats but will still form a significant bloc. Right-wing groups are unlikely to achieve a majority in parliament, but with around a quarter of the seats, they could cause significant disruption. Further development of pan-European regulations would be made more difficult and require more unity within the pro-European camp. With election day looming, the focus among MEPs is on building future alliances. These days, Manfred Weber starts work at dawn. Things are getting serious. Millions are being asked: what will your future, the EU’s future look like? The main concern: just how many right-wing extremists, those I fight against, who reject Europe and the concept of cooperation, are there? Weber is a veteran: he has been an MEP for 20 years. For a decade, he’s led the largest political group, the conservative EPP. Ahead of the election, MEPs from his and other parliamentary groups queued up outside his door to coordinate their policy positions with his. People want to know: where do I stand? Where are we going? That's where you have a responsibility. Weber discussed how the EPP will continue to position itself with fellow group member Roberta Metsola. He asked our camera crew to leave. Weber and his parliamentary group’s opposition to von der Leyen's course on climate policy has led many in Brussels to wonder what cooperation will look like after the election. I love to debate. I also love to argue. I love political discussions. But I always want to do it in a way that doesn't tear down bridges, that allows us to still find a way to work together. ing to European correspondent Eric Bonse, Weber is seeking a compromise with von der Leyen, but there is a history behind the complicated relationship between these two political power players. It is certainly a game with assigned roles. Weber is smart enough not to make a complete mess of things with von der Leyen. It is well known there’s no love lost between the two of them. Weber has long wanted to become Commission President. For a long time, he did not accept being passed over for the job, that von der Leyen received the post. He rightly points out that she never stood for election. She did not take part in the 2019 European elections. In 2019, Manfred Weber ran for the post of President of the Commission. This was his promotional video at the time. His group had received the most votes in the European election. As the lead candidate of the strongest political group, he should have been elected Commission President. But the European heads of government rejected Weber at the last minute and presented their own surprise candidate to the parliament. It was a scandal. Many MEPs refused to support von der Leyen’s candidacy. In 2019, it was relatively close and von der Leyen was indeed dependent on some dubious votes. However, this was mainly because the German Social Democrats did not vote for her. Nor did most of the Greens. There were also some outliers among the Liberals and even among the Christian Democrats. Votes in favor, 383.... She was elected by a very narrow margin. The votes of the right-wing conservatives from Hungary and Poland secured victory for von der Leyen. Now, in 2024, five years later, it’s unclear how she will keep a majority. Votes from the right-wing camp could once again play a decisive role. We can see that von der Leyen can get along very well with right-wing politicians. Take Giorgia Meloni. Von der Leyen is very skillful. She simply involves her. She goes to Tunisia with Meloni and says, "this is our deal now." Then Meloni can no longer complain about her. After all, they did it together and I suspect that she will deal with others in the same way. Although her parliamentary group elected her as its lead candidate, von der Leyen is calling for an economic focus in future climate policy, which party colleagues consider to be "too green." French MEP Aurore Lalucq takes a pragmatic view of von der Leyen's time in office. She is someone who has faults, like everyone else. But she was a true embodiment of Europe in difficult times. I think of the war in Ukraine. I think of Covid. Apart from that, maybe it would be good to have a debate, a real debate about who should be at the head of the next Commission. And maybe some change would also be good. Finding a compromise will become more difficult regardless of who takes over the Commission. It has long been apparent that the strategy of *integrating* the right has also led to a *shift* to the right. The price: a minimal common climate policy, sealing off Europe against migration and little chance of tackling treaty reforms. Voters will soon decide which path Europe will take in years to come. The more right-wing extremists there are in parliament, the more blockades there will be, and the more concessions will be needed. Many of the problems Europe will face in years to come can hardly be tackled by one country alone. This means a Europe capable of acting in concert, with a common policy, could become more important than ever.