European Parliamentary Research Service Blog

Citizens are calling on the European Union to sanction Iceland for its whaling practices. Many citizens have written to the President of the European Parliament on this subject since January 2025 to express their concerns regarding the impact of whaling in the environment. They are also calling on the EU to impose sanctions on Iceland, push for sustainable alternatives like ecotourism, and encourage Iceland to prioritize marine conservation.

We replied to citizens who took the time to write to the President:

Main elements of our reply EU laws protecting whales

Iceland’s decision to allow the hunting of whales falls outside the EU’s jurisdiction. However, whalesare protected from hunting within EU waters. The EU has always defended the full implementation of the moratorium on commercial whaling, in place since 1986.

Parliamentary debate

As mentioned in your message, on 22 January 2025 the European Parliament held a debate on stepping up international action to protect whales following Iceland’s decision to extend commercial whaling until 2029.

Members of the European Parliament raised concern about Iceland’s decision. They underlined the vital role that whales play in maintaining the marine ecosystem and the need for stronger, enforceable action under updated international frameworks. Members also highlighted that ecotourism such as whale watching can protect tradition, ecosystems and the economy.

You can read the full text of the debate in the original language of the speakers.

European Parliament position on whaling

In its October 2022 resolution, the European Parliament strongly supports the continuation of the global moratorium on commercial whaling as well as the ban on international trade in whale products. Parliament calls on Japan, Norway and Iceland to cease their whaling operations. The European Parliament also notes the critical importance of whale populations to marine ecosystems and carbon sequestration.

Decision on EU sanctions

The European Parliament is not involved in the process of adopting sanctions against non-EU countries. Following a proposal from the Head of EU diplomacy, decisions on EU sanctions are taken in a unanimity at the Council.

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 Laurence Amand-Eeckhout.

Three years after its launch, Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan is positively impacting lives by fostering collaboration and advancing prevention, early detection, treatment and care while enhancing the quality of life for cancer patients. Nevertheless, cancer remains a major public health challenge, with cancer cases continuing to rise, reflecting population ageing as well as changes to people’s exposure to risk factors.

World Cancer Day

World Cancer Day was established on 4 February 2000 at the ‘World Summit Against Cancer for the New Millennium’, on the initiative of the Union for International Cancer Control. The three-year ‘United by unique’ campaign (2025-2027) aims to raise awareness about the need for people-centred care. Behind every cancer diagnosis, there is a unique human story, but people touched by cancer are united in a shared ambition to see cancer treated successfully and lead better lives with cancer.

Background

As defined by the World Health Organization (WHO), cancer is a generic term for a large group of diseases that can affect any part of the body. One defining feature of cancer is the rapid creation of abnormal cells that grow beyond their usual boundaries, which can then invade adjoining parts of the body and spread to other organs (metastasis). Cancer arises from the transformation of normal cells into tumour cells in a multistage process that generally progresses from a pre-cancerous lesion to a malignant tumour.

According to the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), at least 40 % of all cancer cases could be prevented with effective primary prevention measures. Tobacco use, alcohol consumption, unhealthy diet, obesity, lack of physical activity, hormones, environmental exposures, occupational exposures, ultraviolet radiation exposure, infections (e.g. hepatitis B and C viruses and some types of human papillomavirus) are the main risk factors for cancer. The impact of cancer can also be reduced through early detection and appropriate treatment.

Facts and figures

The European Cancer Information System (ECIS) provides indicators on cancer across the EU. Mainly driven by an ageing population, the burden of cancer is increasing: in 2022, 2.7 million people in the EU were diagnosed with cancer; cancer deaths also went up and were estimated to be at 1.3 million. Cancer is currently the second leading cause of mortality in the EU on average (after cardiovascular diseases), although it is already the leading cause of death in five Member States (Belgium, Denmark, France, the Netherlands and Spain). Cancer diagnoses are expected to increase by 19 % by 2040 in EU countries; in the same period, cancer deaths are expected to increase by 27 %, making cancer the leading cause of death in the EU. The four most common cancer causes of death in the EU are estimated to be lung (19.5 % of all cancer deaths), followed by colorectal (12.3 %), breast (7.5 %), and pancreatic cancer (7.4 %). Among men, the main diagnoses are prostate cancer, followed by lung cancer and colorectal cancer. Among women, breast cancer is the main diagnosis. As underlined in the 2024 report on ‘Beating Cancer Inequalities in the EU‘, published jointly by the European Commission and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), not everyone has the same risk of dying from cancer, even within the same country.

The economic burden of cancer across the EU is difficult to calculate. In 2021, the Commission estimated the overall economic impact of cancer to exceed €100 billion annually. In its November 2024 report on ‘Tackling the impact of cancer on health, the economy and society‘, the OECD estimates that – assuming that the incidence and survival rates of cancer per age group remain unchanged – per capita cancer health expenditure would grow by 67 % between 2023 and 2050 on average across the OECD.

EU action on cancer

EU Member States are responsible for their own healthcare policies. However, according to Article 168 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the EU can complement and add value to national actions by encouraging the sharing of information and best practices and by fostering cooperation.

As far back as 1985, the EU has been fighting cancer alongside Member States, in collaboration with the WHO, the Joint Research Centre and the IARC. The EU focuses on prevention, research and information while also fostering cooperation between Member States. It also complements Member States’ efforts by adopting legislation to address cancer risk factors (such as exposure to environmental pollution or hazardous substances and radiation, obesity, alcohol-related harm, tobacco consumption and smoke- and aerosol-free environments) and ensuring specific policy rules reflect cancer-related concerns.

In February 2021, as part of the European Health Union, the European Commission adopted the Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan to address cancer-related inequalities and help improve prevention, treatment and care. The plan is structured around four key action areas (prevention; early detection; diagnosis and treatment; and quality of life) and supported by 10 flagship initiatives, currently under implementation:

1. The Knowledge Centre on Cancer
2. The European Network of Comprehensive Cancer Centres (which, by 2028, should link 100 multidisciplinary structures that manage all aspects of cancer care, research and specialised medical training)
3. Cancer diagnosis and treatment for all
4. The European Cancer Inequalities Registry
5. The EU Cancer Screening Scheme (a Council recommendation was adopted in 2022)
6. The European Initiative to Understand Cancer
7. Better quality of life for cancer patients (smart card application)
8. Eliminate cancers caused by the human papillomavirus (a Council recommendation on vaccine-preventable cancers was adopted in 2024)
9. The European Cancer Imaging Initiative (to create digital infrastructure linking cancer imaging data resources across the EU)
10. Helping children with cancer

The EU has invested continuously in cancer research through successive framework programmes for research and innovation. Under Horizon Europe (2021-2027), the EU Mission on Cancer aims to offer a comprehensive approach by bringing together research, innovation and policy development.

European Parliament

In June 2020, the European Parliament set up a Special Committee on Beating Cancer (BECA), which completed its mandate in December 2021. The final report (‘Strengthening Europe in the fight against cancer – towards a comprehensive and coordinated strategy‘) was adopted by Parliament in February 2022. The recommendations focus on cancer prevention, equal access to cancer care across borders, and a European approach addressing medicine shortages.

In its resolution of 13 December 2023 on non-communicable diseases (NCDs), Parliament pointed out that many people living with NCDs (including cancer) are undiagnosed and unaware of their illness, and thus fail to get proper, timely treatment. It invited the Commission to collect examples of best practices regarding screening for and early detection of NCDs.

Since the start of the current legislature, Parliament has submitted several written questions to the Commission regarding cancer-related issues. They include questions on the reintegration of cancer patients into the workplace (E-002497/2024), addressing ageism in cancer-related healthcare (E-001125/2024), and providing support to Member States lagging behind in screening programmes (E-002125/2024). Additional questions have focused on the Commission’s efforts to achieve a tobacco-free generation by 2040 (E-001618/2024), tackling unequal access to medicinal products (E-002559/2024), introducing labelling on all alcoholic beverages (E-002418/2024), and abolishing taxes on domestic fruit and vegetable production as a measure to tackle child obesity, cancer and diabetes (E-002474/2024). The new standing Committee on Public Health (SANT) – succeeding the SANT subcommittee – will continue to monitor the implementation of the Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan.

Read this ‘at a glance’ note on ‘World Cancer Day 2025 – 4 FebruaryThe burden of cancer is increasing‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Written by David Ashton.

Online commerce is a defining feature of the modern world. It opens up opportunities for consumers and businesses alike. For consumers, it can mean a wider choice of goods and services at cheaper prices. For business, it offers new ways to reach larger markets. The borderless nature of online commerce means that, today, such opportunities within the EU are also open to businesses from elsewhere, and this phenomenon has been on the rise in recent years. Many consumers are familiar now with the advantages of being able to purchase goods at low prices from all corners of the globe.

However, along with these opportunities come risks. Goods imported from outside the EU do not always conform to EU product standards or comply with EU consumer law. It can be extremely challenging for customs and other public authorities to check the increasingly large numbers of imports of often very low value.

These challenges have been identified by a wide variety of stakeholders across the EU. The issue is on the radar of various actors in the EU institutions, with the promise of action already from the new Commission, concerns expressed by Member States and attention in Parliament. The consensus seems to be that the time has come for action to be taken.

The issues are technically challenging. They sit at the centre of a web of legislation, some of which has only recently been adopted. To get to grips with the problem, policymakers and lawmakers will need to examine that legal framework systematically, and work out what gaps have to be filled, and how best to fill them. They will also need to bear in mind that similar concerns have already been raised in other jurisdictions, and some solutions proposed. The way in which these issues are addressed will put wider trading and diplomatic relations between large global actors to the test.

Read the complete briefing on ‘Problems presented by third-country e-commerce‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Written by Vasilis Margaras and Emmanuel Alvarez.

Discussions on the next EU multiannual financial framework are expected to begin soon. These talks on the allocation of future budget resources have a direct impact on all European Union policies, including EU cohesion policy. A reflection on the future of cohesion policy is underway, engaging EU institutions and advisory bodies, EU Member States, regional and local authorities, and stakeholders. The European Commission set up a high-level group of specialists to examine the direction of cohesion policy, which came up with a number of conclusions in March 2024. These conclusions fed into the ninth report on economic, social and territorial cohesion, which acts as a compass for the Commission’s reform options for the future design of cohesion policy. Nevertheless, there are still some crucial decisions ahead.

This reflection process not only entails technical matters, but also touches upon many other policy issues, some of which have highly political content. Negative scenarios for the cohesion budget, competing thematic priority allocations, a possible recentralisation of funds, or the future relationship with the Recovery and Resilience Facility, all have the potential for political friction. Issues requiring discussion include simplification and flexibility, better coordination of European Structural and Investment Funds with other instruments, and a more focused ‘place-based’ approach to cohesion policy. Local and regional authorities across all EU Member States highly value and support EU cohesion policy. However, political division between budget net-recipient Member States and net contributors could lead to cohesion policy being contested, especially in the light of new emerging priorities for the EU (e.g. in immigration, security and defence, or enlargement).

The appointment of a new College of Commissioners on 1 December 2024 and the beginning of a new legislative process provide a unique opportunity for regional and local stakeholders to influence national positions and those of the European institutions at an early stage.

This is an update of an October 2023 briefing by Balazs Szechy.

Read the complete briefing on ‘The future of cohesion policy: Current state of the debate‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

GDP per head (PPS) 2021 Population change in EU NUTS3 regions (2010-2021)

Written by Anja Radjenovic.

Over the past decade, the EU’s asylum and migration systems have been severely tested by several major events, including the 2015-2016 migrant crisis, the COVID-19 pandemic and recent tensions at the EU’s eastern border. To address these challenges, in 2020 the European Commission proposed a pact on migration and asylum, a comprehensive legislative framework designed to streamline and harmonise the reception of asylum seekers in the EU. The pact was adopted by the European Parliament and the Council in December 2023 and published in May 2024. This landmark agreement, heralding significant reforms, consists of 10 legislative acts that bring together policies on migration, asylum, integration, and border management. Its core objectives are to foster greater responsibility sharing, solidarity and effective border management among the EU Member States.

To facilitate the pact’s rollout, the Commission has developed a common implementation plan categorising the various obligations stemming from the pact into 10 distinct building blocks. The plan also identifies key milestones on the way to establishing the necessary legal and operational frameworks that would allow Member States to start applying the pact by mid-2026.

Despite the adoption of the 10 legislative acts, support for them is not homogeneous across the Member States. Additionally, there is pressure for further changes, and the migration debate has been increasingly politicised. Experts and stakeholders have highlighted key challenges and potential scenarios for the implementation of the pact and raised doubts as to whether the new rules will be able to tackle the complexities of migration while also protecting fundamental rights.

Read the complete briefing on ‘Implementation of the EU pact on migration and asylum‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Read also ‘EU response to the migrant challenge‘ on Europarl.

Written by Elena Lazarou with Panagiotis Politis Lamprou.

The Strategic Compass, adopted by the 27 EU Member States in March 2022 – only weeks after the onset of Russia’s unjustified and unprovoked aggression on Ukraine –emphasised the need for robust partnerships, for the EU to be able to achieve its objectives in the area of security and defence. Alongside ‘acting’ (operations), ‘securing’ (resilience) and ‘investing’, ‘partnering’ is one of the four main pillars of the Compass. The document itself outlines specific targets and deadlines to measure progress in this area.

While the EU has partnered with other security and defence actors (essentially states and international organisations) in the past, a new model of tailored security and defence partnership was launched shortly after the adoption of the Compass, as a reinforced framework for enhanced partnership. To date, the EU has signed six such partnerships – with (by date of signature) Norway, Moldova, South Korea, Japan, Albania and North Macedonia, and more are envisaged. While the partnerships vary in content, depending on the assessed mutual interests of the EU and each individual partner, some ten areas of cooperation are common to all six.

The European Parliament has highlighted the significance of the Strategic Compass’s partnership dimension and, in particular, the value of security and defence dialogues with partners from the Western Balkans, the Eastern Partnership, as well as with key partners in strategic maritime areas such as the Southern Neighbourhood and the Indo-Pacific. Parliament has underlined that cooperation with countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Norway, Ukraine, Georgia, the Western Balkans, Japan, Australia and certain African countries serves as a key element of the common security and defence policy. In 2023, it called for deeper military and defence cooperation with Japan and South Korea, and for closer cooperation with partners in Latin America and the Caribbean.

Read the complete briefing on ‘The EU’s new bilateral security and defence partnerships‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Written by Hendrik Mildebrath.

The ‘datafication’ of everyday life and data scandals have made the protection of personal information an increasingly important social, legal and political matter for the EU. In recent years, awareness of data rights has grown considerably.

The right to privacy and the right to protection of personal data are both enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU and in the EU Treaties. The entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty in 2009 gave the Charter the same legal value as the Treaties and abolished the pillar structure, providing a stronger basis for a more effective and comprehensive EU data protection regime.

In 2012, the European Commission launched an ambitious reform to modernise the EU data protection framework. In 2016, the European Parliament and the Council, as co-legislators, adopted the EU’s most prominent data protection legislation yet – the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) – and the Law Enforcement Directive. The framework overhaul also included adopting an updated Regulation on Data Protection in the EU institutions and reforming the e-Privacy Directive.

The European Parliament played a key role in these reforms, both as co-legislator and author of own‑initiative reports and resolutions, seeking to guarantee a high level of data protection for EU citizens. The European Court of Justice plays a crucial role in developing the EU data protection framework through case law.

In the coming years, challenges in the area of data protection will include rectifying GDPR enforcement deficits, balancing the compliance and data needs of emerging technologies, granting data access for security purposes without excessively compromising privacy and data protection, and mitigating compliance burdens for small and medium-sized enterprises.

This is a further updated edition of a briefing originally written in 2020 by Sofija Voronova and updated in 2023.

Read the complete briefing on ‘Understanding EU data protection policy‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Written by Alina-Alexandra Georgescu.

It is now 80 years since the liberation of Nazi Germany’s concentration and extermination camp, Auschwitz‑Birkenau, in Poland. A major commemoration event is taking place at the former camp on International Holocaust Remembrance Day; it will be attended by numerous Heads of State or Government, and other dignitaries, in a context of growing antisemitism across Europe.

Commemoration of the liberation of Auschwitz

On Monday 27 January 2025 – International Holocaust Remembrance Day – a memorial event will take place at Auschwitz-Birkenau to mark 80 years since the former Nazi German concentration and extermination camp was liberated. All remaining Auschwitz survivors have been invited to the event and some 50 are expected to attend. The main event will take place in front of the gate to the former Auschwitz II-Birkenau camp. To symbolise this moment of remembrance, a goods train wagon will stand in front of the gate. The German Nazis used this type of goods wagon to bring deported Jews to the camp. The wagons were manufactured in Germany and connected ghettos and hiding places with the ‘place of death‘. This particular wagon is dedicated to the memory of approximately 420 000 Hungarian Jews who were deported to Auschwitz between May and July 1944.

By the time the camp was liberated on 27 January 1945 by Red Army soldiers, the Nazis had murdered approximately 1.1 million people in Auschwitz. These people were mostly Jews, but also Poles, Roma, Soviet prisoners of war and people of other nationalities. There were only 7 000 prisoners left at the camp by the time of its liberation.

A number of survivors will be speaking at the ceremony. In addition, numerous public figures from the European Union (EU) and the Member States will attend, including the President of the European Parliament, Roberta Metsola, and the president of the European Council, António Costa. The events around 27 January in Poland are being organised under the auspices of the Polish Presidency of the Council of the EU. Many memorial events will be taking place across Europe around this date.

Importance of Holocaust Remembrance Day in the current context

For the whole world, Auschwitz – a place tragically inscribed in the history of Poland and of Europe – is the most potent symbol of the Holocaust and the atrocities of the Second World War. This 80th anniversary of the liberation of the Auschwitz camp is an opportunity for a collective commemoration of the victims, and a global reflection on the significance of the Nazi genocide of Jews and Roma in Europe. The annual International Holocaust Remembrance Day is a reminder of the danger of indifference and the need for constant vigilance to overcome stereotypes and prejudice. The refrain of ‘never again’ is one that had a direct bearing on the creation of what has become the European Union today, at its origin a project of peace and reconciliation after World War II.

These efforts to remember the Holocaust and learn from history are critically important in the current context, characterised by antisemitism and Holocaust denial, and distortion and trivialisation of history, caused or amplified by digital technology, social media, and foreign interference and propaganda. In July 2024, the EU’s Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA) published the results of its latest survey of Jewish people’s experiences and perceptions of antisemitism. It covered 13 EU Member States, accounting for around 96 % of the EU’s Jewish population. This survey, conducted even before the Hamas attacks in October 2023 and the war in Gaza, found persistent high rates of antisemitism. Confronted with prejudice and hostilities, most Jewish people do not feel able to live openly Jewish lives.

European Union action to counter intolerance and antisemitism

In line with its fundamental values of respect for human dignity and freedom of thought, conscience and religion, the EU has stepped up its efforts to counter these worrying trends. According to his mission letter, the Commissioner for Internal Affairs and Migration, Magnus Brunner, is responsible for leading both the European Commission’s fight against antisemitism and the dialogue with religious and philosophical organisations under Article 17 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU. Since 2015, the Commission has had a Coordinator on combating antisemitism and in 2021 it adopted an EU strategy on combating antisemitism and fostering Jewish life (2021-2030). This strategy envisages numerous measures in the sphere of education, research and remembrance of the Holocaust (Shoah). The EU has been a permanent international partner of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) since 2018, working closely with other IHRA members to combat Holocaust denial and prevent racism, xenophobia and antisemitism.

Role of the European Parliament

In 1995, Parliament adopted a resolution calling for the establishment of a European Holocaust Remembrance Day in all Member States. In January 2005, on the 60th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz-Birkenau, Parliament adopted a resolution proposing 27 January as European Day of Remembrance of the Holocaust in the EU. In November the same year, the United Nations General Assembly designated 27 January as an annual international day of commemoration to honour Holocaust victims. Since 2005, the European Parliament has marked International Holocaust Remembrance Day every year. This year, Parliament is holding a formal Holocaust commemoration ceremony during a plenary session on 29 January, with a formal address by Holocaust survivor Corrie Hermann.

Simone Veil, who was elected European Parliament President following the first direct elections to the European Parliament in 1979 – and who was the first woman to hold that office – was herself a survivor of Auschwitz. She expressed her firm conviction that teaching about the Holocaust was essential for Holocaust remembrance. The European Parliament’s current Vice-President responsible for Holocaust Remembrance Day and the fight against antisemitism is Pina Picierno (S&D, Italy). The House of European History, a European Parliament initiative in Brussels, has devoted part of its permanent exhibition to the Holocaust.

In an October 2017 resolution, Parliament called on the Member States to mark 2 August as the date to remember the victims of the Roma Holocaust and to include this community in the annual Holocaust Remembrance Day on 27 January. The same year, in a resolution on antisemitism adopted on 1 June, Parliament called on the Member States to adopt and apply the working definition of antisemitism employed by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, in order to identify and prosecute antisemitic attacks more efficiently and effectively. An October 2018 resolution on the rise of neo-fascist violence in Europe drew attention to growing violence against Jews and called on the Member States to counter Holocaust denial and trivialisation, and to mainstream the issue in education.

Parliament regularly adopts resolutions on the situation of fundamental rights in the European Union, focusing on a wide range of issues pertaining to respect for human dignity, freedom, minority rights and antisemitism. Parliament’s September 2022 resolution on the situation of fundamental rights in the European Union in 2020 and 2021, for instance, gave a general overview of antisemitism, racism, anti‑LGBTIQ, anti Gypsyism and xenophobia.

In 2023, Parliament’s Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs began work to extend the list of EU crimes in Article 83 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to include hate speech and hate crime. Its report was a reaction to the 2021 Commission communication ‘A more inclusive and protective Europe: extending the list of EU crimes to hate speech and hate crime‘, ‘whether because of race, religion, gender or sexuality’. In this framework, Parliament and the Council may establish minimum rules concerning the definition of criminal offences and sanctions, to be applicable in all EU Member States. Parliament voted in support of the report in plenary on 18 January 2024. The European Parliament’s Working Group against Antisemitism, composed of more than 80 Members from across the political groups, cooperates with all EU institutions, other European Parliament intergroups, national parliaments, and non-governmental organisations (NGOs). It is active in countering and preventing antisemitic acts and behaviours, and protecting those affected.

Read this ‘at a glance’ note on ‘International Holocaust Remembrance Day 2025: 80th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Written by Clare Ferguson and Katarzyna Sochacka.

The first plenary session of 2025 featured a debate on the conclusions of the European Council meeting of 19 December 2024, with António Costa participating for the first time in his new capacity of President of the European Council. A debate on the programme of the Polish Council Presidency followed, with the Prime Minister of Poland, Donald Tusk, who underlined the Presidency’s focus on prioritising EU security and defence.

Parliament’s President and political group leaders adopted a statement on the ceasefire in Gaza. Members also debated the consequences for Europe of US President Donald Trump’s second mandate. Members debated the need to counter the Russian shadow fleet’s sabotage of critical undersea infrastructure; the critical political situation in Venezuela and in Georgia; and the humanitarian crisis in Sudan. They also debated 2024’s record-breaking heat and the need for climate action; EU energy independence and innovation; the failed negotiations on a United Nations plastic treaty; the need to set global standards for cryptocurrencies; EU funding transparency; and the Hungarian government’s illegal espionage of EU institutions.

Belarus: Continued oppression and fake elections

Parliament has long criticised President Lukashenka’s regime and expressed concern about the human rights situation. As the situation in Belarus has deteriorated, Parliament has also called for the release of political prisoners, and accountability for human rights issues. Following a statement from the Commission, Members held a debate on the continued oppression and fake elections in Belarus, and adopted a resolution calling the presidential ‘elections’ (due to take place on 26 January) a sham.

Addressing EU demographic challenges: Implementing the Demography Toolbox

As the EU’s population ages, increasing mismatch between workers and jobs is beginning to stretch public budgets. Demographic change also has consequences for competitiveness, environmental and technological progress, and communities. Parliament has urged the use of cohesion policy instruments and EU funds to address these challenges. Members debated a Commission statement on the EU’s demographic challenge.

Facilitation of irregular migration by criminal networks

Over 90 % of irregular migrants to the EU pay for the assistance of smugglers. The migrant smuggling business brings considerable profits to the violent criminal groups involved – at great risk to the lives of those who use them. Parliament has consistently called for more cooperation and data-sharing to combat this challenge. Members debated EU measures to tackle criminal networks’ facilitation of irregular migration.

COP 16 desertification conference: Outcomes

Members debated a Commission statement on combating desertification, which follows the Conference of the Parties (COP16) of the United Nations Convention. While COP16 agreed financial support for land restoration and drought resilience initiatives, no legally binding framework was established to tackle drought.

Opening of trilogue negotiations

One decision to enter into interinstitutional negotiations ahead of Council’s first reading was announced, from the Environment, Climate and Food Safety (ENVI) Committee on a proposal for a regulation on preventing plastic pellet losses to reduce microplastic pollution.

This ‘at a glance’ note is intended to review some of the highlights of the plenary part-session, and notably to follow up on key dossiers identified by EPRS. It does not aim to be exhaustive. For more detailed information on specific files, please see other EPRS products, notably our ‘EU legislation in progress’ briefings, and the plenary minutes.

Read this ‘at a glance’ note on ‘Plenary round-up – January 2025‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Written by Anita Orav.

In recent years, the European Union has faced a significant number of asylum applications, with over 513 000 applications received in the first half of 2024 alone. Women and girls make up a substantial proportion of asylum seekers, with one in three asylum-seekers being female.

In international law, the 1951 Geneva Refugee Convention is the main instrument regulating asylum. The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and the Istanbul Convention provide a framework for protecting the rights of women who seek protection.

The EU has developed a common European asylum system that has gradually incorporated gender-sensitive elements in legal texts such as the Qualification Directive, the Asylum Procedures Directive and the Reception Conditions Directive. These directives offer special protection to vulnerable individuals, including women and children.

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has played a crucial role in advancing a gender-sensitive approach in EU asylum law, acknowledging the specific experiences and circumstances of women and other vulnerable individuals seeking protection in the EU. The CJEU has recognised gender-based violence as a form of persecution and grounds for asylum or subsidiary protection. It has also acknowledged the importance of considering the individual circumstances and experiences of asylum seekers, particularly women and girls, who may face persecution or harm owing to their adherence to certain values or lifestyles. This aligns with a more gender-sensitive approach in EU asylum law and policy in recent years. Nevertheless continued progress is needed to address the human rights challenges faced by women and girls in asylum procedures.

Read the complete briefing on ‘The gender dimension of asylum claims‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

First-time asylum applicants in the EU by age and sex (non-EU citizens), 2023, (%)

Written by Gabija Leclerc.

Natural hazards, armed conflicts, human-induced or amplified disasters, and often, complex crises – a combination of these may result in humanitarian emergencies. Meeting complex humanitarian needs, especially in resource-scarce environments, requires intervention beyond national capacities. Therefore, broader humanitarian action is essential to save lives, preserve the health and dignity of victims, assist recovery, and improve prevention, preparedness and resilience. This action encompasses humanitarian assistance, its financing, advocacy, policy and legal frameworks, coordination, monitoring and evaluation efforts.

The main international humanitarian efforts are run by the United Nations, facilitating resource mobilisation, coordination and consistency of humanitarian action. However, regional and bilateral actions are equally important, especially given that, due to growing humanitarian needs and scarce financial resources, the humanitarian system is facing a severe funding crisis, compromising the delivery of assistance.

The EU is an important humanitarian donor and actor, with its toolbox consisting of humanitarian assistance, both through financing and operational means; international advocacy for more coordinated, efficient and prominent humanitarian assistance and increased resource mobilisation; support for the respect of international humanitarian law; and policy measures, most notably humanitarian exceptions to sanctions.

Since the creation of its humanitarian office in 1992, the EU has provided needs-based humanitarian assistance to more than 110 countries and territories, in line with the principles of humanity, neutrality, impartiality and independence and with a focus on gender-, age- and environment-sensitive approaches, among other things.

The European Parliament is significantly involved in the EU’s humanitarian action. As a co-legislator and a budgetary authority, as well as through its resolutions, diplomacy, outreach and numerous other activities, the Parliament shapes EU humanitarian policy, decides on the financing, and brings important issues into the spotlight.

Read the complete briefing on ‘Understanding EU humanitarian action‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Written by Agnieszka Widuto.

Clean technologies are at the forefront of the EU’s ambition to pursue both decarbonisation and industrial competitiveness. The global clean tech market is expected to triple by 2035, covering sectors such as solar, wind, batteries, heat pumps and electrolysers for the production of hydrogen. While the roll-out of clean technologies is increasing in the EU, its global market share is falling and manufacturing is lagging behind. This is due to a combination of factors, such as high energy prices, import dependency on raw materials and key components, skills shortages and fierce international competition, fuelled by robust public support policies adopted by the EU’s main global competitors, such as China and the United States.

The EU has already taken some steps to boost manufacturing of clean technologies. The Net-Zero Industry Act of June 2024 seeks to enhance the manufacturing capacity of strategic net-zero technologies by streamlining administrative procedures, boosting investment and improving skills. It sets a target for domestic manufacturing capacity of strategic net-zero technologies to reach 40 % of EU annual deployment needs by 2030 and 15 % of global production by 2040. The Critical Raw Materials Act of April 2024 addresses the issue of import dependencies by seeking to diversify supplies and boost domestic capacity in mining, processing and recycling of critical raw materials.

However, some challenges remain for EU clean tech. These include ensuring adequate private and public funding, swiftly implementing the recently adopted legislative framework and reinforcing a favourable regulatory environment for investment. The Clean Industrial Deal to be announced in February 2025 by the new European Commission, together with the Competitiveness Fund under the future multiannual EU budget, are expected to provide an additional boost to clean technologies in Europe.

Read the complete briefing on ‘Clean tech in the energy sector‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

In 2024, people from across the European Union (EU) and all over the world turned to the European Parliament and its President, Roberta Metsola to request information, call for action to be taken, express their opinions, or suggest ideas on a wide range of topics.

The Citizens’ Enquiries Unit (Ask EP) replied in the 24 official EU languages. It was indeed a special year for the European Parliament with the European elections taking place in June 2024 across the 27 EU countries.

People wrote to us on many topics, notably on how to visit the European Parliament, the European elections, the war in Ukraine, the situation in Gaza, seasonal time changes, or the political situation in Hungary. Ask EP also received questions related to the European Parliament and its Members, its traineeship offers and how to visit Parliament. In 2024, we received 10 578 individual messages and 90 709 campaign enquiries.

Most frequent topics in individual enquiries in 2024

The most frequently addressed topic in 2024 was issues concerning EU democracy, institutional and parliamentary law – followed by questions on migration and justice. Citizens expressed interest in the Members of the European Parliament and their activities, enquired about traineeship and job opportunities and the possibilities to visit Parliament. They also requested information on topics such as parliamentary questions, committee meetings and the right to petition the Parliament.

Many citizens also contacted Ask EP in 2024 on issues related to foreign affairs. In particular, people voiced their concerns about conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza and their consequences.

Finally, the European Parliament received many enquiries about citizens’ personal situations, with requests for assistance to help them solve problems (financial support, legal aid, cross-border administrative issues, cases of discrimination, etc.). Although neither the European Parliament nor its President are able to resolve many of these types of requests directly, the Ask EP service provided citizens with a contact point and sources of information whenever possible.

Campaign messages sent to the European Parliament in 2024

As a response to political, humanitarian and economic events, citizens often send messages to the President of the European Parliament, expressing their views on current issues and/or requesting action from the Parliament.

In the largest campaign ever received by Ask EP, citizens wrote to the European Parliament to encourage Members to vote against including the right to abortion in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. Over 59 000 citizens wrote on the issue. A resolution adopted in April 2024 by the European Parliament calls on the European Council (heads of state or government) to launch a procedure to include the right to safe and legal abortion in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. However, altering the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights is a complex process, which would need modification of the Treaties and subsequent ratification in all EU countries.

Back in early 2024, Parliament received almost 16 000 messages in German, from citizens concerned about a proposal to regulate the recognition of parenthood across EU countries. Citizens urged Members to vote against the European Commission’s proposal. In their messages, citizens claimed that the proposal interferes with the legislative powers of EU countries.

The third largest campaign of 2024 was on climate targets, with Ask EP receiving almost 6 000 messages. Citizens wrote calling on the European Union to set a strict EU 2040 climate target to keep the global temperature rise below 1.5°C and to phase out fossil fuels. On fossil fuels, the Parliament calls for an end to all direct and indirect fossil fuel subsidies, at national and EU level, as soon as possible. The European Parliament also supports a global target to triple renewable energy and double energy efficiency by 2030, together with a swift halt to all new investment in fossil fuel extraction.

Parliament received several campaigns on the arrest of Captain Paul Watson, an anti-whaling activist, in Greenland. Around 1 250 citizens wrote to the President of the European Parliament, asking her to intervene with the Danish authorities to stop Captain Watson from being extradited to Japan. In December 2024, Paul Watson was released from detention in Greenland.

Over 2 500 citizens wrote to the European Parliament President about animal welfare and the use of cages. They supported prioritising the ‘End the Cage Age’ European citizens’ initiative in its legislative work. In a 2021 resolution, Parliament called on the European Commission to propose a law to phase out the use of cages on EU farms, with the aim of ending cage-farming by 2027, following up the ‘End the Cage Age’ European citizens’ initiative. Parliament also set up a committee of inquiry on protecting animals during transport. Following on from the committee of inquiry, in January 2022, Parliament then called on the Council of the EU and the Commission to strengthen the protection of animals during transport both within and outside the EU.

Are you curious about our answers to other campaign messages in 2024? You can find replies to campaigns on the EPRS blog. A selection of answers to questions frequently posed to the European Parliament can also be found on the blog.

If you wish, you can put your questions and/or comments to the Citizens’ Enquiries Unit (Ask EP), using our contact form, the Citizens’ app, or by post. We reply in the EU language that you use to write to us.

We look forward to your enquiries in 2025 and beyond!

Your Citizens’ Enquiries Unit (Ask EP)

Written by Isabelle Gaudeul-Ehrhart.

At the beginning of a new year and, from an institutional perspective, of a new mandate, what should we focus on and understand to navigate the coming months? Out of so many competing issues on Parliament’s agenda, the European Parliamentary Research Service (EPRS) selected 10 for closer examination.

The event was introduced by Jutta Schulze-Hollmen, Director at EPRS. She highlighted that if there is a tendency to consider every year as a special year, it is certainly not less the case in 2025. In these challenging times, she pointed to some notes of hope in the publication. Lasse Boehm, Head of the Economic Policies Unit, EPRS, moderated the event. He guided the audience through a 10-stage journey, starting with economic issues, zooming in on a few sectoral issues, and then zooming out again to look at the financial means to address the challenges, ending with the overarching issue of trust.

Martin Hoflmayr introduced the challenge of balancing scale with innovation for productivity. Liselotte Jensen explained what is as stake when it comes to setting the 2040 climate target. Marcin Szczepanski helped the audience understand what is behind the emerging concept of ‘European economic security’ – an issue complemented by Sebastian Clapp‘s talk on strengthening the European defence industry.

With the scene now set, the event focused on three sectoral policies: Maria Niestadt on helping the EU compete on artificial intelligence, Mathias Gullentops on European electric cars, and Costica Dumbrava on speeding up the return of irregular migrants.

The question of how to finance these challenges was addressed by Marianna Pari, who explored what it takes to shape the EU’s future finances. Alessandro D’Alfonso then discussed the need to strengthen capacity to invest in the future.

Naja Bentzen concluded the series of issues by addressing the all-important issue of trust.

After a time for audience questions and policy analysts’ answers and comments, Vice-President Victor Negrescu closed the event. He started by paying tribute to the work of EPRS policy analysts, pleased that such an event could give their back-stage work more visibility. Commenting on various issues from the publication, he concluded with thoughts on the growing need for democracy and on Europe’s potential to rise to the challenges.

The recording will be available soon.

Read the complete in-depth analysis on ‘Ten issues to watch in 2025‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Written by Clare Ferguson.

A new year means a new start at the European Parliament, with the January session agenda seeing Members welcoming a new EU Council presidency and considering a number of current and foreign affairs issues, including issuing a statement welcoming the ceasefire in Gaza. Members are expected to hear Council and European Commission statements on the implications for transatlantic relations of the new Trump administration, Russian sabotage in the Baltic, on the political situation in Venezuela and in Georgia, and on the humanitarian crisis in Sudan.

Looking ahead, a key debate scheduled for Wednesday morning focuses on the Polish EU Council Presidency‘s programme of activities for the coming six months. The programme covers seven linked aspects of security: external, internal, information, economic, energy, food and health, in line with its ‘Security, Europe’ motto and its priority to boost EU defence readiness in a deteriorating geopolitical situation. This follows a key debate on the conclusions of the December European Council meeting (the first chaired by its new President, António Costa), which followed an EU-Western Balkans Summit on 18 December.

As the human rights situation worsens in Belarus, with a continued climate of oppression in the country, the European Parliament has long criticised President Lukashenka’s regime and expressed concern about the human rights situation. It has called for the release of political prisoners and accountability for human rights issues, highlighting the cases of prisoners such as Nobel laureate Ales Bialiatski. The Parliament’s engagement with Belarusian democratic forces includes a cooperation agreement signed by President Roberta Metsola. In advance of presidential ‘elections’ due to take place on 26 January and following a statement from the Commission, Members are due to hold a debate on the need for EU action on the continued oppression and fake elections in Belarus, on Tuesday afternoon.

Online platforms have become an important space for public debate worldwide. Protecting this freedom of expression from foreign interference and bias has become a hot topic in recent months. Following Council and Commission statements on the need to enforce the Digital Services Act, Members are due to participate in a debate on Tuesday morning on protecting democracy online.

As the EU’s population ages, increasing mismatch between workers and jobs is beginning to stretch public budgets. Demographic change also has consequences for EU competitiveness, environmental and technological progress, and communities. Parliament has urged the simplification of cohesion policy instruments and enhancing coordination of EU funds to address these challenges. Members are set to debate the EU’s demographic challenge following a Commission statement on addressing demographic issues, scheduled on Wednesday afternoon.

Over 90 % of irregular migrants to the EU pay for the assistance of migrant smugglers. The migrant smuggling business brings considerable profits to the violent criminal groups involved – at great risk to the lives of those who use them to reach the EU. Parliament has consistently called for more cooperation and data sharing to combat this challenge. Following a Commission update on Wednesday, Members are due to debate criminal networks’ facilitation of irregular migration.

Finally, on Thursday morning, Members are due to hear a Commission statement on combating desertification, which follows the conclusion of the 16th session of the Conference of the Parties (COP16) of the United Nations Convention. While COP16 agreed financial support for land restoration and drought resilience initiatives, no legally binding framework was established to tackle drought.

• Outcome of the EU leaders’ meetings of 18-19 December 2024
• Priority dossiers under the Polish EU Council Presidency
• The Polish Parliament and EU affairs
• Belarus: Continued oppression and fake elections
• Information integrity online and the European democracy shield
• Addressing EU demographic challenges: towards the implementation of the 2023 Demography Toolbox
• Facilitation of irregular migration by criminal networks
• COP 16 desertification conference: Outcomes

Written by Anne Altmayer.

The Baltic has several unique features, comprising a mixture of saline and fresh water and a shallow depth, enabling a broad variety of habitats. Its fish species are rather limited in number, with the bulk of fish stocks spread among cod, herring and sprat.

The sea’s characteristics make it particularly vulnerable to environmental changes and many habitats and species of the Baltic Sea are not in good condition. The environmental deterioration is caused by several factors, including excessive nutrient input, pollution, climate change, invasive species and over-exploitation.

The worrying situation of the Baltic Sea habitats is leading to a dramatic decline in some commercial fish stocks, with fisheries losing economic and cultural importance.

A range of promising measures for specific fish species have been taken at EU level, the results of which could however be jeopardised if habitats cannot be restored.

Parliament has previously expressed concern about the state of the Baltic Sea over many years, and has played an important role in adopting measures to alleviate the situation.

Read the complete briefing on ‘Baltic Sea fishing area: Current challenges‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Top 10 species in landed weight and value, for EU Member States’ fleets operating in the Baltic Sea 2021 (tonnes, €)

Written by Ralf Drachenberg.

The focus of the December 2024 European Council meeting lay on two main issues: Ukraine and the European Union in the world. On Ukraine, the main message was that the EU will give full support to Ukraine for as long as necessary. In that context, EU leaders condemned Russia and those who support its war, and also discussed the path to peace. Regarding the EU in the world, EU leaders first examined developments in the Middle East, with a strong focus on the situation in Syria, and, over dinner, held a strategic discussion on the EU’s global engagement in the current geopolitical context. Notably, they discussed EU relations with the United States after the US elections, as well as the current ‘new positive energy’ in relations between the EU and the United Kingdom.

Additionally, based on the report by former Finnish President Sauli Niinistö, EU Heads of State or Government considered ways of increasing EU resilience, preparedness and crisis prevention. They also discussed migration, reviewing progress in the implementation of past conclusions and calling for legislation with a migration component to be given priority. In addition, they endorsed the ‘strategic guidelines for legislative and operational planning within the area of freedom, security and justice’ for the 2024-2029 period. Finally, EU leaders discussed enlargement, developments in Moldova and Georgia, and the situation in Venezuela.  

The European Council meeting, which was the first one chaired by its new President, António Costa, was preceded by an EU-Western Balkans summit on 18 December.

1.      EU-Western Balkans Summit

The day before the European Council meeting, EU leaders met in Brussels for a summit with the Western Balkans (WB) countries, aiming to emphasise the strategic importance of the partnership between the EU and the WB region. EU leaders discussed ways of: i) boosting the EU-WB partnership through the growth plan; ii) increasing the EU’s political and policy engagement with the WB (including areas such as foreign and security policy); iii) building a strong economic base; iv) easing the impacts of Russia’s war on Ukraine and building resilience to Russia’s hybrid threats; v) cooperating in areas such as migration and tackling organised crime, terrorism and corruption; vi) building the social dimension of EU integration. At the summit, EU leaders also discussed the overall geopolitical challenges facing the EU and the WB, and agreed on a 17-page declaration.

2.     European Council meeting General

At the start of the meeting, EU leaders marked the 50th anniversary of the creation of the European Council as an informal body of Heads of State or Government. It formally became an EU institution with the Lisbon Treaty. The meeting began with the customary address by the President of the European Parliament, Roberta Metsola. Subsequently, EU leaders held an exchange of views with the President of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelenskyy. The meeting concluded with a report by the Prime Minister of Hungary, Viktor Orbán, on the achievements of the Hungarian Presidency of the Council of the EU.

Ukraine

The discussion on Ukraine covered three broad topics: i) the path to peace; ii) EU support to Ukraine; and iii) the condemnation of Russia’s aggression and of those supporting it. With peace recently coming more to the fore in EU discussions, the European Council emphasised that Ukraine, as the country that had been invaded, must be part of any peace initiative for it to be credible. It reiterated its support for a lasting peace based on the UN Charter, international law and the principles of the Ukraine Peace Formula. The conclusions contained a notable shift in tone – ‘Russia must not prevail’ – and did not refer to any ‘scenarios’ or to peace-keeping forces, which are considered premature.

The European Council reiterated the EU’s commitment to providing ‘political, financial, economic, humanitarian, military and diplomatic support to Ukraine and its people for as long as it takes and as intensely as needed’. EU leaders reviewed efforts to deliver military support, calling for increased efforts to deliver air defence systems, ammunition, missiles, and training and equipment for Ukrainian brigades. They also reiterated the importance of developing Ukraine’s defence industry and its cooperation with the EU defence industry. Moreover, they called, once again, on the Council to accelerate work on strengthening the EU Military Assistance Mission in support of Ukraine (EUMAM Ukraine), which aims to strengthen the capacity of the Ukrainian armed forces through the provision of training support (almost 70 000 soldiers have been trained since the mission launched).

EU leaders welcomed the implementation of the Ukraine Facility, which delivered payments of €16.2 billion in 2024 but is expected to deliver almost €4 billion less in 2025. They also welcomed the swift implementation of the Extraordinary Revenue Acceleration (ERA) loans initiative agreed by the G7 in Italy in October 2024. The ERA initiative, which is funded by profits from immobilised Russian assets, will result in €45 billion of support to Ukraine’s current and future military, budget and reconstruction needs. The first tranche of funds is due to be released in January 2025. Furthermore, EU leaders highlighted the importance of the Ukraine Recovery Conference (to be hosted by Italy in July 2025) as part of the EU’s commitment to support Ukraine’s repair, recovery and reconstruction.

The European Council reiterated its condemnation of Russia’s deliberate attacks against Ukraine’s civilian and energy infrastructure, which seek to weaponise winter conditions. It called for increased support to keep Ukraine’s energy infrastructure running and for Ukraine and Moldova’s energy systems to be further integrated into the EU’s network. Member States were praised for their exports of electricity to Ukraine.

EU leaders welcomed the adoption by the Council of the 15th package of sanctions against Russia, underlining the need for further measures to counter the circumvention of sanctions, including through third countries, and for their full enforcement. Furthermore, they condemned, and urged the cessation of, actions and support by third countries for Russia’s war of aggression, with Iran and North Korea specifically mentioned for their arms transfers to Russia and deepening military cooperation, including the deployment of North Korean forces to Russia for use against Ukraine.

Main message of the EP President: We need a path to real peace. But the guiding principle must remain ‘Nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine’.

Middle East

Developments in the Middle East, notably in Syria, were a central discussion point for EU leaders. The European Council saw in the new situation in Syria – after an offensive which toppled the Assad regime on 27 November – an historic opportunity to reunite and rebuild an inclusive Syrian-led political process in line with the principles of UN Security Council Resolution 2254. EU leaders agreed on the main points of the EU approach to the Syrian transition, which must aim to: i) preserve national unity; ii) ensure the protection of all civilians; iii) ensure the provision of public services; iv) create the conditions for an inclusive and peaceful political transition; and v) create the conditions for safe, voluntary and dignified returns of Syrian refugees. Considering the potential impact on Europe, EU leaders stressed the need to prevent the re-emergence of terrorist groups and to ensure the destruction of Syria’s remaining chemical weapons. In this respect, they invited the Commission and the High Representative to submit to the Council potential support measures for Syria.

On Lebanon, the European Council welcomed the 27 November 2024 ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hezbollah, which followed mediation efforts, in particular by France and the United States. EU leaders urged all parties to implement the ceasefire, which is still holding, despite violations. They also underlined their continuing support for the Lebanese state’s sovereignty, territorial integrity and state-building efforts, calling on Lebanese political leaders to overcome the political and economic impasse. Until the recent election of Joseph Aoun, the country had been without a president for several years and remains subject to a severe and lingering economic crisis.

Concerning Gaza, the European Council, reiterating its previous conclusions, called for a ceasefire, the release of all hostages, improved and sustained access for humanitarian assistance to Gaza, and an end to hostilities in line with UN Security Council Resolution 2735. EU leaders also declared their continuing commitment to international law and lasting peace based on the two-state solution. The European Council reiterated its continued support for the Palestinian Authority and for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), which provides support to the civilian population of Gaza. Once again, it expressed concern over the consequences of Israeli legislation impeding the humanitarian work of the UNRWA.

Main message of the EP President: Dialogue, unity, respect for fundamental rights, and international law must guide the way forward. Now is our moment to step up.

EU in the world

Although there were no lengthy conclusions on the topic, President Costa noted that the EU’s global engagement had been an important focal point during this European Council meeting. EU leaders held a strategic discussion on the EU’s global engagement and priorities in the current geopolitical context. They also discussed EU relations with the United States, stressing the EU’s commitment to continue working with the US under the Trump administration, as well as relations with the United Kingdom and the current trend of ‘new positive energy’ since Keir Starmer became Prime Minister.

Resilience, preparedness, crisis prevention and response

The former President of Finland, Sauli Niinistö, presented his report ‘Safer together: Strengthening Europe’s civilian and military preparedness and readiness’ to EU leaders. In the context of an evolving threat landscape and of an increasing number of natural disasters due to climate change and environmental degradation, the European Council reaffirmed the urgency of strengthening resilience, preparedness, crisis prevention and response capacities. With a view to the future preparedness strategy, EU leaders invited the Commission, the High Representative and the Council to pursue work on the different work strands and actions at EU level.

Migration

On migration, EU leaders took stock of the progress made in implementing past conclusions on the issue, notably regarding the external dimension of migration, the implementation of adopted EU legislation and the application of existing legislation.

The European Council reiterated its support for the Commission’s planned legislative proposal on returns, due to be submitted in early 2025, and called on the co-legislators to advance, as a matter of priority, on files with a migration dimension. It took note of the Commission communication on the weaponisation of migration and strengthening security at the EU’s external borders.

Other items

Enlargement: The European Council underscored the importance of enlargement as a geostrategic investment in peace, security, stability and prosperity. EU leaders stated that both the EU and aspiring members had a responsibility to make the most of this opportunity. They endorsed the Council’s 35 pages of conclusions on enlargement, agreed on 17 December 2024.

Main message of the EP President: Enlargement must remain merit-based, founded on our criteria. But we need to step up our efforts, too.

Moldova: The European Council praised Moldova for the successful conduct of the presidential elections, together with the referendum on enshrining EU accession in the Moldovan constitution, despite Russia’s hybrid interference. EU leaders invited the Commission to urgently provide options for the strengthening of Moldova’s energy security. They committed to working with Moldova to enhance the country’s resilience and stability, and to support its reform efforts on its European path, specifically through the Growth Plan and the Reform and Growth Facility.

Georgia:The European Council reiterated its serious concerns regarding the path taken by the Georgian government, expressing regret at the Georgian government’s decision to suspend the country’s EU accession process until 2028. EU leaders condemned violence against those peaceful protestors, politicians and media, and highlighted that the EU would support the Georgian people’s European aspirations, if the authorities reverse their present course of action.

Venezuela:Once again, EU leaders expressed their concern about the situation in Venezuela and committed to mobilising the tools at their disposal to support democracy and a peaceful transition in the country. They also called for the release of all political detainees and for Venezuela to uphold international law.

Hybrid activities: The European Council strongly condemned Russia’s hybrid campaign against the EU and its Member States. EU leaders also welcomed the adoption of the first listings under the framework for restrictive measures in view of Russia’s destabilising activities.

Freedom, security and justice:The European Council welcomed the Council Decision to lift the checks on persons at internal land borders with and between Bulgaria and Romania as of 1 January 2025. As flagged up in the EPRS Outlook briefing, the leaders endorsed the strategic guidelines for legislative and operational planning within the area of freedom, security and justice, a Treaty obligation with which the European Council did not comply during the 2019-2024 period.

Read this briefing on ‘Outcome of the EU leaders’ meetings of 18-19 December 2024‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Written by Polona Car with Filippo Cassetti.

Dark patterns are deceptive techniques used by online platforms to manipulate users’ behaviour, often without their knowledge or consent. The EU regulatory framework against dark patterns is fragmented and lacks a unified legal definition. This can lead to legal uncertainty and inconsistent enforcement. Stakeholders and academics are calling for clearer definitions, stronger safeguards, and more effective enforcement of existing laws.

What are dark patterns?

Dark patterns or deceptive patterns can be described as ‘tricks used in websites and apps that make you do things that you didn’t mean to, like buying or signing up for something’. They are based on harmful online choice architecture. Their purpose is to influence a broad spectrum of consumer decisions, impeding the consumers’ ability to make informed choices. They intentionally affect users’ behaviour to manipulate them. Some dark patterns are designed to make the person feel compelled to purchase, either by the design of the website or by the ‘opportunity’ of the deal. Examples include fake urgency (for instance fake countdown timers) to pressure user action, disguised advertisement, and emotional manipulation to make users question their actions.

Absence of a single legal definition

There is no common definition of dark patterns in the EU legal framework. The Digital Services Act (DSA) describes them in its recital 67 as ‘practices that materially distort or impair, either on purpose or in effect, the ability of recipients of the service to make autonomous and informed choices or decisions’. According to the DSA, these practices are to be prohibited. The recent fitness check of EU consumer law on digital fairness defines dark patterns as ‘unfair commercial practices deployed through the structure, design or functionalities of digital interfaces or system architecture that can influence consumers to make decisions they would not have taken otherwise’. The various definitions nevertheless have two key features in common: the manipulative or deceptive nature of the practice and the resulting negative or harmful outcome. As this description is quite broad, to be able to determine whether a particular practice should be classified as a dark pattern, there are numerous guidelines and practical recommendations to consider.

Complexity of the existing legislative framework

Dark patterns were introduced into the EU’s legal framework by the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (UCPD). However, the UCPD does not use the term ‘dark patterns’. What it prohibits are ‘misleading’ and ‘aggressive’ commercial practices. The UCPD protects consumers against unfair business-to-consumer (B2C) commercial practices in advertising, sales and after-sales. To this ‘first level’ of protection, a series of subsequent legal acts were added, offering protection where the UCPD failed to offer adequate protection against new players and technological advances: the UCPD clearly forbids only a limited number of dark patterns that are mentioned in its Annex I and these prohibitions do not deal with digital interfaces.

The above-mentioned fitness check raised concerns about how Article 25 of the DSA interacts with other EU legal acts. While it prohibits online platforms from using dark patterns, it excludes practices covered by the UCPD and the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). This means that if a dark pattern of an online platform provider violates the GDPR, its legality will be assessed according to the requirements of the GDPR, not the DSA. This situation creates legal uncertainty. Although the GDPR does not address dark patterns explicitly, particular techniques to obtain consent from data users could be interpreted as such. This leaves space for interpretation that could minimise the impact of the DSA.

Similarly, the UCPD has such a broad scope, covering all B2C relations, that the space left for applying the DSA is limited. Consequently, the clear and general prohibition of dark patterns in the DSA may still lead to a reliance on the UCDP’s case-by-case analysis. As a solution, the fitness check report proposed adding specific prohibitions of dark patterns to the UCPD. This could be done by expanding the UCPD’s Annex I with explicit prohibitions addressing online interfaces.

Parliament’s December 2023 resolution on addictive design of online service and consumer protection arrived at similar conclusions. It called on the Commission to close regulatory gaps relating to dark patterns, and strengthen transparency provisions, as the current rules were not sufficient to mitigate adverse effects. It argued that several dark patterns could already be addressed under the current list in Annex I of the UCPD. Nevertheless, it asked the Commission to assess the need to extend Annex I as a matter of urgency, to prohibit the most harmful practices. Parliament considered that development of ethical and fair digital products free of dark patterns should constitute reasonable professional diligence.

Other legal acts also address dark patterns. The Artificial Intelligence (AI) Act introduces new prohibitions on dark patterns, without mentioning the term specifically. The AI Act prohibits subliminal techniques, purposefully manipulative or deceptive techniques or use of AI systems that exploit vulnerabilities based on age, disability or a specific social or economic situation (Articles 5(1)(a) and (b)) that could cause significant harm. Unlike the DSA, the AI Act requires case-by-case interpretation of specific terms such as ‘subliminal technique’ and ‘purposefully’ manipulative or deceptive. However, exploitation of some vulnerabilities under the AI Act (e.g. emotion-recognition) is classified as high-risk AI, but not prohibited.

For its part, the Digital Markets Act (DMA) includes an anti-circumvention rule (Article 13) aimed at capturing dark patterns used by gatekeepers to influence consumer decisions unlawfully. The Data Act mentions the prohibition of the use of dark patterns in relation to third parties and data holders when they are designing their digital interfaces (Recital 38). These should not be designed in a way to make decisions unduly difficult for the users. Specific prohibition of dark patterns was introduced for financial services, with the 2023 amendment to the Consumer Rights Directive (CRD). The amendment (Article 16(e)) prohibits traders from applying dark patterns when they are concluding financial services contracts at a distance. This variety of provisions used in different legal acts intended to address dark patterns could create a lack of coherence in implementation. This was outlined in the above-mentioned fitness check report, which established a need for further action. Based on this evaluation, the Commission announced a public consultation in preparation for the upcoming Digital Fairness Act in 2025, to remedy the situation.

Academic views

Inge Graef warns of risk of inconsistencies, leading to under-enforcement owing to the fragmented EU regulatory framework for dark patterns. Martin Brenncke underlines the difficulty of effective regulation as dark patterns act in between legitimate persuasive techniques and illegal methods of coercion and manipulation. In addition, dark patterns take advantage of consumer behaviour bias, while EU consumer legislation assumes that consumers are rational economic actors. Mark Leiser and Cristiana Santos underline the importance of clear labelling of dark patterns in enforcement, and publicising such actions to discourage deception. In addition, they highlight the need to update the EU acquis constantly, to confront emerging prohibited designs and forms of manipulation (for instance hyper-nudging).

Stakeholder positions

During the public consultation for the digital fairness fitness check, stakeholders expressed concern about the current legal framework, citing ambiguity, complexity and ineffective enforcement. A majority of respondents advocated enhanced protection against dark patterns and similar deceptive practices, recommending clearer and stronger safeguards. They proposed, among other things, a comprehensive ban on dark patterns, clearer definitions of key concepts to reduce uncertainty, and the placing of a ‘fairness by design’ obligation on businesses.

The European Consumer Organisation, BEUC, recommended ensuring better enforcement against dark patterns and in particular, reviewing the UCPD and CRD. For the two directives, BEUC proposed to introduce an anti-circumvention clause, modelled on the example introduced by the DMA. A March 2024 BEUC report proposed regulatory solutions, based on a horizontal principle of fairness by design.
Digital industry stakeholders meanwhile insist that a distinction must be drawn between deceptive practices and legitimate online persuasive methods, so as not to jeopardise innovation. In a recent report, Eurocommerce argued that dark partners are already sufficiently covered by existing legislation.

Read this ‘at a glance’ note on ‘Regulating dark patterns in the EU: Towards digital fairness‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Written by Marketa Pape.

The recent cost-of-living crisis has exacerbated a longstanding problem with housing affordability in the EU. Higher building costs and mortgage rates, together with a related decrease in housing construction, have made access to home ownership more difficult. At the same time, investors use housing as a vehicle for investment. Growing numbers of people are struggling to access affordable housing, whether to rent or to buy, particularly in cities. Across Europe, homelessness is rising.

In addition, many residential buildings need to be made energy-efficient and decarbonised in order to achieve the EU’s energy and climate goals, lower energy consumption and reduce energy bills.

While the EU has no direct competence in the area of housing and only a limited scope of action to address social issues, it provides relevant guidance and funding, and has carried out several initiatives to support housing. Furthermore, certain EU rules have a indirect impact on housing provision, starting with the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive. In parallel, many sources of EU funding are available for various housing-related purposes in the current financing period.

In the run-up to the 2024 European elections, the lack of adequate and affordable housing, and the need to address it at EU level, emerged as a concern across the whole of the EU and the entire political spectrum. The new European Commission (‘von der Leyen II’) is giving housing policy visibility and weight by proposing a coordinated approach. For the first time, housing has become a distinct part of a commissioner’s portfolio. Dan Jørgensen, the new Commissioner for Energy and Housing, is responsible for dealing with several complex issues relating to housing.

The European Parliament voted on 18 December 2024 to set up a special committee on the housing crisis in the EU. Building on recent developments, the Commission’s 2025 work programme is expected to outline the next steps for the EU.

Read the complete briefing on ‘A coordinated EU approach to housing‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Written by Pieter Baert.

Equality between men and women is one of the key foundational principles of the European Union. Despite much progress, however, significant gaps persist between men and women regarding employment opportunities and income levels. Taxation can either mitigate or exacerbate these gender inequalities. On 13 January 2025, the European Parliament’s Subcommittee on Tax Matters (FISC) is due to hold a public hearing on the topic.

Implicit gender biases in joint taxation systems

In general, Member States do not differentiate explicitly between men and women in their tax systems. However, certain tax provisions may inadvertently carry implicit gender biases, often rooted in broader socio-economic and cultural factors.

One notable example is joint taxation, where married couples (or civil partners) file joint declarations, with household income taxed as a single unit. While a joint declaration does decrease the overall tax burden for the household, especially where there is significant income disparity between the two partners, it can also lead to a disproportionately higher marginal tax rate for the secondary earner (lower income earner), who often is a woman. This effect can make additional earnings less financially rewarding, discouraging women from entering the labour market or transitioning from part-time to full-time employment.

The consequences of these tax structures can contribute to broader gender inequalities by limiting women’s career advancement and undermining their economic independence in the long term. Joint taxation systems are increasingly being phased out, although several (European) countries continue to have them in place, on either a voluntary or a mandatory basis.

Although taxation remains largely a national prerogative, the European Commission has actively encouraged Member States to reform tax incentives that deter secondary earners from participating in the labour market. For example, the European Commission argued that Germany’s national recovery and resilience plan failed to address concerns about the country’s joint taxation system (‘Ehegattensplitting’), which, in the Commission’s opinion, reduces women’s potential for participating in the labour market.

VAT rates on feminine hygiene products and gender-based price discrimination

Over the years, the tax cost of menstrual products has been a topic of growing public debate. Since these products are used exclusively by women, the issue has gained attention for its gendered economic impact. Advocates for lowering or removing value added tax (VAT) on menstrual products argue that the tax places an unfair, systematic financial burden on women, and contributes to ‘period poverty‘. Unlike other consumer products, these goods are considered a matter of necessity rather than an expression of consumer choice.

In April 2022, a revision of the EU VAT Directive introduced greater flexibility for Member States to reduce VAT rates on female sanitary products. This change allowed Member States to lower the VAT rate to as little as 0 %, compared with the previous minimum rate of 5 % (Annex III, paragraph 3). The European Parliament urged Member States to take advantage of this increased flexibility. However, while several Member States have since reduced their VAT rates on such goods, practices remain quite divergent, as illustrated in Figure 1 below.

VAT rate on tampons (EU, 2024)

Tax policy experts are generally cautious about VAT rate reductions, citing the likelihood for suppliers to bypass these reductions by increasing their profit margins instead. However, a recent study by academics from the University of Vienna, which looked at VAT rate cuts on menstrual products in Austria, Belgium, France and Germany, found that the tax reduction had been fully passed on to consumers over time. With the lower price, households purchased products of higher quality, and low-income households increased their purchase volume of menstrual products, highlighting the potential of such reforms to improve access for disadvantaged groups.

While reducing VAT rates is one approach to making female hygiene products more affordable, some Member States and local governments have chosen to provide these goods for free in schools, public restrooms and other public spaces.

A related, and puzzling, phenomenon is that of gender-based price discrimination. Although not an explicit tax as such, this refers to the situation where women sometimes incur extra costs for products and services marketed to them compared with similar items for men, with the products differing often only in superficial aspects, such as colour, name or description. Common examples include shampoo, razors and hairdressing services. While no comprehensive EU-wide research has been conducted to assess the prevalence of such practices, a study by the German Federal Anti-Discrimination Agency examined over 1 500 products in Germany and found that female variants were priced higher in 2.3 % of cases, while male variants were more expensive in 1.4 % of cases.

EU Directive 2004/113 already prohibits discrimination in access to goods and services based on gender. In 2023, the European Commission said it had no plans at the time to introduce additional measures in that directive to address gender price discrimination.

Read this ‘at a glance’ note on ‘Taxation’s impact on gender equality in the EU‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.