Patriots look to derail EU climate policy with key parliament file
On Tuesday it was confirmed that the PfE group will lead negotiations on the EU's new climate target to reduce greenhouse emissions by 90% on 1990 levels by 2040, reserving the key role of rapporteur in the Parliament for the file for one of the group's MEPs.
On Wednesday an attempt to dilute this power by pushing the file through an emergency procedure which would allow it to be adopted "without a report or on the basis of an oral report by the committee responsible" failed when 379 MEPs voted it down.
Wednesday's vote provided confirmation that the third largest group in the Parliament, which has systematically opposed the EU's climate policies, will now be tasked to produce a report and recommend a political line attached to the file.
"Now that the vote has dissipated our concerns, we will seek to revise in depth the EU's climate policy, and not just modify on a very small scale some numerical targets," said Fabrice Leggeri, an MEP from the Patriots and France's National Rally.
It's not yet clear which PfE MEP will bag the rapporteur role within the Environment committee (ENVI), which will oversee the legislative work, but officials touted that it might be an MEP from France's National Rally, which has a large contingent of lawmakers on the ENVI.
The Commission 2024 proposal is aimed at reaffirming the bloc's "determination to tackle climate change" according to the Commission's website, and "shape the path" to climate neutrality, an objective that is at the heart of the EU's Green Deal.
Patriots always disliked the Green Deal
But far-right parties have lashed out against what they see as the bloc's climate change fanaticism and want to undo recent environmental rules. National Rally leader Jordan Bardella called for the immediate suspension of the EU's Green Deal a few months ago.
"We have always opposed this [emission reductions] target, which we consider too difficult to reach for European companies and citizens," Italian League MEP Silvia Sardone told Euronews.
"We need to discuss the best outcome for the European citizens, which of course is different from the target pushed so far," added Sardone, the PfE's coordinator in the ENVI committee.
The attribution of the file to the PfE results from a complex allotment system, which gives the large groups control over important files.
The vote on Wednesday triggered a backlash from leftist and centrist MEPs a day before the chamber is set to vote a motion of censure against Ursula Von der Leyen's Commission.
Many lambasted the centre-right European People Party for rejecting the emergency procedure and letting the file rest in the hands of the far right. The outcome of the vote on the emergency procedure was indeed another display of the so-called "Venezuela majority", the occasional alliance between EPP and right wing and far right parties to get crucial files through the Parliament.
Prior to the vote, the EPP's Jeroen Lenaers had called the chamber to vote down the emergency procedure as "we just want to work on this proposal with the normal proceedings of this house."
But the Greens argued that the Patriots' opposition to the EU's Green Deal will complicate negotiations ahead of the COP30 international climate conference in Brazil and before the United Nations deadline for submitting national climate plans.
Sardone from Patriots confirmed that the file will not pass committee stage in time for the law to be approved by November, when the COP30 takes place.
"The EPP is joining forces with right-wing extremists, making climate change deniers chief negotiators and putting the health, economy and credibility of the EU at risk," said Lena Schilling, an Austrian green MEP.
"The heat waves of the past few weeks have claimed over 2,000 lives in the EU. The climate emergency is now, and it requires immediate action. Instead, the unholy alliance of conservatives and right-wing extremists is slowing [it] down."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Euronews
3 hours ago
- Euronews
Zelenskyy proposes new round of peace talks with Russia
Kyiv has proposed a new round of peace talks to be held next week with Russia, Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said on Saturday. In a video message posted on X, Zelenskyy urged "the pace of negotiations must be increased" to ensure lasting peace. "A meeting at the level of leaders is needed," he said, emphasising Ukraine's willingness to do so. Ukraine's newly appointed Secretary of National Security and Defence, Rustem Umerov, was the one who sent Moscow the invitation, Zelenskyy said. He also previously lead the delegation talks held in Istanbul last month. The previous negotations held in June failed to lead to a ceasefire agreement, but did result in a new prisoner of war exchange. The first round of negotiations held on 16 May also resulted in a prisoner exchange, the largest one yet, but hadn't yielded much result either regarding putting an end to Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine. In his video address, Zelenskyy also urged Western allies to further toughen their sanctions against Russia. "It is very important that the new EU sanctions package is also supported by other free European countries that are currently not part of the European Union," Zelenskyy said. "We are also working on the American track, there are agreements with President Trump that must be implemented as soon as possible," he added. A day prior to Zelenskyy's address, the EU imposed new sanctions on Russia, targeting its oil and banks. It marks the 18th package of sanctions imposed by the EU since February 2022. Earlier this month, the US President also threatened harsher sanctions on Russia if a peace agreement was not reached within 50 days. Writing on his Truth Social platform, Trump framed the threat as a response to Russia "absolutely 'pounding' Ukraine on the battlefield right now." "To Russia and Ukraine, get to the table right now, before it is too late. Thank you," the US president said.
Euronews
18 hours ago
- Euronews
Anti-immigrantion demonstrations in more than 80 cities across Poland
Anti-immigration protests organised by the far-right Confederation Libery and Independence party took place in more than 80 cities across Poland, including in Warsaw, Krakow, Poznan, Wroclaw, and Bialystok. Demonstrators demanded the closure of the borders with Lithuania, Ukraine, Belarus and Slovakia. "Enough of the years-long policy of 'let everyone in, and who they are will be determined later'," Krzysztof Bosak, one of Confederation party's leaders, wrote on X. "Polish women and men have the right to be concerned about the level of security in their own homeland," he added. In a speech at the start of the march, Bosak demanded the resignation of Donald Tusk's government, the closure of the borders with Lithuania, Ukraine, Belarus and Slovakia to curb illegal immigration, and the permission for soldiers to shoot at people who cross the border illegally. "Without closing Poland to illegal immigration, without launching a deportation operation, without renouncing political correctness, without equipping the Border Guard and the forces responsible for controlling the legality of residence, and without controlling the labour market, security will gradually deteriorate," he said, calling for a change in policy. The protests come shortly after Poland introduced border controls with Germany and Lithuania, which came into effect on 7 July. On the Polish-German border, controls are in place at 52 places and on the Polish-Lithuanian border at 13. The issue of migration has been widely up for debate, and a contentious topic in Polish politics, particularly as the country has experienced a rise in immigration in recent years. In the first round of the presidential elections held in May, candidates of the far-right performed well, with Slawomir Mentzen of the Confederation Libery and Independence party and Grzegorz Braun of Confederation of the Polish Crown party coming in third and fourth, respectively. Many believe that both candidates' successes were due to their hardline stance on migration. Interior ministers agree on asylum rules On Friday, Poland and five other EU countries, agreed a set of targets for tightening asylum rules. During the meeting hosted by Germany's interior minister, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz admitted that he was "pleased that Poland is carrying out border controls." Last year, Poland saw an increase in asylum applications due to the recurring crisis on its eastern border with Belarus, which has been ongoing since 2021. As a result, the Polish parliament passed a law temporarily suspending the right to apply for asylum for those who crossed the Belarusian border. Both Polish and European leaders have long accused Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko of orchestrating the influx of migrants to destabilise the EU. On Saturday morning, the Ministry of Interior and Administration published statistics on the number of approvals issued for special protection for foreigners on X. "In 2024, we issued 40 per cent fewer approvals for special protection for foreigners than in 2021. This is the result of a better managed system, our operations at the border and more efficient procedures," the post read. "The government is pursuing a responsible and well-considered migration policy, taking care of the stability and security of citizens," it added. Counter demonstrations in many cities Counter-manifestations against the Confederation marches were also held in Warsaw, Katowice, Olsztyn and other cities on Saturday. Demonstrators carried banners with the slogans: "Accept the refugees, delete the fascists," "Action Democracy" and "We defend the right to asylum." "Everyone, regardless of their skin colour and origin, should feel comfortable not only in Poland, but also in Europe," Maria Książak of the International Humanitarian Initiative Foundation said during the demonstration.
LeMonde
a day ago
- LeMonde
The EU must assert itself in its trade relationship with the US
"Trump always chickens out." The phrase, coined by a columnist at the Financial Times, has been circulating widely in recent weeks. The idea that the US president speaks loudly but does not always follow through on his threats has fueled complacency among stock markets regarding the risks his trade war poses to the global economy. However, accusations of cowardice may not apply to Donald Trump alone. The European Union's hesitance in the face of Trump's maneuvering has also raised questions about whether the 27 member states can truly engage in the kind of power struggle that is now essential. While Brussels believed it was on track to minimize the tariffs on European exports to the United States, Trump dashed the EU's hopes by announcing on July 12 that he would unilaterally impose a 30% tax starting August 1. Is this a final bluff to extract further concessions, or a definitive move that could deal a severe blow to European growth? In any case, as the American president ramps up the pressure, the EU continues to waver, trying to salvage what it still can. European leaders have responded with lackluster retaliatory measures that have done little to deter Trump, who seems indifferent to the economic consequences of his actions. This game of high-stakes bluffing is likely to benefit the party setting the rules, to the detriment of those who are forced to adapt, always a step behind and uncertain of the game's true objective. Setting ambitious goals The confrontation appears to be based on a misunderstanding. The EU seeks to negotiate in good faith, aiming for fair trade based on the principle of comparative advantage between countries. But the US president has little interest in this quest for a mutually beneficial, purely commercial agreement. His ambitions go further. He aims to undermine Europe by any means, because he despises everything it stands for: supranationalism, multilateralism, progressivism and the primacy of law. Yet the EU has no reason to apologize for what it represents, nor to make concessions on its tax policy or the regulatory framework it has established for digital services. In this final stretch of negotiations, Europe must give the talks a political dimension, moving beyond the technical aspects that have dominated the debate so far. The EU should clearly set out its red lines and aim high. Settling for a compromise as unfavorable as the one the United Kingdom accepted in May would be unacceptable. If the 27 member states, as the US's top trading partner, fail to demonstrate that they carry more weight than a single country, it would send a disastrous message about the purpose of the European project. The EU's strategy of absorbing American provocations without actually implementing the retaliatory measures at its disposal has shown its limitations. The "proportionate, robust, and well-calibrated" reprisals promoted by the 27 member states do not measure up to what is a clear act of aggression, one whose aim goes beyond simply rebalancing the US trade deficit – its goal is to subordinate Europe. If Europe were to "chicken out," the consequences would not be purely economic.
