EU: the wind of anger rises from the east
Czech Republic, Romania, Hungary, Slovakia, Poland... the time of submission is coming to an end.
Two articles from France-Soir :
1 - Censorship motion: Gheorghe Piperea unveils the issues surrounding Ursula von der Leyen
In this debrief, law professor and MEP Gheorghe Piperea (Romania) shared his concerns about Ursula von der Leyen's presidency of the European Commission. In a frank and detailed conversation, he discussed the reasons that led him and other MEPs to table a motion of censure against Mrs von der Leyen.
Gheorghe Piperea puts forward three main reasons for this motion. Firstly, he mentions a report by the European Court of Auditors, revealing irregularities in the use of funds from the recovery and resilience mechanism, amounting to some 650 billion euros. “The auditors raised suspicions of corruption”, he explains, stressing the importance of transparency in the use of these funds.
The second point of discord concerns a decision of the European Court of Justice requiring the disclosure of SMS exchanged between Ms. von der Leyen and the CEO of Pfizer, Albert Bourla, concerning a vaccine contract of 35 billion euros. "It is unusual to negotiate by SMS for a contract of such a scale," said Piperea, adding that the lack of disclosure of these exchanges is worrying.
Finally, Piperea evokes the financial involvement of the European Commission with certain NGOs to promote the Green Deal, an act which he describes as "corruption", emphasizing a lack of transparency and ethics in these transactions.
Beyond these specific concerns, Piperea criticized the general management of the European Commission under the direction of Ms. von der Leyen, accusing a "contempt for institutions" and a violation of the principles of separation of powers. "This gives citizens a bad example," he said, insisting on the need to respect European institutions.
In a context where the media qualifies him as an extremist, Piperea defends himself by explaining that his approach is not dictated by a political ideology, but by principles of transparency, responsibility and respect for laws. "I am not an extremist, I am a lawyer and a committed teacher," he said, rejecting simplistic political labels.
According to him, the absence of censorship motions for 20 years within the European Union reveals a lack of will to request accounts from the Commission. "Democracy requires that the legislative power controls and, if necessary, sanctions the executive," he recalls.
Piperea concludes by saying that this motion is a strong signal, even if it is rejected. "It is a message of awareness," he said, hoping that this will encourage more transparency and respect for laws in the future.
In short, this interview immerses us behind the scenes of current political tensions within the European Union, highlighting the challenges of governance and transparency that it is confronted. Pipere, by his voice and his commitment, embodied the struggle for a more transparent Europe and respectful of its founding principles.
2 - Prague firmly rejects the new climate objective of the European Commission
The European Commission multiplies controversial initiatives and the discontent wins the opposition. Shortly after announcing its new climate objective, namely to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions by 90% by 2040 in relation to their 1990 level, which only a dozen EU member states support, Czech political leaders of the European People's Party (PPE, Center-Direct), who left the President of the EC, Ursula von der Leyen, express their categorical rejection. The announcement comes a few days before a censorship motion which targets the president of the European executive and which will be passed next week.
The new climate objective of the European Commission was officially proposed on Wednesday July 2. This is a modification of the European climate law, setting for the EU a target of reduction of 90% of net greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) by 2040, compared to the levels of 1990. This objective is a continuity of previous commitments such as climate neutrality by 2050 and the reduction of at least 55% of emissions by 2030, which was already in the same way. that the Green Pact, its binding legislation and its bureaucratic fallout.
EC puts it’s finger in the gear
The Commission mainly founded this proposal on the recommendations of the European Consultative Consultative Council on the Climate. "Industry and investors are turning to us to define a foreseeable direction of the trip. Today, we show that we firmly maintain our commitment to decarbonize the European economy by 2050", said Ursula von der Leyen, even adding that "the objective is clear, the course is pragmatic and realistic".
The new proposal insists on the "flexibility" granted to the Member States to achieve the objective, authorizing from 2036, an appeal limited to high quality international credits, making it possible to use foreign carbon compensations for part of the discounts. In addition, the text incorporates permanent carbon absorptions carried out on the national territory in the emission quota exchange system (SEQE).
In the coming months, the three European institutions, namely the Commission, the Council and the Parliament, will have to find an agreement on a common version of the text. Only a dozen member states officially support this objective. Others, such as Hungary, Slovakia, Poland and the Czech Republic, judge the proposal unrealistic.
And Czech political leaders did not fail to say it openly. Starting with Prime Minister Petr Fiala, who quickly rejected the goal. "We do not agree to set a new climate objective," he said the announcement of the new proposal from the CE. "We believe that the existing climatic objectives are already in place and that they must be achieved reasonably, by adjusting some of the measures on which we have agreed so as not to jeopardize competitiveness," he argued, warning that his country "will not have the support of public opinion".
Environment Minister Petr Hladík has followed suit. "This proposal is not realistic for the Czech Republic (...) without realistic conditions and fair funding, the transformation is not achievable," he added.
Von der Leyen threatened by a motion of censorship
For its part, MEP Tomáš Zdechovsky, whose party is affiliated with the PPE, warns of serious political consequences. "I think that if the European Commission does not want to be dismissed from its duties next week in Strasbourg and does not want us to vote for the motion of censorship targeting it (...), it will have to withdraw the proposal". The MEP refers to the censorship motion that aims for the CE.
This was deposited in the European Parliament and will be debated and then passed next week. Conservative MEPs behind this initiative, which had initially collected 74 signatures, criticize the Commission its lack of transparency in the "Pfizergate", its management of post-prisoners and the alleged use of funding to influence the Parliament on the Green Pact.
"The whole European Commission has gone mad. The majority of MEPs, all political trends, are angry," added Tomáš Zdechovsky, who regrets that the new climate proposal "was not discussed with [them]".
Another Czech MEP Alexandr Vondra, a member of the European Parliament (envi), said that his country "had no chance" to reach the goal without "huge costs, which will fall on ordinary people". He denounced an “example of disgusting climate colonialism”.
This anger among MEPs, including those of the PPE, is part of a context marked by many controversies. To the green or pfizergate pact are added the accusations of interference in the Romanian presidential election, and the Rearm Europe initiative for which Ursula von der Leyen intends to do without the opinion of the European Parliament. And now, another new proposal .... the negotiations are going to be complicated.
Brilliant article