European Parliamentary Research Service Blog

In this year of elections more than ever, everyone needs access to fair and unbiased reporting. You might have noticed worrying trends in the news about media politicisation and a lack of transparency around media ownership across the European Union. With threats, harassment, public shaming and even assassinations of journalists having a considerable chilling effect on the media landscape, Parliament has advocated better protection for press freedom and media pluralism in the EU and beyond. Its November 2020 resolution, for example, raised awareness of attempts by some EU governments to silence critical media and undermine media freedom and pluralism. So what has the Parliament done to protect our media environment?

The European Media Freedom Act (EMFA), the first ever EU-level regulation on media freedom, pluralism and protecting journalists, applies since April 2024. It ensures that the rules are the same for media online and offline, throughout the EU. It addresses the risk of ‘media capture’ through hidden funding, lack of transparency in the ownership of media outlets, the use of spyware, and provides guarantees against financial distress and market concentration. Parliament succeeded in removing a proposed reference to ‘protecting national security’ that might give state authorities a ‘blank cheque’ to spy on journalists. The act states that EU countries will have to respect media service providers’ editorial freedom. In line with Parliament’s request, all public authorities will have to publish annual accounts of their public advertising expenditure, including when advertising on online platforms. Parliament also ensured that very big online platforms, sometimes known as ‘gateways’, have to give a statement of reasons before they restrict content.

At the time of her murder in 2017, Maltese journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia was facing 43 different vexatious libel suits. To end this type of harassment of journalists – strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) – the EU adopted its Anti-SLAPP Directive in April 2024. The law obliges EU countries to ensure courts can dismiss these kinds of cases as unfounded, and do so early, under a mechanism for early dismissal of abusive cases,to avoid lengthy and cumbersome civil procedures. To help EU countries organise measures to deal with criminal proceedings brought abusively against journalists and other activists, the European Commission has provided guidance in a non-binding recommendation.

This way, Parliament used both its law-making and agenda-setting powers to promote democratic participation, fight disinformation and support media freedom and pluralism. Parliament’s powers fall broadly into six, often overlapping, domains: law-making, the budget, scrutiny of the executive, external relations, and, to a lesser extent, constitutional affairs and agenda-setting. This graphic shows more examples of areas where Parliament used one or more of its different powers to influence legislation:

Mapping the European Parliament’s powers in different areas

For a fuller picture of the European Parliament’s activity over the past five years, take a look at our publication Examples of Parliament’s impact: 2019 to 2024: Illustrating the powers of the European Parliament, from which this case is drawn.

Written by Clément Evroux (1st edition).

According to the Flash Eurobarometer 528 survey, released in December 2023, 81 % of Europeans believe that foreign interference in our democratic systems is a serious problem that needs to be addressed. The current geopolitical tensions highlight the following dilemma: while international cooperation is required to tackle global challenges such as climate change, including the participation of third countries in the EU debate, such activities also carry the risk of foreign interference in EU policymaking, which can be defined as the harnessing of EU policy proceedings through coercive, covert or deceptive means.

On 12 December 2023, the Commission published the defence of democracy package, which includes a proposal for a directive establishing harmonised requirements on transparency of interest representation carried out on behalf of third countries, as well as two proposals for Council recommendations, one on inclusive and resilient electoral processes in the Union, and one on promoting the engagement of citizens and civil society organisations in public policymaking. The majority of Member States have already adopted legislative or non-legislative measures to regulate interest representation activities in general, with several of them having also established specific registers. This proposal is about ensuring the transparency of interest representation activities geared towards influencing policymaking in the EU as a whole, while also facilitating the exercise of such activities across the single market.

Complete version

• May 2024: ‘Making representation of third countries’ interests more transparent‘ (1st edition)

Proposal for a directive establishing harmonised requirements in the internal market on transparency of interest representation carried out on behalf of third countries and amending Directive (EU) 2019/1937Committee responsible:Internal Market and Consumer Protection
(IMCO)COM(2023) 637
12.12.2023Rapporteur:Pablo Arias Echeverría (EPP, Spain)2023/0463(COD)Shadow rapporteurs:Sandro Gozi (Renew, France),
Alexandra Geese (Greens/EFA, Germany),
Virginie Joron (ID, France)Ordinary legislative
procedure (COD)
(Parliament and Council
on equal footing –
formerly ‘co-decision’)Next steps expected: Presentation of the Committee report

Citizens are protesting against a revision of certain provisions of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) adopted at the end of the 2019-2024 legislative term. Many people have written to the President of the European Parliament on this subject since April 2024. These citizens are concerned that the revision, voted on during the 24 April 2024 plenary session, would be detrimental to environmental protection. They also criticise the speed with which the reform is being adopted.

We replied to citizens who took the time to write to the President (in French). The main elements of our reply were:

English European Commission proposal

In response to farmers’ protests, the European Commission submitted a legislative proposal to simplify a number of environmental requirements with which farmers must comply in order to qualify for EU funding.

Among other things, the proposal abolishes the obligation for farmers to leave fallow at least 4 % of arable land. In return, farmers can receive financial support if they keep a proportion of their arable land fallow or introduce other measures (such as planting hedges or trees). In some EU countries, farmers would be given a choice between crop diversification and crop rotation, the latter being more restrictive. Finally, to avoid a disproportionate administrative burden, small farms of less than 10 hectares would be exempt from controls and penalties linked to environmental requirements.

More information on the Commission’s proposal is available in this press release.

Vote in the European Parliament

On 24 April 2024, following a request to hold a debate as an urgent procedure, Parliament adopted the Commission’s proposal with technical amendments proposed by the Council. The text was adopted with 425 votes in favour, 130 against and 33 abstentions. To see how each Member of the European Parliament voted, you can consult the voting results (point 30.24).

More information is available in this press release.

In accordance with Article 2 of Parliament’s Rules of Procedure, Members exercise their mandate freely and independently. The President of the European Parliament cannot influence their votes, and the President does not vote on texts adopted by Parliament.

French Proposition de la Commission européenne

En réponse aux protestations des agriculteurs, la Commission européenne a soumis une proposition législative visant à assouplir plusieurs exigences environnementales auxquelles les agriculteurs doivent se conformer pour pouvoir bénéficier des financements européens.

La proposition supprime entre autre l’obligation pour les agriculteurs de laisser au moins 4 % des terres arables en jachère. Au lieu de cela, les agriculteurs peuvent recevoir un soutien financier s’ils conservent une part de leurs terres arables en jachère ou s’ils introduisent d’autres mesures (telles que planter des haies ou des arbres). En outre, si leur pays offre cette possibilité, les agriculteurs pourraient choisir entre la diversification des cultures et la rotation des cultures, qui est plus contraignante. Enfin, pour éviter une charge administrative disproportionnée, les petites exploitations de moins de 10 hectares seront exemptées de contrôles et de sanctions liés aux exigences environnementales.

Plus d’informations sur la proposition de la Commission sont disponibles dans ce communiqué de presse.

Vote au Parlement européen

Le 24 avril 2024, à l’issue d’une procédure dite d’urgence, le Parlement a adopté la proposition de la Commission avec des modifications techniques proposées par le Conseil. Le texte a été adopté avec 425 votes en faveur, 130 contre et 33 abstentions. Pour voir comment chaque député a voté, vous pouvez consulter les résultats des votes (point 30.24).

Plus d’informations sont disponibles dans ce communiqué de presse.

Conformément à l’article 2 du règlement intérieur du Parlement, les députés européens exercent leur mandat de façon libre et indépendante. La Présidente du Parlement européen ne peut pas influencer le vote des députés européens, et elle ne vote pas sur les textes adoptés par le Parlement.

Background

Citizens often send messages to the President of the European Parliament expressing their views and/or requesting action. The Citizens’ Enquiries Unit (AskEP) within the European Parliamentary Research Service (EPRS) replies to these messages, which may sometimes be identical as part of wider public campaigns.

Written by Kamil Baranik, Micaela Del Monte, Silvia Kotanidis and Hendrik Mildebrath.

This briefing discusses the issue of the ‘Europeanisation’ of the ballot papers in Member States ahead of the 2024 European Parliament elections. The European Parliament has made two recent attempts at electoral reform seeking to ‘Europeanise the European elections. The second of these – still to be agreed with the Council – seeks to align electoral rules across the EU Member States. With the 2024 European elections imminent, it is useful to take a closer look at the rules as they currently stand.

The focus of this briefing is the notion of the ‘Europeanisation’ of the electoral ballot in its narrowest sense, namely whether ballot papers used in each Member State for the European Parliament elections can include the logos and/or names of the European political parties to which the respective national political parties are affiliated.

This exploration of the issue of the visibility of European political parties on the ballot papers for European elections is broken down into three parts. The first is the rationale behind and progress in the ‘Europeanisation’ of the European electoral process, with a particular focus on reforms geared towards showing the affiliation of national parties to European political parties on the ballot paper. The EU institutions have taken several initiatives intended to inject mutual European features into the national political processes ahead of the elections to the European Parliament. The second is a discussion of the data on European features of national ballot papers for the 2014 and 2019 European Parliament elections. The third part analyses the current state of ballot papers in all Member States, i.e. those applicable to the 2024 European elections, examining the extent to which Member States allow or forbid the visibility of European political party logos and/or names on the ballot paper for the European elections. This last section includes a synopsis of the similarities and differences between Member States.

Read the complete briefing on ‘‘Europeanising’ the electoral ballot‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Written by Marketa Pape and Balazs Szechy with Mislav Grbesa.

Europe is experiencing a significant demographic shift, which greatly influences daily life and requires comprehensive, integrated responses. As EU citizens enjoy longer, healthier lifespans, it is imperative for all Union policies to be proactive and facilitate the transition from an ageing society to one that embraces longevity.

The demography toolbox, devised by the European Commission, incorporates insights from across the EU and presents a holistic strategy to address demographic transformation through four key areas: supporting parents, empowering younger generations, enhancing the well-being of older generations, and managing migration effectively. The toolbox acknowledges the importance of considering the geographical aspects of demographic trends, particularly in areas facing population decline and notable emigration of young workers.

This briefing delves into the initiatives implemented following the release of two pivotal Commission communications: the green paper on ageing and the long-term vision for rural areas. It outlines the EU legislative instruments and programmes that bolster the four central components of the toolbox. Furthermore, the paper examines the demographic trends at regional and local level, focusing on the implementation of the Commission’s Talent Booster Mechanism. The briefing also provides a synopsis of the EU cohesion funding mechanisms designed to mitigate the adverse impacts of demographic change.

This briefing has been drafted at the request of a member of the European Economic and Social Committee, in the framework of the agreement between the European Parliament and the Committee.

Read the complete briefing on ‘Demographic change in Europe: A toolbox for action‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Written by Ivana Katsarova.

Pollination is a fundamental process for the survival of our ecosystems and ultimately, of our planet. Nearly 90 % of the world’s wild flowering plant species depend on pollination, along with more than 75 % of the world’s food crops and 35 % of global agricultural land. Without pollination, many interconnected species and processes functioning within the ecosystem would collapse. Not only do pollinators contribute directly to food security, but they are key to conserving biodiversity.

There are different pollinator species – such as bees, butterflies, birds and bats. Most of the 25 000 to 30 000 species of bees – Hymenoptera: Apidae – are pollinators, and together with moths, flies, wasps, beetles, and butterflies, they make up the majority of pollinating species. However, close to 35 % of invertebrate pollinators, such as bees and butterflies, face extinction globally. If this trend continues, staple crops like rice, corn and potatoes will increasingly be substituted for nutritious crops, such as fruits, nuts and vegetables, eventually resulting in an imbalanced diet.

Intensive farming practices, land-use change, mono-cropping, improper use of pesticides and higher temperatures associated with climate change all pose threats to bee colonies, by reducing their access to food and nesting sites, exposing them to harmful chemicals, and weakening their immune systems. 

We all depend on pollinators and it is therefore crucial to try and reverse their decline. To raise awareness of the importance of pollinators, the threats they face and their contribution to sustainable development, the United Nations designated 20 May as World Bee Day.

Every year pollinators make a €15 billion contribution to the agriculture industry and ensure pollination of around 80 % of crops and wild plants in the EU. In 2022, the over 710 000 EU beekeepers took care of more than 20 million beehives. Greece had the highest number of hives per beekeeper (99), followed by Bulgaria and Cyprus (81) and Spain (80).

The EU is the second largest honey producer after China, but it is also a net importer of honey mainly from China (40 %), Ukraine (26 %) and Argentina (12 %). EU countries with the largest honey production – Germany (34 %), France (31 %), Romania (30 %), Spain (27 %), Hungary (25 %), Italy (25 %), Poland (24 %) and Greece (22 %) – are mainly located in southern Europe, where climatic conditions are more favourable to beekeeping.

In 2023, the European Commission registered 1 million valid signatures to the ‘Save Bees and Farmers’ citizens’ initiative. To protect bees and people’s health, the European citizens called on the Commission to propose legal acts to help phase out synthetic pesticides by 2035, restore biodiversity, and support farmers in the transition.

More recently, in 2024, the European Parliament and Council approved measures to protect consumers and beekeepers from adulterated honey, and to facilitate informed consumer choices through increased transparency. The new piece of legislation makes it compulsory to indicate clearly, close to the product name, the countries of origin of the honey, ‘in descending order of their share in weight, together with the percentage that each one represents’. However, EU countries would have the flexibility to enforce this obligation for the four largest shares only when they account for more than 50 % of the blend. Should this not be the case, the percentages would have to be indicated for all the countries of origin. To ensure flexibility, packs under 30 g could indicate the names of the countries of origin by international two-letter ISO codes (DE for Germany for instance), as suggested by Parliament.

However, Members of Parliament had to come to a compromise on traceability. Parliament would have preferred that every producer had a unique identification code, so that all batches could be traced to the harvesting producer or importer. Instead, the Commission will need to conduct feasibility studies before proposing harmonised methods of analysis to detect honey adulteration with sugar, a uniform methodology to trace the origin of honey, and criteria to ensure that honey is not overheated when sold to consumers. Parliament was successful in its demand for the establishment of an EU platform of experts to collect data, improve controls, detect adulteration in honey and make recommendations for the future EU traceability system. After a formal adoption by the Council and by Parliament in April 2024, the new legislation will be published in the EU Official Journal and will enter into force 20 days later. EU countries will have to apply the new rules two years after entry into force. 

We all benefit from a society based on common values – such as justice, equality, solidarity, or tolerance. In the European Union, these common values are enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU). The article lists six fundamental EU values that are common to the EU Member States: (i) human dignity, (ii) freedom, (iii) democracy, (iv) equality, (v) rule of law, and (vi) human rights (including the rights of people who belong to minorities). The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has underlined that these values ‘define the very identity of the European Union as a common legal order’. The European Parliament strongly exercises its powers to ensure all EU countries respect these values. Let’s take a look at how Parliament has continued to protect EU values and fundamental rights during the 2019-2024 legislative term.

The EU institutions can ensure all EU countries uphold these values through monitoring, preventive and sanctioning mechanisms. For example, when a breach of the rule of law affects the EU’s financial interests, the Conditionality Regulation allows the EU to suspend or cut funding. Even though the European Parliament cannot trigger the mechanism itself, it has repeatedly called on the European Commission to do so, and has even taken the Commission to the ECJ over its inactivity. Parliament decided to take the Commission to court again in March 2024, this time because the Commission unfroze funds for Hungary despite persistent concerns over respect for EU values in that Member State.

Parliament had already activated the preventive mechanism enshrined in Article 7(1) of the TEU in 2018, to call formally on the Council to establish that Hungary might seriously breach EU values. Parliament’s concerns covered a broad array of issues, including the functioning of the constitutional and electoral system, minority rights and the freedom of expression. However the Council has blocked these proceedings since 2018. Parliament has continued to urge the Member States to take a decision.

To make its voice better heard in matters of fundamental rights and EU values, Parliament has called repeatedly for a mechanism on democracy, rule of law and fundamental rights to facilitate cooperation between the Parliament, Council and Commission. Moreover, Parliament has regularly adopted topical resolutions on issues relating to the rule of law, fundamental rights and EU values more generally, in particular in reaction to the Commission’s annual rule of law reports. In response to Parliament’s calls, the Commission included country-specific recommendations for each of the 27 EU Member States from 2022 – and takes stock of progress in addressing those recommendations since 2023.

Parliament’s focus on protecting human rights is therefore evidenced in its exercise of influence on constitutional issues to ensure EU values are respected. Parliament’s powers fall broadly into six, often overlapping, domains: law-making, the budget, scrutiny of the executive, external relations, and, to a lesser extent, constitutional affairs and agenda-setting. This graphic shows more examples of areas where Parliament used one or more of its different powers to influence legislation:

Mapping the European Parliament’s powers in different areas

For a fuller picture of the European Parliament’s activity over the past five years, take a look at our publication Examples of Parliament’s impact: 2019 to 2024: Illustrating the powers of the European Parliament, from which this case is drawn.

Written by Katrien Luyten.

With no end in sight to the war in Ukraine, the EU has started preparing for the post‑March 2025 period, when temporary protection for displaced people from Ukraine ends. The Temporary Protection Directive – triggered for the first time ever in March 2022, shortly after Russia invaded Ukraine – has enabled EU Member States to offer assistance and rights to people in need of immediate protection.

In principle, once the temporary protection period ends, the general laws on protection and on non-EU nationals in Member States will apply, including on return. Yet, there is a general fear that when large numbers of beneficiaries of temporary protection suddenly start seeking international protection, asylum systems risk being overwhelmed. Moreover, uncertainty about temporary protection beneficiaries’ legal status might place them in a legal limbo, with potential periods of irregular residence owing to slow processing of applications for international protection. Moreover, even if eligible for refugee or subsidiary protection status, beneficiaries will not enjoy the same rights as under the Temporary Protection Directive.

Academics and organisations dealing with migration management therefore agree on the urgency of finding a solution that would ensure a smooth transition out of the temporary protection regime and encourage eventual return to Ukraine. However, with the European elections taking place in June, the timing may not be ideal to amend existing EU legislation or craft new EU laws, as the legislative work in the European institutions will temporarily be put on hold. Moreover, a newly composed European Parliament and European Commission, as well as a new rotating presidency of the Council of the EU as from July, might also complicate decision-making.

This briefing provides an overview of the potential exit strategies discussed by experts in the field, including the pros and cons of the most widely discussed options.

Read the complete briefing on ‘When EU temporary protection for displaced people from Ukraine ends: Possible scenarios‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Written by David De Groot.

‘Rainbow families’ – same-sex couples with or without children – still face many obstacles while exercising their free movement rights today.

In a debate in the European Parliament in September 2010, then‑European Commissioner for Justice, Fundamental Rights and Citizenship, Viviane Reding, stated, ‘Let me stress this. If you live in a legally recognised same-sex partnership, or marriage, in country A, you have the right – and this is a fundamental right – to take this status and that of your partner to country B. If not, it is a violation of EU law, so there is no discussion about this. This is absolutely clear, and we do not have to hesitate on this’.

Over a decade later, same-sex couples still experience issues when relying on their free movement rights.

While the European Court of Human Rights has upheld that all member countries must provide for a registered partnership for same-sex couples if they do not provide for same-sex marriage, it can be unclear which rights should be attached to such a status. And while the European Court of Justice has ruled that same-sex marriages and parenthood established for same-sex couples have to be recognised in all EU Member States for the purpose of free movement, this case law is still very unclear, due to mixed concepts, which has led to consistent Member State violations.

In her 2020 State of the Union Speech, Commission President Ursula von der Leyen stated ‘If you are [a] parent in one country, you are [a] parent in every country’. In 2021, the European Parliament declared the EU an LGBTIQ Freedom Zone. It has expressed its deepest concern regarding the discrimination suffered by rainbow families and their children in the EU and insists that the EU needs to take a common approach to the recognition of same-sex marriages and partnerships. In December 2022, the Commission proposed a regulation on the recognition of parenthood.

Read the complete briefing on ‘Free movement rights of rainbow families‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

As the 77th Cannes Film Festival rolls out the red carpet, discover how the European Union supports filmmakers.

While pandemic restrictions impacted the film industry globally, European film production largely recovered by 2022. 1 960 films were produced in the EU and the United Kingdom in 2022, representing the second highest production level since 2014. However, cinema audiences have not returned: cinema attendance in the EU and the UK in 2022 represented only 67 % of the average pre-pandemic admission levels.

Meanwhile, the strong United States presence in the EU film market means European film makers need public subsidies to compete. American productions make up two thirds of the films on offer. Since 2013, EU State aid rules allow EU countries to support film production, distribution and promotion budgets by up to 50 %, and up to 60 % in the case of co‑productions funded by more than one EU country. In contrast, there are no limits on aid for script writing or film-project development, or for difficult works (defined by each EU country).

The EU programme supporting the cultural and creative sectors in 2021‑2027, Creative Europe, dedicates €34 million to European film distribution in 2023, and €5.5 million to European film sales. Moreover, €16 million in ‘Films on the Move’ funding encourages agents and theatrical distributors to invest in pan-European promotion and distribution of recent European films.

The Lux Prize also helps overcome distribution barriers for European films. The five films featuring in the competition’s final stage are subtitled in the 24 official EU languages and screened in cities and festivals throughout Europe, providing a wide European audience.

Further information

• EPRS publication ‘Creative Europe programme 2021-2027’, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document/EPRS_BRI(2018)628229
• EPRS publication ‘Coronavirus and the European film industry’, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document/EPRS_BRI(2020)649406
• European Commission ‘Creative Europe’ programme website on media, https://culture.ec.europa.eu/creative-europe/creative-europe-media-strand
• EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service: https://epthinktank.eu

Explore our website ‘What Europe does for me’ to learn more about how the European Union affects your daily life.

Written by Eamonn Noonan.

Strategic foresight is about actively building the future we want, rather than letting trends make choices for us. It is also about building awareness of the changing context, rather than about predicting events. These are the perspectives that inform the fourth report of the interinstitutional ESPAS network, published on 15 April 2024. The ‘Choosing Europe’s future’ report looks ahead towards 2040 to identify strategic challenges facing the EU in the near term. The report is the product of a collaborative exercise across nine EU institutions and bodies.

Globally, interconnected trends point towards fragmentation

The main part of the report analyses trends across 10 policy areas up to 2040. Two themes stand out: fragmentation is one; interconnections across sectors the other. Division and discord is becoming more prominent in international relations, in the global economy, and even as regards the diffusion of technology. The environment is also fragmented, with greater disparities between liveable and marginal areas, and greater threats to vulnerable populations. At the same time, internal divisions increase the risk of polarised societies. These multiple fragmentations create challenges on several fronts.

Intricate interconnections between trends can create both negative and positive dynamics. More geopolitical conflict can harm economic prosperity, which can mean fewer resources for climate transition, and thus lower investment in green technology. On the other hand, technological breakthroughs on energy and materials can propel a faster green transition, which can restore economic prosperity; this could ease geopolitical tensions, and in turn add impetus to international collaboration on new technology.

The report cites several striking research findings. Europe is warming faster than any other continent, and this will impact different generations differently (see Figure 1). By 2040, the EU will have 17 million fewer people of working age than in 2023. Closing the women’s health gap could benefit the world economy by up to US$1 trillion by 2040.

Figure 1: How current and future generations will experience global warming Strategic challenges and choices for the EU

The report’s concluding chapter turns to strategic challenges for the EU. Rather than making recommendations, the report identifies strategic questions and choices across several domains.

In global affairs, the EU needs to consider ways to be able to act with partners where possible, and autonomously where necessary. The report does not talk of hard or soft power, but of smart power: the ability to navigate in an uncertain geopolitical landscape.

On the climate and environment emergency, the report asks how the EU can ensure that the green transition can be both effective and achieved in a socially and economically equitable way.

The need for greater autonomy entails economic challenges, not least to the competitiveness of EU industry. De-risking approaches can involve economic frictions; how can these be best managed? Does the EU’s current economic model need adjustment in order to ensure long-term sustainability and wellbeing?

Technological progress will play a crucial role in the EU’s ability to solve challenges and deliver prosperity. How can the EU incentivise innovation, diffuse its economic benefits, and safeguard against potential harms?

On the social front, social fragmentation can undermine support for necessary transitions. How can the EU strengthen opportunities for all citizens, to work against greater inequality and to counteract anti‑democratic tendencies?

Using foresight for anticipatory governance

From its beginnings in the wake of the 2008 global financial crisis, the ESPAS initiative has sought to encourage a common understanding of global challenges across the EU institutions. This was not an end in itself, but a means to encouraging joint and effective action on these challenges. The 2024 ESPAS report results from an exercise in thinking together that involved nine EU institutions and bodies; this is a first step towards acting together.

The report draws attention to both threats and opportunities. Trends and disruptions are coming hard and fast. Negative trends, left unattended, evolve into crises. Game-changing developments can happen suddenly. These are good reasons to be able to act quickly, and to avoid putting off difficult decisions. The risk of false economies remains. In areas such as defence and security, for example, avoiding costs now may mean far greater costs in the future.

On the positive side, decision-makers can exploit the fact that trends act on each other. A focus on threat multipliers, such as social fragmentation, can prevent knock-on effects in other domains. Action on gain multipliers, such as environmentally friendly technologies, can give dividends across the board. The intricate interconnections between trends also mean that responses need to be more integrated. Strategic cohesion across policy areas, coupled with coordination across levels of governance, enhances the EU’s ability to shape events. Strategies and policies that contradict each other do the reverse.

The ESPAS report also emphasises that the EU has agency. It has the weight to exercise a positive influence, for instance on climate and on technology. The report concludes on a hopeful note, invoking the possibility of turning challenges into new opportunities to maintain and spread prosperity in Europe and beyond.

References

• ESPAS, Global trends to 2040: Choosing Europe’s future, ESPAS, 2024.
• ESPAS, Global trends to 2030: Challenges and choices for Europe, ESPAS, 2019.
• Noonan E., Foresight within the EU institutions: The ESPAS process so far, EPRS, European Parliament, 2020.

Read this ‘at a glance’ note on ‘Choosing Europe’s future: The 2024 ESPAS report‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Written by David De Groot with Jacques Gerard.

Directive 2004/38/EC (also known as the Citizens’ Rights Directive or alternatively the Free Movement Directive) establishes the conditions under which European Union (EU) citizens and their family members, whether they are EU citizens or third-country nationals (TCNs), can exercise the right of free movement within the EU. Before the adoption of this directive, there were several other directives and a regulation that addressed different categories of mobile EU citizens.

The provisions of the directive are highly specific, meaning that all articles have direct effect and do not allow much flexibility for the Member States in their implementation.

The directive covers not only EU citizenship but also the free movement of workers, establishment and services. Consequently, the directive introduces separate categories of beneficiaries each with their own unique set of specific rights.

This briefing offers an overview of the various conditions and rights outlined in the directive for both EU citizens and their family members.

Read the complete briefing on ‘Free movement of EU citizens and their family members: An overview‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Written by Maria Margarita Mentzelopoulou.

Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine on 24 February 2022, more than 4 million Ukrainians have been welcomed under the temporary protection scheme in the EU. From the beginning of the war, the European Commission, national, regional and local authorities, together with civil society and international organisations, have worked to facilitate the reception and the integration of people fleeing the war in Ukraine.

Background

The EU responded rapidly to Russia’s military invasion of Ukraine by activating, for the first time ever, the Temporary Protection Directive (TPD), which gave people fleeing the war legal status, immediate protection and stability. Rights under the TPD include access to a residence permit, to the labour market and housing, to medical and social welfare assistance, and to education for children and teenagers, and the possibility to travel within the EU and in and out of Ukraine – under certain conditions. In addition, any legal resident in the EU has the right to access banking services.

Receiving and integrating displaced people from Ukraine in the EU has been a notably different task from similar efforts with regard to other groups of asylum seekers and refugees, as the EU and its Member States have had to smoothly adapt and swiftly increase reception capacity. Authorities have had to provide guidance on how to address Ukrainians’ needs for housing, education, employment and healthcare, with particular focus on special care needs, for instance, for unaccompanied children and people who have faced torture or violence. Several challenges have emerged, for instance, as regards monitoring the integration process, providing adequate support to groups in vulnerable situations and addressing the ‘waiting dilemma’, as many people might want to return to their home country once it is safe again. However, one of the main challenges in the coordination between EU, national and local authorities on reception and integration has been information outreach to people fleeing Ukraine. Another such challenge has been the uncertainty regarding the length of stay, which directly affects planning for both local authorities and beneficiaries. Thus, across the different sectors, it has been crucial to increase local capacity and apply the necessary administrative flexibility to facilitate procedures in place.

EU actions to support reception and promote integration

To address this situation, the Commission issued operational guidelines to support the Member States in applying the TPD, and a 10-point plan for stronger EU coordination in welcoming people fleeing Ukraine. Additionally, the Solidarity platform – set up in close cooperation with Member States and the Schengen-associated states, EU agencies, international partners and the Ukrainian government – monitors the needs identified in the Member States and coordinates their operational response. The College of Commissioners appointed a Special Advisor for Ukraine to assist and coordinate the Commission’s efforts in promoting the integration of displaced people from Ukraine as regards work, housing, education and healthcare. The EU rapidly made adequate funding available to the Member States to assist them in supporting those fleeing the war and in exercising smooth border management.

Housing

The TPD provides for the right to suitable accommodation and housing. To find solutions to the urgent situation, Member States applied diverse models combining public reception with private accommodation offers. Initiatives vary from repurposing public facilities, collaborating with private entities offering housing, and enabling people to opt for independent lease contracts. Thus, besides giving Member States support to expand their reception capacity, the Commission has also offered them safe homes guidance to encourage private housing initiatives. There are many examples of how this hybrid approach works in practice. In Ireland, for instance, the International Organization for Migration screens and examines private housing offers before referrals, in collaboration with local authorities and the Red Cross. In Luxembourg, information is provided to host families by social workers available via the Red Cross switchboard. Gothenburg, Sweden, in partnership with NGOs, quickly opened two evacuation shelters (Skyddsvärnet and Räddningsmissionen) and facilitated private accommodation solutions. The same solution was applied by the local authorities of Belgium, France and Slovakia, which facilitated contracts with private hosts.

Healthcare

Ukrainians, being beneficiaries of temporary protection (BTPs), have access to healthcare in their host Member State. Thus, they are entitled to a broad range of sickness benefits and to accessing the host Member State’s public healthcare system. In addition, under certain national rules, where Ukrainians are regarded as fully insured, they may also receive a European Health Insurance Card. To cater to people from Ukraine in urgent need of specialised hospital treatment and care, the Commission set up a solidarity mechanism for medical transfers of refugees and displaced persons within the EU. In addition, the Commission prioritises children’s access to routine vaccinations, while coordinating targeted actions on mental health and trauma support. For example, in Belgium, BTPs are entitled to free public health insurance. Similarly, in France they may benefit from universal health protection, as well as complementary health insurance. Mental Health Finland organised a crisis helpline and training for its staff workers and volunteers, many of whom are themselves displaced persons from Ukraine. In Sweden, the Västra Götaland Regional Council established a dedicated organisation to deal with displaced Ukrainians’ health issues. To address the acute traumas of displaced people, the Vienna Social Fund, together with other organisations, offers psychological care and psychiatric outreach consultations.

Education

Besides providing guidance on supporting the inclusion of displaced children from Ukraine in education, the Commission is also financing support for schools, vocational education and training, and also for early childhood education and care, to accommodate these childen’s needs. Moreover, the EU Education Solidarity Group for Ukraine seeks to identify the needs of children from Ukraine and support Member States hosting them. In addition, through the School Education Gateway, the Commission provides access to learning materials in Ukrainian and offers online resources and courses for teachers. To further support those with a teacher’s background among the displaced, they get access to EU programmes and exchanges in the eTwinning community. Member States support the integration of displaced children by granting them full access to their education systems or offer them introductory courses. Estonia, for instance, established the Freedom School, where 29 of the staff are teachers and the support specialists are from Ukraine. Poland established a Ukrainian school allowing displaced children to study in Ukrainian and follow the Ukrainian curriculum. At the same time, the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) and NGOs have fostered language acquisition at schools in Bratislava, Slovakia, Italy and Czechia.

Jobs

Under the TPD, displaced people from Ukraine have the right to be employed or self-employed, in accordance with Member States’ laws. The Commission published guidance to help people fleeing the war access jobs, training and adult learning and, together with the European Labour Authority, launched the EU Talent Pool pilot to help people fleeing the war find a job in the EU. Moreover, the Commission has taken initiatives to facilitate the recognition of qualifications obtained in Ukraine, for instance, by setting up a resource hub and comparing the Ukrainian and European Qualifications Frameworks. Furthermore, Ukrainian jobseekers can acquire new language and basic digital skills under the Pact for Skills. The European Research Area for Ukraine portal is a hub for information and support services to Ukraine-based researchers and researchers fleeing Ukraine. Overall, it is shown that Ukrainians have been entering the labour market shortly after their arrival in EU Member States. For instance, in Poland, about 30 % of working-age Ukrainians had found a job by the end of May 2022, while in Lithuania over 27°000 Ukrainians were in employment by August 2023. Estonian employers have the possibility to request financial support for job-related training for employees who are BTPs. The role of dedicated public employment services at national and local level has also been crucial in supporting temporary protection beneficiaries in searching for employment or training, as in the case of AMS in Austria, Actiris in Brussels (Belgium), and Eesti Töötukassa in Estonia. In Latvia, Ukrainian medical personnel and teachers were permitted to access the labour market directly after their arrival.

Read this ‘at a glance’ note on ‘Reception and integration of displaced people from Ukraine‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Written by Krisztina Binder.

Teachers play an essential role in providing high-quality education and making education a rewarding experience for all learners. This makes teachers key to achieving a true European education area (EEA) that offers improved access to quality education and lifelong learning for all. However, the current shortage of teachers is a widespread issue across the European Union (EU). Not only is the teaching workforce ageing but the profession has become less attractive owing to factors such as challenging working conditions and perceived low societal recognition. Teacher shortages are more acute in certain subjects, specialisations and geographic areas. There is also a significant gender disparity in the teaching profession at various educational levels across the EU.

Against this backdrop, the 2023 Education and Training Monitor – the European Commission’s annual report on EU education and training systems – put a spotlight on the teaching profession, focusing in particular on teacher shortages across the Member States. The report noted that, while shortages are an increasing concern, reinforcing the teaching profession’s attractiveness requires a balanced policy approach to both teacher recruitment and teacher retention.

While the organisation and content of education fall under the responsibility of the Member States, the EU is working on boosting the prestige of the teaching profession and has launched several initiatives to offer professional education and development opportunities to educators. Examples include providing EU-level guidance on various topics relating to the teaching profession, establishing the Erasmus+ teacher academies that create communities of practice, and promoting cross-border teacher mobility.

Over the years, the European Parliament has expressed continued support for teachers and for making the teaching profession more attractive. In February 2024, it held a plenary debate on the working conditions of teachers in the EU, with the participation of the European Commissioner for Innovation, Research, Culture, Education and Youth.

Read the complete briefing on ‘Teachers: Key to achieving the European education area‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Primary, lower and upper secondary education teachers by age group, EU-27, 2021

Written by Magdalena Pasikowska-Schnass.

Climate change, a global phenomenon, affects every aspect of our lives, including cultural heritage in both its forms – tangible and intangible. Extreme weather conditions expose these important elements of our cultural identity to serious threats. These threats must be addressed to protect valuable sites and preserve them for future generations.

Research on climate change is not a novelty, but climate change as it relates to cultural heritage is a relatively new area of exploration and policy. The impact of climate change on cultural heritage made its way to the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Convention on Climate Change in Madrid in 2019 (COP25) and has become increasingly visible at subsequent COPs.

In 2003, the European Commission became the first European Union institution to launch a research project addressing the intersection of climate change and cultural heritage. Since then, the EU has expanded the scope and scale of its projects in this policy area. The EU’s competence in cultural policy is limited to providing funds, which it does in the areas of cooperation, networking, exchange of best practices, research and education. Despite this limitation, EU‑level policies offer a broad perspective, much needed given the interdisciplinary and global nature of this issue.

The dual challenge of climate change and protection of cultural heritage does not often feature clearly in European Parliament resolutions or European Commission policy documents. However, policy instruments are indeed available, and an integrated approach including not only economic, but also social, environmental, sustainability and identity dimensions of this complex issue is well underway.

Read the complete briefing on ‘The impact of climate change on cultural heritage ‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Written by Velina Lilyanova.

The Next Generation EU recovery instrument, and in particular the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF), with its target to dedicate at least 20 % of funding to the digital objectives, contribute significantly to one of EU’s core priorities, the digital transformation. A number of reports acknowledge the RRF as a primary contributor to most of the Digital Decade targets, namely the digital transformation of businesses and public services, as well as building digital skills and infrastructure across the EU.

This briefing aims to give a flavour of what Member States’ national recovery and resilience plans (NRRPs) bring to boost investment and innovation in the field of artificial intelligence (AI) in particular. The first part provides background information on what the EU does (in terms of regulation and investment) to ensure its competitiveness in the field. The second part contains a set of country examples outlining selected measures from various NRRPs.

AI is an advanced technology, and before unlocking all the opportunities it holds, Member States need to address barriers to its widespread uptake, such as regulatory issues, shortage of digitally skilled professionals, low digitalisation of companies and others. In a broad sense, all digital measures in the NRRPs help create enabling conditions allowing the development and uptake of more advanced digital innovations. Within the NRRPs, AI-related measures can fall under different categories: investment in research and development; digitalisation of businesses; digital public services; digital capacities; and deployment of advanced technologies. Some NRRPs (such as Spain’s) envisage specific financing to boost AI development, while in others support is rather indirect.

Overall, the NRRPs help pave the way for subsequent initiatives in developing AI. The RRF funds come on top of dedicated EU funding from other programmes, and although they will not suffice to close the investment gap in the field, they are a step towards boosting the EU’s ambition.

Read the complete briefing on ‘Investment in artificial intelligence in the National Recovery and Resilience Plans‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Written by Jakub Przetacznik.

The EU is providing Ukraine with strong political and economic support, and future EU accession should support its reconstruction and modernisation, the cost of which is currently estimated at over €450 billion. This year’s Ukraine Recovery Conference will seek to improve coordination and cooperation among its allies.

EU-Ukraine relations

In 2014, the EU and Ukraine signed an association agreement and established a deep and comprehensive free trade area, deepening bilateral political and trade relations. Since Russia began its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the EU and its Member States have committed over €143 billion in financial, economic, humanitarian, and military support for Ukraine, and have welcomed refugees. The sum includes €50 billion for the Ukraine Facility, approved in February, its recovery and its path to EU accession. The EU has also granted annual renewable autonomous trade measures (ATM) – suspending outstanding customs duties and quotas for Ukrainian products. An extension of the ATM until June 2025, reinforcing protection for sensitive agricultural products was approved by Parliament in plenary on 23 April 2024.

EU accession process

Ukraine made a formal request to join the EU after Russia began its full-scale invasion in February 2022. It was granted candidate country status in June 2022, and it unveiled its roadmap for decentralisation reform in November 2023, with a view to EU accession. In December 2023, EU Member States agreed to open accession negotiations. The European Commission submitted a draft negotiating framework for Ukraine on 12 March 2024 and, in its conclusions of 21‑22 March, the European Council invited the Council to ‘adopt them and to take work forward without delay’. The draft framework has three parts: accession negotiation principles; six negotiation clusters; and procedures. Once approved, the first intergovernmental conference will take place, the framework will be made public, and formal negotiations will begin. The key challenges for EU enlargement relate to agricultural, budgetary and cohesion policy reform, security and defence policy, and the mutual defence clause. Ukraine will have to make progress on its reform agenda, not least on fighting corruption and implementing the entire acquis.

Reconstruction and recovery

At the end of 2023, the cost of Ukraine’s reconstruction and recovery was estimated at €452.8 billion over 10 years. The sectors with the greatest needs are housing (17 % of the total), transport (15 %), commerce and industry (14 %), agriculture (12 %), energy (10 %), social protection and livelihoods (9 %), and explosive hazard management (7 %). The sum is equal to 2.8 times Ukraine’s estimated 2023 nominal gross domestic product; to meet these needs will require international support. It is the joint assessment of Ukraine, the World Bank and the Commission that effective reconstruction will be crucial to secure adequate funding and resources, ensure a safe and secure environment, and overcome political challenges.

Ukraine Recovery Conference 2024

This year’s Ukraine Recovery Conference (URC2024) will be held on 11 and 12 June in Berlin. The goal is to mobilise international support for recovery, reconstruction, reform and modernisation. URC2024 will focus on four themes: EU accession and related reforms; recovery of municipalities and regions; private-sector mobilisation for reconstruction and economic growth; and social recovery and human capital for the future of Ukraine. Integral to URC2024 will be the Recovery Forum, designed to offer a platform for dialogue, matchmaking and collaboration, and to enable local government and business representatives to interact.

Read this ‘at a glance note’ on ‘Ukraine‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

The European Parliament regularly receives enquiries from citizens about how the EU institutions deal with lobbyists and interest representatives.

The Treaty on European Union establishes that European Union (EU) institutions must have an open, transparent and regular dialogue with representative associations and civil society.

Transparency register

EU institutions interact with many people who represent specific interests, sometimes known as lobbyists. This is a legitimate and necessary part of the decision-making process, ensuring EU policies reflect society’s real needs. However, this process must be transparent. Transparency is one of the EU’skey principles and is important to maintain citizens’ trust.

Since 2021, the European Parliament, European Commission and Council share a common transparency register. This register lists ‘interest representatives’ (organisations, associations, groups and self-employed individuals) who try to influence the law-making and policy decisions of the EU institutions. It allows citizens to access information about lobbying activities in the institutions.

All interest representatives (lobbyists) are encouraged to register. However, registration is mandatory for certain activities, including access to the Parliament’s premises.

As of February 2024, close to 12 500 entities have been listed in the Transparency register. More than half are in-house lobbyists and trade associations and over a quarter are non-governmental organisations. For updated figures and more details, see the Transparency register statistics.

European Parliament calls for stricter rules to strengthen transparency

In the aftermath of ‘Qatargate’, the 2022 corruption scandal involving several Members of the European Parliament, Parliament adopted a resolution calling for stricter transparency rules. The text calls for the Transparency register to become fully mandatory and proposes setting up a special committee to identify any flaws in the European Parliament’s rules on transparency, integrity and corruption. Parliament has subsequently implemented a number of reforms to strengthen transparency.

Publication of meetings with lobby groups

• In the European Parliament, Members have to publish their scheduled meetings with lobby groups on the Parliament’s website.
• The European Commission’s high-level decision makers must publish lists of all meetings with lobby groups.

Further details on publications of meetings is available via the Transparency Register website.

Access to European Parliament premises

Organisations and individuals must be listed in the Transparency Register before requesting access (accreditation) to the European Parliament. However, registration in the Transparency Register does not mean that access is automatically granted. Further details on accreditation are available via the European Parliament website.

Further information

• Interinstitutional Agreement on a Transparency register, European Union, 2021
• EU Transparency Register, Briefing, European Parliamentary Research Service, 2023
• Article 7, Code of conduct for Members of the European Parliament regarding integrity and transparency, Rules of procedure of the European Parliament

Keep sending your questions to the Citizens’ Enquiries Unit (Ask EP)! We reply in the EU language that you use to write to us.

Written by Annastiina Papunen and Rebecca Torpey.

The special meeting of 17-18 April was the last European Council meeting before the European elections on 6-9 June. The EU Heads of State or Government concentrated on competitiveness, the situation in the Middle East and the war in Ukraine. The discussions on competitiveness – informed by a report by former Italian Prime Minister Enrico Letta on the future of the internal market – were lengthy and difficult. Whereas EU leaders agreed on the need for a new European competitiveness deal, the outcome was less ambitious on measures towards convergence of the business environment and more centralised supervision of financial markets. On Ukraine, the most salient topics discussed were the provision of air defence for Ukraine and of ammunition more generally, and the use of frozen Russian assets. On the Middle East, EU leaders condemned the Iranian attack on Israel, reiterated their previous statements on Palestine, called for be avoidance of further escalation of tensions in the region, and committed to increase support for Lebanon.

© European Union 2024 1.     General

Addressing EU leaders at the start of the meeting, the President of the European Parliament, Roberta Metsola, emphasised – in the context of the European elections – that the European Parliament stood ready to support Member States in ‘pushing back and addressing any malign interference with our democratic decision-making processes’. With the participation of the European Parliament President, the European Council had a lengthy discussion on the threat of disinformation, and agreed to ‘closely monitor and contain any risks stemming from disinformation, including through artificial intelligence, as well as foreign information manipulation and interference in electoral processes’.

2.     European Council meeting Ukraine

The European Council recalled its March 2024 conclusions and its full support for Ukraine. Before entering the meeting, the Dutch Prime Minister identified air defence and ammunition as the two short-term priorities for Ukraine. The previous week, Germany had announced that it would send a third Patriot system, in addition to other air defence equipment already sent, such as Gepard anti-aircraft gun tanks and Iris-T air defence systems. Germany has been reaching out to both NATO and non-NATO partners to join the Immediate Action on Air Defence initiative. The aim is to ask partners to check their air defence stocks and consider what could be sent to Ukraine.

MEPs had already been calling on the Member States to send more patriot systems; 86 MEPs recently sent a letter to European Council President Charles Michel, the High Representative/Vice President (HR/VP) Josep Borrell and some Heads of State or Government (DE, EL, ES, PL, RO, NL). Michel stressed that Ukraine needed not words but more military equipment. Even with the Patriot systems in place, each missile costs millions of dollars, while Russia is using comparatively cheap drones (among other equipment), produced in Russia and Iran. EU leaders also welcomed the progress on the frozen Russian assets proposals and called for their speedy adoption. Funds such as these could be utilised to cover the cost of much-needed military equipment.

Since the start of its invasion in February 2022, Russia has launched hundreds of missiles and drones at Ukraine – killing thousands of Ukrainians and causing considerable damage to the country’s energy infrastructure. In response, EU leaders have committed to providing additional humanitarian and civil assistance to Ukraine, such as power generators.

Main message from the European Parliament President: Metsola stressed that the EU’s support for Ukraine cannot waver. ‘We need to speed-up and intensify the delivery of equipment that they need, including on air defence’.

Competitiveness

As indicated in Michel’s invitation letter, competitiveness and the single market took centre stage in this special meeting, and the conclusions on these topics were long and detailed. Years of polycrisis and a complex global situation have made strengthening the economic base an urgent task for the EU, as there are worries that China, the US and India will leave an ageing Europe behind if no action is taken. EU leaders notably called for action to enhance productivity and growth in Europe, both to improve the living standards of EU citizens and to strengthen Europe’s economic standing in the world. European Parliament President Roberta Metsola said in the meeting that now is the time to show political will to deepen the single market or ‘we risk losing it all’.

One of the most intense debates related to further steps to deepen the capital markets union (CMU) in order to mobilise private capital, notably €33 trillion in private savings, for investment and innovation. Among the steps on CMU proposed, EU leaders agreed to harmonise ‘relevant elements of national corporate insolvency frameworks’. Proposals put forward by France and Germany, however, for ‘tougher and more centralised’ supervision of capital markets, were opposed by at least 10 smaller countries, led by Ireland and Luxembourg. The compromise text calls for an improvement in ‘the convergence and efficiency of the supervision’, and tasks the Commission with assessing the conditions for the European supervisory authorities to ‘effectively supervise the most systemic relevant cross-border capital and financial market actors’. After the meeting, Michel stated that ‘capital markets union is our European inflation reduction act’, which could deliver a similar boost to the EU economy. EU leaders will discuss CMU again during their June 2024 meeting. The divisive issue of new common EU debt was also raised as a possible way to finance a green and competitive Europe, but it was not mentioned in the conclusions.

Also subject to intense discussion was the question of whether or not to include corporate tax harmonisation on the list of steps forward. A number of countries, notably Ireland and Estonia, were strongly against this, as such a move might damage their competitive advantage. The conclusions therefore refer only to ‘a targeted convergence of business conditions’.

As part of the meeting, following a June 2023 European Council request, former Italian Prime Minister Enrico Letta presented his much anticipated 140-page report on the future of the internal market, entitled ‘Much more than a market – Speed, security, solidarity‘. The report argues that the single market is in dire need of updating, especially in relation to energy, telecoms and finance, which, as Letta underlined, are crucial components of economic security. Letta also advocates the formulation of a ‘fifth freedom’ to enhance research, innovation and education, in addition to the classic ‘four freedoms’ of free movement of goods, services, capital and people. Moreover, he underlines that ‘powerful forces of change – spanning demographics, technology, economics, and international relations – necessitate innovative and effective political responses’. The EU leaders welcomed the report and asked the current and upcoming Council presidencies to take work forward on its recommendations by the end of the year.  

EU leaders also called for a new European competitiveness deal to close gaps in innovation, growth and productivity, and to strengthen ‘Europe’s economic, manufacturing, industrial and technological base, thereby securing the Union’s economic resilience and industrial renewal, global competitiveness, technological leadership, and attractiveness as a business location’. The aim is also to have a level playing field – both inside the EU, through an effective State aid and competition framework, and globally. Former European Central Bank (ECB) President Mario Draghi is currently working on a report on EU competitiveness to be presented to EU leaders in June. In a recent speech, Draghi said that he would call for ‘radical change’, because a ‘rapidly changing world has caught Europe by surprise’, and many current EU processes are designed for ‘the world of yesterday – pre-COVID, pre-Ukraine, pre-conflagration in the Middle East, pre-return of great power rivalry’.

Another crucial component in efforts aimed at boosting EU competitiveness is the development and implementation of an effective industrial policy together with stakeholders. The globalisation and smooth supply chains of recent decades have seen factories move to countries outside the EU. The move needs to be countered and European strategic autonomy increased, for Europe to have ‘more factories and fewer dependencies‘. In this vein, EU leaders also stated that strategic dependencies should be reduced, as mentioned in the Versailles Declaration, especially on (i) energy, (ii) critical raw materials, (iii) semi-conductors, (iv) health, (v) digital, (vi) food, (vii) critical technologies, and additionally on (viii) chemistry, (ix) biotechnology and (x) space. The EU currently has an industrial strategy in place that was published in 2020 before the COVID-19 crisis, and updated in 2021.

Being digitally advanced as a society and at the forefront of ‘game-changing digital technologies such as artificial intelligence, blockchain, quantum computing and immersive reality technology’ was another essential element mentioned in the conclusions to strengthen EU competitiveness. In that context, EU leaders also requested a joint communication from the Commission and the HR/VP on ways to strengthen the EU’s leadership in global digital affairs.

The EU Heads of State or Government also looked into the current regulatory framework and the administrative burden it poses on companies. They stressed that the Commission should apply the ‘think small first’ principle, and carry out ‘high-quality, timely and thorough impact assessments and competitiveness checks, including of cumulative effects’ when designing major proposals, in order not to overburden companies or national authorities. EU leaders called for an initiative to cut reporting requirements by at least 25 %.

Finally, EU leaders underlined that a ‘competitive, sustainable and resilient agricultural sector’ was a key strategic interest of the Union. Reiterating their March 2024 conclusions, they called for the swift adoption of amendments to the Common Agricultural Policy Regulation and for work to be taken forward, notably on (i) cutting red tape for farmers; (ii) strengthening the position of farmers in the supply chain to secure their income; and (iii) ensuring fair competition internally and globally. They also mentioned cohesion policy, which rarely features in European Council conclusions, as having ‘a key role in narrowing disparities and stimulating long-term sustainable growth’.

EU-Türkiye relations

As anticipated, the European Council held a strategic discussion on EU-Türkiye relations. The European Council made it clear that progress on EU-Türkiye cooperation would be linked to the resumption of, and progress in, the Cyprus settlement talks. Talks have been stalled since the 2017 talks in Crans Montana. Furthermore, the European Council welcomed the appointment of María Angela Holguín Cuéllar as the United Nations Secretary-General’s Personal Envoy on Cyprus.

Middle East Iran/Israel

The European Council condemned the Iranian attack on Israel on 13 April, which utilised hundreds of missiles and drones – similar to the weapons supplied to Russia for use in its war against Ukraine. In advance of the meeting, a number of EU leaders (such as those of Greece and Ireland) called for restraint and de-escalation to avoid a regional conflict. The US, Israel’s main security guarantor, has also stated that it will not participate in any retaliatory attack on Iran. EU leaders were united in agreeing to further sanctions on Iran in response to the attack, namely in the sectors of missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles, i.e. drones.

Gaza

The European Council reiterated its calls for (i) an immediate ceasefire; (ii) unconditional release of all hostages; and (iii) full, rapid, safe and unhindered access to humanitarian aid for Palestinians. EU leaders restated the EU’s commitment to a two-state solution. Both Ireland and Spain wanted to discuss recognition of the Palestinian state, as part of momentum towards a two-state solution. Belgian Prime Minister Alexander De Croo stated that Belgium was open to recognising the Palestinian state ‘at some point’, but as part of a process and if further steps were taken.

Lebanon

Southern Lebanon has also been impacted by the escalation of violence in the region, with Israeli retaliatory strikes on Hezbollah on the southern Lebanese border and growing conflict between Hezbollah and other factions. EU leaders called on all parties to implement United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701, which calls for the full cessation of hostilities, notably between Israel and Hezbollah. The European Council committed to strengthening EU support for the Lebanese armed forces, as well as to providing additional aid for the most vulnerable in Lebanon – notably refugees. Struggling with a severe economic crisis, high inflation and poverty, Lebanon is also the country with the highest number of refugees per capita in the world – approximately 1.5 million refugees in total. Amid increasing numbers of Syrian refugees arriving in Cyprus, the Cypriot government announced that it was suspending examination of asylum requests, and wanted EU partners to reconsider the status of certain areas of Syria, so as to declare them safe for refugee returns. EU leaders recalled the need to ‘achieve conditions for safe, voluntary and dignified returns’ of Syrian refugees based on the UNHCR definition. The European Council tasked the High Representative / Vice-President and the Commission with examining and improving the efficiency of EU assistance for Syrian refugees and displaced people in Syria.  

Main message from the European Parliament President: Metsola noted that ‘the European Parliament voted overwhelmingly to have the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps listed as a terrorist organisation. We maintain that’.

Strategic agenda

As flagged up in the EPRS outlook, this meeting was also the moment to take stock of preparations for the next strategic agenda which have been going on in small groups of Heads of State or Government in recent weeks. Michel informed the members of the European Council of the results from the various small group sessions and indicated the next steps in the process.

In that context, the European Council’s indicative leaders’ agenda had also envisaged a discussion on internal reforms. Neither that topic, nor the specific call from the European Parliament to open a convention for Treaty change were addressed at this meeting.

Read the complete briefing on ‘Outcome of the special European Council meeting of 17-18 April 2024‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Written by Ralf Drachenberg with Paweł Bącal.

In a series of ‘This is Europe’ debates, from 2022 to 2024, many EU Heads of State or Government have addressed the European Parliament, to present their vision for Europe and its future. Touching on past and present crises, they have outlined the policy areas that they believe the EU should concentrate on in the future. While every speaker has had their own focus, there have been six recurring themes: (i) the value of EU membership; (ii) the importance of defending EU values; (iii) the main challenges facing the EU; (iv) the need to deliver for EU citizens; (v) the next steps in EU integration; and (vi) the importance of EU unity. While offering a unique analysis of all of these contributions, this briefing outlines the main messages, the key topics, and similarities and differences between the various speakers. It also examines the focus of participants based on party political affiliation and provides a comparison with the previous debates on the future of Europe with EU Heads of State or Government, in 2018-2019.

Read the complete briefing on ‘‘This is Europe’ debates in the European Parliament, 2022-2024‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Participants in ‘This is Europe’ debates in the European Parliament (2022-2024) Attention given by each speaker to the 20 most addressed topics. categories of all topics