EU's von der Leyen defends record in face of censure motion
The vote on the motion, scheduled for Thursday, is destined to fall far short of the two-thirds majority needed to force out von der Leyen's Commission as centrist groups that hold a majority in the parliament have said they will not support it.
But the motion was an unwelcome political headache for the EU executive chief just as her Commission is in the midst of negotiations to try to avoid hefty tariffs on European products from U.S. President Donald Trump's administration.
Speaking in the European Parliament in Strasbourg, von der Leyen pushed back against criticism in the motion of her handling of the COVID-19 crisis, arguing her strategy had ensured all EU members had equal access to vaccines.
"This is the Europe of solidarity that I love - and this is the Europe that the extremists hate," von der Leyen, a German former defence minister, declared to applause in the chamber.
Speaking before von der Leyen, the motion's lead sponsor, Romanian nationalist Gheorghe Piperea, accused the Commission of lacking transparency and failing to respect justice.
"The decision-making process has become opaque and discretionary and raises fears of abuse and corruption," he said.
Von der Leyen rejected those accusations. But, in an apparent nod to discontent from some lawmakers who see her governing style as high-handed, she said she was committed to working with the parliament "every step of the way".
"I want to say that I hear your concerns loud and clear," she said.
Even as the centrist groups rejected the motion, the debate exposed tensions among them. Several criticised von der Leyen's centre-right European People's Party for siding with the far right on migration, climate and other policies.
"Do you want to govern with those who want to destroy Europe or those of us who fight every day to build it?" Iratxe Garcia Perez, leader of the centre-left Socialists and Democrats group, asked von der Leyen in her speech.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
37 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Troop deployment plans abandoned in latest Coalition of the Willing talks
Britain and Europe have sidelined plans to deploy thousands of troops to Ukraine because Donald Trump's attempts to negotiate an end to the war have failed, The Telegraph can disclose. The ' Coalition of the Willing ' will concentrate future discussions on sustaining Kyiv in a war of attrition against Russia's invading forces in an apparent softening of plans. The group, hastily set up by Sir Keir Starmer and Emmanuel Macron earlier this year, was created with the intention to arrange a European-led ground force to police any ceasefire between Ukraine and Russia. At a meeting called to coincide with the French president's state visit to Britain, dozens of world leaders will instead discuss plans to ramp up ammunition supplies and boost Ukraine's domestic defence industry. Rebuilding Ukraine's energy production and post-war reconstruction of its war-stricken cities will also be discussed, according to a draft agenda shared with The Telegraph. The decision to change the group's approach comes after months of failed attempts by the US President to convince Vladimir Putin to sign up to a truce. A diplomatic source told the Telegraph: 'Given that Trump's strategy has not yet yielded any results, the ceasefire is still too far away to discuss how to secure it. 'What we need now is to continue to supply arms to Ukraine so that it can defend itself and, hand in hand with that, to continue to pressure Russia to start serious negotiations.' Europeans hope that continuing to demonstrate their support for Ukraine will convince Putin to come to the negotiating table. Trump funds weapons after U-turn Mr Trump has also appeared to have had a change of heart after signalling he was 'not happy' with Putin for ignoring his demands for a ceasefire. The US president said he would send more 'defensive weapons' to Kyiv, reversing a decision from days earlier to pause shipments. But Mr Trump has said he would help fund Patriot air defence systems for Ukraine after becoming angry over Russia's drone and missile barrages on Ukrainian cities. He said: 'We're going to send some more weapons. We have to. They have to be able to defend themselves. 'They are getting hit very hard now.' The Pentagon last week put weapon shipments, including surface-to-air missiles and artillery shells, on pause as part of a review over its own stockpiles. Lack of US security guarantee The talks on Thursday, via videolink, will be the first time the Coalition of the Willing has come together since March. Volodymyr Zelensky is expected to join the call from Rome, where he is attending the annual Ukraine Recovery Conference. The decision to all but end talks over a European-led troop deployment will come as a blow to the Ukrainian president, who has been calling for robust security guarantees from his allies. Talks over the prospect of boots on the ground largely collapsed because of limited troop pledges and a refusal by Mr Trump to offer US security guarantees to European militaries stationed in the war-torn country. A source familiar with the discussions said: 'Some realism has broken out. 'It could have duplicated existing Nato and other mechanisms, but it all fell on the issue of the US backstop and limited troop pledges.' Plans previously watered down The original plans for a large scale troop deployment to protect Ukraine's cities, ports and nuclear power plants had already been watered down to moving Western training missions back to the country. It was thought that the presence of British and French military trainers would fulfil the promise to put Western boots on the ground while not provoking Russia or putting Nato's plans to defend its eastern flank in jeopardy. Earlier this week, a French official told reporters: 'On the agenda, there's how to maintain Ukraine in a capacity to fight, how to increase pressure on Russia and how to continue the work on the next steps.' A readout of Sir Keir's latest call with Mr Zelensky said the Coalition would also debrief on the 'significant progress being made by military planners'. The Prime Minister told the Ukrainian president: 'The recent Russian attacks reinforced the need for Ukraine's friends and allies to focus both on ensuring Ukraine had the support it needed to defend itself, while also planning for a post-ceasefire future.'
BreakingNews.ie
39 minutes ago
- BreakingNews.ie
Religious orders will be ‘held accountable' for sex abuse crimes in schools
Institutions and religious orders involved in historical sex abuse in schools will be 'held accountable' for the 'awful' crimes, the education minister has vowed. The Government approved the establishment of a commission of investigation into allegations of historical sex abuse in schools across the country. Advertisement Mr Justice Michael McGrath will chair the commission. Minister for Education Helen McEntee, who outlined the details of the commission of investigation, said that any redress scheme would have to be funded by the religious orders and organisations. Minister McEntee announces establishment of Commission of Investigation into historical sexual abuse in schools and appointment of Chair — Department of Education and Youth (@Education_Ire) July 8, 2025 Speaking at Government Buildings on Tuesday, Ms McEntee said that more works needed to be done to establish exactly what is owned and in the possession of the religious orders. The scoping inquiry found some 2,395 allegations of sexual abuse in day and boarding schools run by religious orders, involving 884 alleged abusers in 308 schools across the country, between 1927 and 2013. Advertisement Most of the allegations were reported from the records of some 42 religious orders. The commission will examine the handling of allegations, suspicions and concerns of sex abuse in schools, failure to treat concerns, causes and responsibility for such failure, failure to prevent harm, and the concealment of child sex abuse. Ms McEntee said work is ongoing around how such a redress scheme would work, but said that it must be funded by religious orders and any other school organisations 'involved in these awful crimes'. The Fine Gael minister said it will take five years to complete, at a cost of tens of millions of euros. Advertisement She said the Government was examining a number of ways to make this happen, including making legislative change. Ms McEntee said that any steps to secure or maximise payment for a redress scheme is being worked on by the Attorney General 'It is important to stress that the preferred outcome here is that religious institutions and organisations would come forward,' she added. 'The commission will be separated into two parts, but they will happen in tandem. Advertisement 'The first will be the investigation, and the intention is that the chair will be supported by two commissioners. 'One commissioner which will look at the investigation into handling of sexual abuse claims in religious schools. 'The second commissioner will start work on the investigation into sexual abuse in schools that were non-religious run schools. 'The third commissioner will then focus solely on the survivor engagement forum. Advertisement 'The forum itself will be non-adversarial. 'There will be no cross examination. 'It will be anonymised, and it will mean that every single person who wishes to come forward to tell their story, to tell what happened to them, in that non-adversarial way that they would be able to do so, and it will allow all survivors to do this.' She added: 'The work that is happening in parallel is further examination of the religious orders, what funds they have, what assets they have, what levers may be used by government to ensure that funding is provided by those religious groups and orders. 'It's only after that that obviously a decision would have to be taken on a redress scheme. 'So while it's happening in parallel, it's not the establishment of a redress scheme, it's for the work that is needed, but I'm really clear those who are responsible should be held accountable, and that includes financially, but there is a body of work still needed. 'There are a number of different measures that we're working on at the moment. Some would require legislative change. 'Some of those would relate to limitations for civil claims, the statute of limitations that obviously applies to individuals who are taking cases.' Ms McEntee said that a clear five-year time line has been set out to ensure that it is not an 'open-ended scheme'. 'The chair, accompanied by additional commissioners and a support team will be in place by October 1, and they have been given a five-year time limit to complete this work,' the minister added. 'Importantly, and very clearly outlined in the terms of reference is that no later than two years into their work, the chair must provide a report to the minister of the day, outlining whether or not the work of the commission of investigation is on track to be completed within the five years. 'If it is not, there is a very clear obligation to redefine the scope or the work that is being done to make sure that this is done on time. 'I am absolutely committed and determined in supporting what will be an independent commission of investigation, but supporting their work that this is done on time, that survivors do not have to wait, that this does not go on indefinitely, and that importantly, the terms of reference would set out how we investigate the handling of what happened in schools who was responsible, where abuses were raised, where concerns were raised, what happened then, that that can be identified. 'But if we are not on track, if the chair feels that there are changes that need to be made, that will have to be outlined very clearly in a note to the minister no later than two years.' If you have been affected by any of the issues raised in this article, you can call the national 24-hour Rape Crisis Helpline at 1800-77 8888, access text service and webchat options at or visit Rape Crisis Help.
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Forget left and right: Norman Tebbit was a working-class hero. Politicians now could learn much from him
The word 'icon' is perhaps thrown around rather liberally in the lexicon of memorial. But in the realm of Tory politics, Norman Tebbit, whose death was announced today, was an icon – the politician who perhaps came closest, save of course for the Iron Lady herself, to embodying the phenomenon of Thatcherism. Why? He was not cast in the grouse-moor mould of the Harold Macmillan era, to be sure; but nor was Edward Heath, and little affection won he by that. (Nor, indeed, was Margaret Thatcher.) There was, perhaps, a degree of exoticism about his working-class background in the front rank of Tory politics in what was a much more class-conscious era. But Tebbit was no exotic pet, and nor would he have made such an impression on the public consciousness had he been so. Rather, he managed to personally embody a deeper, seismic shift in British politics: the Conservative party's decisive, and enormously successful, play for a large slice of the working-class vote. It is the nature of revolutionary myth-making to sometimes overstate a transformation. Working-class Toryism long predates Thatcherism, be that its Protestant and Unionist manifestations in Ulster, Scotland, and Liverpool or the more widespread tendency, noted by George Dangerfield in his 1935 classic The Strange Death of Liberal England, for working men to support the party that had no time for teetotalism. But while the nation's pubs might once have been a 'chain of political fortresses' for the party of Lord Salisbury, one can only imagine what he would have made of a working-class man serving as chairman of the Conservative and Unionist party. But then, ironically, a facility for evolution has always (until recently) been the party's strongest suit. Yet personally embodying a change is not enough to make an icon. Alone it produces at best a totem, or perhaps that should be a token; a passive object to be hoisted aloft to signal the party's adaptation to changing times. No, what made Tebbit an icon was that he believed in that change and he fought for it. He was a fighter, at a point when the party needed fighters, a true believer in what was in its early years a deeply uncertain revolution, and a bulwark for his leader against the forces of genteel reaction that would certainly, had the opportunity presented itself, have ditched her and her experiment alike. It would be an ugly politics that comprised solely each side's furious partisans. But it would be a very hollow politics that made space only for conciliators. There is an easy route to a faction's heart for a politician willing and able to be their tribune of the plebs, but that doesn't mean the job can't be well and honourably done, and Tebbit did it honourably and well. The latter is best illustrated by his star turns on the conference platform. Obviously, there was his (in)famous comment about getting on one's bike and looking for work. But more significant, in light of subsequent events, must be his call-and-response routine at the 1992 conference. 'Do you want to be part of a European union?', he asked the hall; the 'NO!' all but took the roof off. All this infuriated John Major, of course; one wonders if either seriously thought they would both live to see Britain leave it. Tebbit paid a heavier price than most for his frontline political career; the Brighton bombing saw him trapped under the rubble for an hour and, much more seriously, paralysed his wife, Margaret, for whom he subsequently cared. But like the true believer he was, he remained involved in the party and what became the Eurosceptic cause. He also managed a decade in the spotlight without acquiring airs and graces, and in the digital age proved more than willing to wade into the comments beneath his Telegraph blog and have it out with all and sundry. Courage, energy, authenticity – these Tebbit had in spades, and they are the things of which political icons are made. One might quibble that my definition makes little reference to the actual content of Tebbit's beliefs. But that is deliberate. He certainly held many views with which readers of this newspaper would profoundly disagree, then and now, and his views on social issues were wildly out of step with modern society. But an icon is not a hero, except perhaps in the Greek sense; recognising one does not require agreeing with all or even any of what they stand for. Every movement will have its own icons, and one of democracy's great strengths – or indeed, basic requirements – is recognising that there is space in public life for more than one. In fact, as a Conservative, it does with hindsight seem to have been a stronger, more vital Conservative party whose chairman was a substantial figure who could, occasionally, embarrass the leader. Henry Hill is deputy editor of ConservativeHome
