
Conservative EPP confident of success in EU deregulation push
Social democrat MEPs 'categorically oppose' the inclusion of the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) in the legislative package expected on 26 February, S&D group leader Iratxe García wrote.
The hard-fought legislation has not even been implemented yet, and 'does not contain reporting requirements,' Garcia wrote in the letter dated 20 February, which also calls for guidance rather than a gutting of the related CSDD.
Although signals from within the Commission suggest the package is still a work in progress and the subject of urgent meetings behind closed doors, the S&D was particularly concerned about the potential scrapping of key enforcement and judicial redress provisions.
'Not only would these changes amount to stripping the directive of its power and rendering it ineffective, the changes would risk worsening…actual human rights and environmental abuses and significantly restricting the rights of victims,' Garcia wrote.
A price worth paying
But Liese, whose group is also von der Leyen's political home and was instrumental in pushing a raft of Green Deal legislation back onto the political agenda, was bullish about the prospects of the Commission backing the EPP's line.
"I trust in the common sense of the Commission that this letter will not be successful, that we will have the omnibus covering all four legislations and that it will be a courageous proposal,' Liese said while briefing reports in Brussels.
There are two other laws that the veteran Christian Democrat lawmakers referred to. One is the carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM), an import duty based on the estimated carbon footprint of certain goods like steel and cement. The other is Taxonomy Regulation, which is a list of industrial sectors deemed to be sustainable, and thus potential beneficiaries of EU support or investment through green bonds.
All but the very largest of corporations should be exempted from CBAM reporting requirements, Liese said, arguing that Commission data shows 99% of emissions would be covered even with 91% of companies – including a new category of mid-cap firms - outside the scope of the law.
A 1% decrease in the beneficial climate impact of the law was an 'acceptable' price to pay to shield European small businesses from the costly administrative burden, Liese asserted.
Campaigning for Merz in Germany, sticking to net zero
Despite the drive to free businesses of environmental obligations, Liese was adamant the EPP remained committed to EU climate goals, including a 55% emissions cut by 2030 compared to 1990, and net zero by the middle of the century.
Speaking before heading to Germany to campaign for his party and its leader Friedrich Merz in the last two days before the general election, Liese said Germany's likely next chancellor – if the polls are correct – shared his commitment to climate action.
'I campaigned for him in his first campaign for the European Parliament in 1989, and really, you can trust that he will not work with the [far-right party] AfD,' Liese said.
'And you can trust that he will not give up the climate targets. In every speech, he says we need to stay on course because climate neutrality is a must.'
But the EPP will likely need support from groups further to the right in the European Parliament to get any proposed amendments to environmental law onto the statute books, although Liese said he believes many rank-and-file members of the S&D share his group's concerns over red tape.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

LeMonde
21 hours ago
- LeMonde
Vichy's antisemitism: A dispute between historians heads to court
On July 17, 2022, French President Emmanuel Macron gave a speech to mark the 80 th anniversary of the Vel' d'Hiv roundup, the mass arrest of Jews by French police in Paris in July 1942. Without mentioning the obvious context of the German occupation, he underscored, emphasizing French responsibility, that "not a single soldier of Nazi Germany took part in the roundup of July 16 and 17, 1942. All of this stemmed from a will and a policy poisoned by antisemitism, initiated as early as July 1940." Faced with what they called the "silence" of the "official historians" in the face of this "manipulation of history," three historians, including two amateurs, decided to use this speech as the starting point for a book published the following year. Written by Jean-Marc Berlière, a respected historian of the French police, along with René Fiévet, an economist, and Emmanuel de Chambost, an engineer, Histoire d'une falsification: Vichy et la Shoah dans l'histoire officielle et le discours commémoratif ("History of a Falsification: Vichy and the Holocaust in Official History and Commemorative Discourse") took aim at "these 'court historians' and presidents of the Republic, all busy making the French feel guilty," and aimed to "restore the complexity to a question that cannot be reduced to a purely Vichyite initiative." In July 2023, historian Laurent Joly, a specialist in the Vichy regime who also found the memorial discourse riddled with approximations and anachronisms, published a lengthy, detailed critique of the book in the Revue d'histoire Moderne et Contemporaine, tracing its "intellectual genealogy." "(...) Such a book does not come out of nowhere. It is part of a history of the historiography of Vichy and the crimes of collaboration, which for decades have inspired a whole literature seeking to minimize their gravity, up to the recent provocations of [far-right politician] Eric Zemmour." The Comité de vigilance face aux usages publics de l'histoire (CVUH), a non-profit organization fighting against the misuse of history in the public sphere, also published a note signed by feminist historian Michèle Riot-Sarcey, which referenced Joly's article.

LeMonde
a day ago
- LeMonde
In Germany, the LGBTQ+ flag is at the heart of a new culture war
The rainbow flag will not fly above the Bundestag on Saturday, July 26, during Berlin's Christopher Street Day (CSD), the annual parade in support of LGBTQ+ rights. This decision, which ends a practice that began in 2022, has sparked heated debate in Germany at a time when the far right is gaining ground and attacks against sexual minorities are increasing. The turning point came in mid-May. Just days after the new government took office, Bundestag President Julia Klöckner, of the Christian Democrat (CDU) party, announced that she would ban the raising of the rainbow flag atop the Bundestag for CSD in the name of neutrality for public buildings and administration, considering it a "political demonstration." She explained that this symbol of diversity and the fight against discrimination would now only be displayed atop of the building one day a year: on May 17, the International Day Against Homophobia. Klöckner also banned the "Parliament's Queer Network," a group of LGBTQ+ staff, from participating in the CSD parade as a political group. Its members may attend only in a private capacity. In doing so, the Bundestag president broke with the approach of her predecessor, Social Democrat Bärbel Bas, who had herself participated in CSD in 2023 and 2024 and had the flag flown atop the building.


Euronews
2 days ago
- Euronews
The battle for the EU budget - who wins, who loses?
Brussels has spoken! The European Commission presented its long-term budget proposal, kicking off tough negotiations over who gets what and who pays for it. Rich countries like Germany and the Netherlands have already rejected the numbers game as being too ambitious. But it's not only about politics - it's about who wins and who loses in crucial areas like technology, agriculture and climate action. Who will finally get their way? And what are the benefits for ordinary citizens? Questions for our panel this week: Kait Bolongaro, managing editor for Europe at MLEX, Tomi Huhtanen, executive director at the Wilfried Martens Centre and Dave Keating, Brussels correspondent for France 24. To say that the European Commission's proposal for a long-term budget would not survive in its current form, would be an understatement. For Chancellor Friedrich Merz the EU must do more with the money it has. This sets up a clash with fellow German Christian Democrat Ursula von der Leyen who believes that rising challenges need an adequate fiscal response - in other words: more money. Get ready for bruising budget battles that might last two years! Another fight over money: This time, it would make smoking, in all its forms, more expensive. The EU Commission announced a renewed push to curb tobacco consumption through higher taxation. At the same time, the World Health Organization is sounding the alarm bell: chronic public health problems are getting out of hand. As a remedy, the WHO is pushing countries to raise the prices of sugary drinks, alcohol and tobacco by 50 percent over the next ten years through higher taxes. This would save millions of lives and raise 1.4 trillion dollars globally, according to the WHO. The move would help cut consumption of the products which contribute to diseases like diabetes and cancer. The WHO is now becoming an ally for the European Commission, which wants to modernize the EU's Tobacco Taxation Directive. A strong signal for public health or just another way to squeeze taxpayers? Can public health be improved by fiscal measures? Finally, panellists discuss the fast-fashion industry operating in Eurpope, as the hunt for super-cheap online bargains might get a little less attractive - at least in France. The government in Paris has hit Chinese ultra-fast fashion giant SHEIN with a €40 million fine for what regulators call 'deceptive commercial practices.' It's a major escalation in Europe's scrutiny of the fast fashion model. The blow comes two months after the European Commission found Shein guilty of engaging in illegal commercial practices under EU law, following a coordinated investigation with national consumer protection authorities. And earlier this year, France already presented new legislation targeting Shein and its Chinese rival Temu, imposing eco-taxes, advertising bans and influencer restrictions. Will these steps have an impact among consumers? Will they stop buying from those sites?