European Parliamentary Research Service Blog

Written by Andrés García Higuera.

Critical and strategic raw materials are essential for the EU economy, its society and policy objectives. At the same time, their supply is at risk today – or in the foreseeable future. Raw material supply has become more salient since the introduction of the EU raw materials initiative, culminating with the recent adoption of the Critical Raw Materials Act. A new STOA study, with its associated options brief, aim at contributing to increasing EU strategic autonomy in critical raw materials through the instrumental role of research and innovation (R&I) in strengthening the EU’s global position.

Critical raw materials (CRM) are necessary for a robust EU economy but are also diverse in their nature and the challenges they pose. Methodologies exist to assess and monitor risks and possible impacts of supply disruption. Despite challenges regarding access to timely, high-quality data, these methodologies address both the status quo (CRM) and future developments (strategic raw materials, SRM) regarding supply and demand for raw materials. The outcome of CRM assessments has changed over time due to changing supply and demand realities. This will also continue to be the case in the assessment of SRM. These assessments and the accompanying background work provide a view of the entire supply chain for CRM. Options can then be developed to minimise supply risks and increase resilience.

The EU has addressed the issue of raw material criticality, including through strong engagement in R&I for CRM. EU policy, from the 2008 raw materials initiative to the recent Critical Raw Materials Act, has stressed the role of R&I. In parallel with this political focus, funding has increased significantly in EU programmes, including past Framework Programmes and the current Horizon Europe, as well as EIT RawMaterials, now reaching the end of its funding period. All this has allowed the EU to become an important patenting actor, especially in mining/processing and recycling, with strong international ties (particularly to the USA). Continued funding and policy support will be key to maintaining and profiting from this position.

The European Parliament’s Panel for the Future of Science and Technology (STOA) recently published ‘The role of research and innovation in ensuring a safe and sustainable supply of critical raw materials in the EU‘. This study aims at illuminating the R&I’s role in ensuring a safe and sustainable supply of CRM. It provides background information on CRMs, related EU policies, sustainability issues, and public controversy, then identifies their connections with their respective needs for R&I. The study reviews the role of R&I and cooperation in securing the EU’s raw material supply, highlighting the significance of R&I along the value chain and analysing patenting activities and international cooperation. It concludes by presenting 11 policy options on EU institutional and R&I capacities, international collaboration and legitimacy, assessing each against a list of dimensions including costs, benefits and feasibility.

Read the full STOA study and the Options Brief to find out more. The study was presented to the STOA Panel at its meeting on 25 April 2024, which was followed by the release of a promotional video. Your opinion counts for us. To let us know what you think, get in touch via stoa@europarl.europa.eu.

Written by Clare Ferguson and Katarzyna Sochacka.

The first plenary session of the tenth parliamentary term took place in Strasbourg from 16 to 19 July 2024. The Members of the new Parliament (sitting from 2024 to 2029) elected certain of their peers to the most important offices in Parliament – the President, Vice-Presidents and Quaestors. During this session, Members also decided on the numerical strength of the standing committees, sub-committees and delegations. They held a debate on the need for the EU’s continued support for Ukraine, and then adopted a resolution reiterating support for Ukraine and condemning, in particular, Russia’s recent attacks on the country. However, the most discussed business was the debate with the candidate for President of the European Commission, and Members’ subsequent vote to confirm Ursula von der Leyen as President-elect for a new five-year mandate.

Election of the President of the European Parliament

In a secret ballot (under Rule 16 of the revised Rules of Procedure), the newly elected Members first voted for a new President. Candidates could be proposed by a political group (or individual Members amounting to 1/20th of the whole Parliament). The outgoing President, Roberta Metsola (EPP, Malta), was elected for a second two‑and‑a‑half year mandate, on the first ballot, by 562 votes of 623 valid votes cast, with only one other candidate standing (Irene Montero, The Left, Spain).

Election of Parliament’s Vice-Presidents and Quaestors

Members then elected 14 Vice-Presidents, in two rounds of voting. The Vice-Presidents, who also serve a two-and-a-half year term, chair debates when the President cannot, with each Vice-President also responsible for specific aspects of parliamentary business. Members also elected Parliament’s five Quaestors, who are responsible for administrative and financial matters that directly concern Members and their working conditions. With the President and Vice-Presidents, the Quaestors make up Parliament’s Bureau, although the latter participate in an advisory capacity only.

New parliamentary committees

Before Parliament’s committees can hold their constitutive meetings, the Conference of Presidents (of the political groups) proposes the number of Members to sit on each committee. Members approved the proposal of the numbers to sit on the 20 committees and 4 sub-committees as well as the 48 standing delegations (under Rules 212 and 229). The Members appointed to each committee by the political groups (plus non-attached Members) were announced on 19 July. The committees should then elect their chairs and vice-chairs during meetings planned for 23 July. These appointments are generally the subject of an informal agreement among the political groups, using the d’Hondt method, and are expected to reflect the plurality of Member States and a fair representation of political views.

Election of the President of the European Commission

While the majority of EU leaders endorsed a second mandate for Ursula von der Leyen during the 27 June European Council meeting, she still needed the support of an absolute majority of Members of Parliament – at least 361). Members confirmed Ursula von der Leyen as Commission President-elect, by secret ballot with 401 votes for, 284 against and 15 abstentions.

Ursula von der Leyen presented her priorities for the next term in office, then debated with Members. These priorities will set the course for the whole term, against which Members scrutinise the Commission’s progress. Together, the new Commission President and EU governments will now propose the candidates for Commissioner posts. Parliament organises hearings of the Commissioners-designate, so that Members from the relevant parliamentary committees can assess their suitability. Members will then decide whether to approve the Commission as a whole at a plenary session later in the year.

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 – July 2024‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Citizens are calling on the European Parliament to prioritise the End the Cage Age European citizens’ initiative in its legislative work. As the European Commission postponed its proposal on cage-free farming initially due at the end of 2023, many people have written to the European Parliament on this subject since July 2024.

We replied to those who took the time to write to the European Parliament (in Italian, Dutch, Spanish, English, French, Portuguese and German).

Italian

Il Parlamento europeo ha affrontato regolarmente la questione del a questione del benessere degli animali.

Nella risoluzione del 2021, il Parlamento ha invitato la Commissione europea a proporre una legge per abolire gradualmente l’uso delle gabbie negli allevamenti dell’UE, con l’obiettivo di eliminarlo entro il 2027, dando seguito all’iniziativa dei cittadini europei “End the Cage Age” (Basta animali in gabbia).

Il Parlamento ha anche istituito una commissione d’inchiesta sulla protezione degli animali durante il trasporto. Nel gennaio 2022, il Parlamento ha invitato il Consiglio dell’UE e la Commissione a rafforzare la protezione degli animali durante il trasporto all’interno e all’esterno dell’UE.

I deputati al Parlamento europeo hanno chiesto in diverse occasioni alla Commissione di spiegare perché non ha presentato una proposta sull’allevamento senza gabbie. Nel gennaio 2024, la Commissione ha risposto che la transizione verso sistemi senza gabbie richiede ulteriori consultazioni sui costi e sulla durata del periodo di transizione. Nel marzo 2024, una Commissaria ha dichiarato al Parlamento che sono ancora in corso i lavori relativi al seguito della risposta all’iniziativa End the Cage Age.

Il ruolo della Commissione è quello di proporre nuove leggi. Tuttavia, il Parlamento valuta le misure adottate dalla Commissione in risposta a un’iniziativa dei cittadini europei.

Vorremmo aggiungere che il Parlamento europeo dovrebbe continuare a lavorare su due proposte legislative sul benessere degli animali che la Commissione ha presentato nel dicembre 2023. In risposta al lavoro della commissione d’inchiesta del Parlamento, la prima proposta mira a rafforzare le norme UE sulla protezione degli animali durante il trasporto. La seconda introduce nuove norme sul benessere e la tracciabilità di cani e gatti, con prescrizioni per allevatori, rifugi e negozi di animali.

Dutch

Het Europees Parlement heeft dierenwelzijn regelmatig onder de aandacht gebracht.

In een resolutie van 2021 verzocht het Parlement de Europese Commissie een wet voor te stellen om het gebruik van kooien op Europese landbouwbedrijven geleidelijk af te schaffen, met als einddoel uiterlijk in 2027 een einde te maken aan het fokken in kooien, naar aanleiding van het Europees burgerinitiatief “End the Cage Age”.

Het Parlement heeft ook een enquêtecommissie opgericht over de bescherming van dieren tijdens het vervoer. In januari 2022 riep het Parlement de Raad van de EU en de Europese Commissie ertoe op de bescherming van dieren tijdens het vervoer binnen en buiten de EU te versterken.

De leden van het Europees Parlement hebben de Commissie herhaaldelijk gevraagd uit te leggen waarom zij geen voorstel over kooivrije landbouw heeft ingediend. In januari 2024 heeft de Commissie geantwoord dat de overgang naar kooivrije systemen verder overleg vereist over de kosten en de duur van de overgangsperiode. In maart 2024 deelde een Eurocommissaris het Parlement mee dat er verder wordt gewerkt aan de follow-up van het initiatief “End the Cage Age”.

Het is de taak van de Commissie om nieuwe wetten voor te stellen. Het Parlement beoordeelt echter de maatregelen die de Commissie naar aanleiding van een Europees burgerinitiatief heeft genomen.

Hier voegen wij graag aan toe dat het Parlement naar verwachting zal blijven werken aan twee wetgevingsvoorstellen over dierenwelzijn die de Commissie in december 2023 heeft gepresenteerd. Als reactie op de werkzaamheden van de enquêtecommissie van het Parlement heeft het eerste voorstel tot doel de EU-regels op het vlak van de bescherming van dieren tijdens het vervoer aan te scherpen. Het tweede voorstel bevat nieuwe regels voor het welzijn en de traceerbaarheid van honden en katten, met voorschriften voor fokkers, asielen en dierenwinkels.

Spanish

El Parlamento Europeo ha abordado con frecuencia la cuestión del bienestar animal.

En una Resolución de 2021, el Parlamento pidió a la Comisión Europea que propusiera una ley para eliminar gradualmente el uso de jaulas en las explotaciones agrícolas de la Unión, con el objetivo de poner fin a la cría en jaulas a más tardar en 2027, como seguimiento de la iniciativa ciudadana europea «End the Cage Age» (Acabemos con las jaulas).

El Parlamento también creó una comisión de investigación sobre la protección de los animales durante el transporte. En enero de 2022, el Parlamento pidió al Consejo de la UE y a la Comisión que reforzaran la protección de los animales durante el transporte dentro y fuera de la UE.

Los diputados al Parlamento Europeo han pedido reiteradamente a la Comisión que explique por qué no ha presentado una propuesta sobre la cría sin jaulas. En enero de 2024, la Comisión respondió que la transición a sistemas sin jaulas requiere nuevas consultas sobre los costes y la duración del período transitorio. En marzo de 2024, una comisaria dijo al Parlamento que proseguían los trabajos de seguimiento de la iniciativa «End the Cage Age».

Corresponde a la Comisión proponer nueva legislación. Sin embargo, el Parlamento evalúa las medidas adoptadas por la Comisión en respuesta a una iniciativa ciudadana europea.

Se espera que el Parlamento continúe trabajando en dos propuestas legislativas sobre bienestar animal que la Comisión presentó en diciembre de 2023. En respuesta al trabajo de la comisión de investigación del Parlamento, la primera propuesta tiene por objeto reforzar las normas de la Unión sobre la protección de los animales durante el transporte. La segunda introduce nuevas normas sobre el bienestar y la trazabilidad de perros y gatos, con requisitos para criadores, refugios y tiendas de mascotas.

English

The European Parliament has regularly addressed the issue of animal welfare.

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 European citizens’ initiative ‘End the Cage Age’.

Parliament also set up a committee of inquiry on the protection of animals during transport. In January 2022, Parliament then called on the Council of the EU and the Commission to strengthen the protection of animals during transport within and outside the EU.

Members of the European Parliament have repeatedly asked the Commission to explain why it has not put forward a proposal on cage-free farming. In January 2024, the Commission replied that the transition to cage-free systems requires further consultations concerning the costs and the length of the transitional period. In March 2024, a Commissioner told Parliament that work was continuing on the follow-up to the End the Cage Age initiative.

It is the Commission’s role to propose new laws. However, Parliament assesses the measures taken by the Commission in response to a European citizen’s initiative.

We would add that Parliament is expected to continue work on two legislative proposals on animal welfare that the Commission presented in December 2023. In response to the work of Parliament’s committee of inquiry, the first proposal aims to strengthen EU rules on the protection of animals during transport. The second introduces new rules on the welfare and traceability of dogs and cats, with requirements for breeders, shelters and pet shops.

French

Le Parlement européen s’est régulièrement penché sur la question du bien-être animal.

Dans une résolution de 2021, le Parlement a invité la Commission européenne à proposer une loi supprimant progressivement, d’ici à 2027,  l’utilisation des cages dans les exploitations agricoles de l’Union européenne (UE), en réponse à l’initiative citoyenne européenne « End the Cage Age » (Pour une nouvelle ère sans cage).

Le Parlement a également créé une commission d’enquête sur la protection des animaux pendant le transport. En janvier 2022, le Parlement a ensuite invité le Conseil et la Commission à renforcer la protection des animaux pendant le transport à l’intérieur et à l’extérieur de l’UE.

Les députés au Parlement européen ont demandé à plusieurs reprises à la Commission d’expliquer pourquoi elle n’a pas présenté de proposition sur l’élevage sans cage. En janvier 2024, la Commission a répondu que la transition vers des systèmes sans cage nécessitait de nouvelles consultations concernant les coûts et la durée de la période transitoire. En mars 2024, une commissaire a déclaré au Parlement que les travaux se poursuivaient sur le suivi de l’initiative «End the Cage Age».

C’est la Commission européenne qui peut proposer de nouvelles lois. Toutefois, le Parlement évalue les mesures prises par la Commission en réponse à une initiative citoyenne européenne.

Nous ajoutons que le Parlement devrait poursuivre les travaux sur deux propositions législatives relatives au bien-être animal que la Commission a présentées en décembre 2023. En réponse aux travaux de la commission d’enquête du Parlement, la première proposition vise à renforcer les règles sur la protection des animaux pendant le transport. La seconde introduit de nouvelles règles sur le bien-être et la traçabilité des chiens et des chats, avec des exigences pour les éleveurs, les refuges et les animaleries.

German

Das Europäische Parlament befasst sich regelmäßig mit Fragen des Tierwohls.

In einer Entschließung aus dem Jahr 2021 forderte das Parlament die Europäische Kommission auf, einen Gesetzesvorschlag zur schrittweisen Abschaffung der Käfighaltung in landwirtschaftlichen Betrieben in der EU vorzulegen. Als Reaktion auf die Europäische Bürgerinitiative „Schluss mit der Käfighaltung“ (Englisch „End the Cage Age“) fordert das Parlament ein Ende der Käfighaltung bis 2027.

Außerdem setzte das Parlament einen Untersuchungsausschuss zum Schutz von Tieren beim Transport ein. In der Folge forderte das Parlament im Januar 2022 den Rat der EU und die Kommission auf, den Schutz von Tieren beim Transport innerhalb und außerhalb der EU zu verstärken.

Abgeordnete des Europäischen Parlaments haben wiederholt Fragen an die Kommission gerichtet, um zu erfahren, warum sie bislang keinen Gesetzesvorschlag zum Ende der Käfighaltung vorgelegt hat. Im Januar 2024 antwortete die Kommission, dass der Übergang zu käfiglosen Systemen noch weitere Beratungen hinsichtlich der Kosten und der Dauer der Übergangsperiode erfordere. Im März 2024 teilte eine EU-Kommissarin dem Parlament mit, dass die Arbeiten an den Folgemaßnahmen zur Initiative zum Ende der Käfighaltung andauerten.

Es ist die Aufgabe der Europäischen Kommission, neue Gesetze vorzuschlagen. Das Europäische Parlament bewertet jedoch die Maßnahmen, die von der Kommission als Antwort auf eine Europäische Bürgerinitiative ergriffen werden.

Wir möchten hinzufügen, dass das Parlament aller Voraussicht nach die Arbeit an zwei Gesetzesvorschlägen zum Tierschutz fortsetzen wird, die die Kommission im Dezember 2023 vorgelegt hat. Als Reaktion auf die Arbeit des parlamentarischen Untersuchungsausschusses zielt der erste Vorschlag darauf ab, die EU-weiten Regeln zum Schutz von Tieren beim Transport zu verschärfen. Mit dem zweiten Vorschlag werden neue Vorschriften zum Schutz und zur Rückverfolgbarkeit von Hunden und Katzen eingeführt, die Anforderungen an Züchter, Tierheime und Tierhandlungen enthalten.

Portuguese

O Parlamento Europeu tem abordado regularmente a questão do bem‑estar dos animais.

Numa resolução de 2021, o Parlamento instou a Comissão Europeia a propor uma lei para eliminar progressivamente a utilização de gaiolas nas explorações agrícolas da UE, com o objetivo de pôr termo à criação em gaiolas até 2027, em seguimento da Iniciativa de Cidadania Europeia «End the Cage Age» (Fim da era da gaiola).

O Parlamento criou igualmente uma comissão de inquérito sobre a proteção dos animais durante o transporte. Em janeiro de 2022, o Parlamento instou o Conselho da UE e a Comissão a reforçarem a proteção dos animais durante o transporte dentro e fora da UE.

Os deputados ao Parlamento Europeu solicitaram repetidamente à Comissão que explicasse a razão pela qual não apresentou uma proposta sobre a criação sem gaiolas. Em janeiro de 2024, a Comissão respondeu que a transição para sistemas sem gaiolas exige novas consultas sobre os custos e a duração do período transitório. Em março de 2024, uma comissária informou o Parlamento de que os trabalhos sobre o seguimento da iniciativa «End the Cage Age» ainda estavam em curso.

Cabe à Comissão propor nova legislação. No entanto, o Parlamento avalia as medidas tomadas pela Comissão em resposta a uma iniciativa de cidadania europeia.

Gostaríamos de acrescentar que o Parlamento deverá prosseguir os trabalhos sobre duas propostas legislativas em matéria de bem‑estar dos animais, apresentadas pela Comissão em dezembro de 2023. Em resposta ao trabalho da comissão de inquérito do Parlamento, a primeira proposta visa reforçar as regras da UE em matéria de proteção dos animais durante o transporte. A segunda proposta introduz novas regras relativas ao bem‑estar dos cães e dos gatos e à respetiva rastreabilidade, e prevê requisitos aplicáveis aos criadores, aos abrigos e às lojas de animais de companhia.

Background

Citizens often send messages to 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 Gilles Pittoors (1st edition).

In December 2023, the Commission proposed to amend Directive (EU) 2015/637 on the coordination and cooperation measures to facilitate consular protection for unrepresented citizens of the Union in third countries, and Directive (EU) 2019/997 establishing an EU emergency travel document. The aim is to make improvements in the areas covered by the two directives, in response to crises such as COVID-19, the conflicts in Afghanistan and Ukraine, and repatriations from Israel and Gaza. The intended outcomes include enhanced legal clarity, streamlined cooperation, greater consular service effectiveness, and heightened standards of consular support and crisis response.

The proposal is subject to the consultation procedure. Within Parliament, the file was assigned to the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE), with Loránt Vincze (EPP, Romania) as rapporteur. The Committees on Legal Affairs (JURI), Foreign Affairs (AFET) and Development (DEVE) were invited to submit opinions, with the latter deciding not to do so. The DEVE committee report was published in March 2024 and adopted in plenary on 24 April 2024. The proposal is now awaiting the Council’s final decision.

Complete version

• July 2024: Consular protection and the EU emergency travel document (1st edition)

Proposal for a Council Directive amending Directive (EU) 2015/637 on the coordination and cooperation measures to facilitate consular protection for unrepresented citizens of the Union in third countries and Directive (EU) 2019/997 establishing an EU emergency travel documentCommittee responsible:Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE)COM(2023) 930 final
6.12.2023Rapporteur:Loránt Vincze (EPP, Romania)2023/0441(CNS)Shadow rapporteurs:Gilles Lebreton (ID, France)
Nacho Sánchez Amor (S&D, Spain)
Marina Kaljurand (S&D, Estonia)
Jana Toom (Renew, Estonia)
Tinneke Strik (Greens/EFA, Netherlands)
Assita Kanko (ECR, Belgium)
Miguel Urbán Crespo (The Left, Spain)Special legislative
procedure – consultationNext steps expected: Adoption by the Council

Written by Kristina Grošek.

The ninth parliamentary term formally ended on 15 July 2024, ahead of the constitutive part-session of the European Parliament elected on 6-9 June 2024. Despite their best efforts, the co‑legislators had not reached agreement on a number of legislative proposals before the end of the ninth term. These will form a major part of the business that needs to be picked up again in the tenth term. To ensure continuity in its work, Parliament has adopted rules on how to deal with unfinished files.

Unfinished business in the European Parliament

‘Unfinished business’ refers to any procedure on which parliamentary work was ongoing at the end of the parliamentary term, i.e. where the plenary had not taken a final decision. According to Rule 250 of Parliament’s Rules of Procedure, at the end of the last part-session before elections, all Parliament’s unfinished business is deemed to have lapsed, unless the Conference of Presidents – at the beginning of the new term – decides, on the basis of reasoned requests from parliamentary committees and other institutions, to resume or continue consideration of the unfinished business. Furthermore, Parliament can ask the European Commission to refer a proposal to it again, in order for work to resume (Rules 62 and 86).

Unfinished files at the end of the ninth parliamentary term

As of 1 July 2024, at the end of the ninth term, some 174 ordinary legislative procedure files were ongoing at different stages of the legislative process. Of these, around 60 remained at an early stage. There are also several other unfinished files (e.g. special legislative procedures, budgetary procedures, and non-legislative procedures). In line with Rule 250, once the committees have been constituted, the new Chair of the Conference of Committee Chairs (CCC) will invite each committee to provide information on the state of play of unfinished files, and on how they intend to handle them (resume work, or ask the Commission to modify or withdraw the proposal). The Conference of Presidents will then decide on which files work will resume and in what manner. On the basis of that decision, the President will then inform the Commission and the Council of Parliament’s plans.

Unfinished files at the end of the eighth parliamentary term

On 24 July 2019, the Chair of the CCC wrote to the chairs of all committees, requesting that they examine the unfinished files and inform him on how they proposed to proceed. Following this, at its meeting of 16 October 2019, the Conference of Presidents decided to resume work on 37 files under the ordinary legislative procedure where a first-reading position had not yet been adopted. The decision listed a further 83 files on which a first-reading position had already been adopted in plenary. Work was to resume on another 71 files (under various procedures), while the Commission was asked to withdraw 12 legislative proposals.

Commission and Council

The Treaties do not set out a specific procedure for handling unfinished legislative files at the end of a parliamentary term, but they do allow the Commission to change a proposal, as long as the Council has not acted (Article 293(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union). For those files where the first reading has been concluded in Parliament, once the Council has transmitted its first-reading position, Treaty deadlines for the second reading must be respected. The 2007 joint declaration on practical arrangements for the co-decision procedure stipulates that the institutions coordinate their work, to enable proceedings to be conducted in a coherent and convergent fashion (point 6), with maximum efficiency (point 20).

Read this ‘at a glance note ‘on ‘Unfinished business from the ninth term‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Written by Tim Peters.

The Ukraine Facility is the EU’s flagship programme to support Ukraine’s recovery, reconstruction and modernisation following Russia’s full-scale war of aggression. The facility as defined by Regulation (EU) 2024/792 consists of three pillars and will mobilise up to €50 billion to ensure stable and predictable financial support for Ukraine between 2024 and 2027 and assist the country on its path towards EU membership. The Ukraine plan guides implementation of the facility’s Pillar I: it sets the conditions and serves as framework for disbursing funds, and outlines the reform pathway for Ukraine’s reconstruction and EU accession. Two tranches of exceptional bridge financing totalling €6 billion and pre-financing worth €1.9 billion have so far been transferred to Ukraine. Regular transfers of quarterly instalments from the Ukraine Facility are planned until 2027. Disbursal is conditional on Ukraine implementing the Ukraine plan quantitative and qualitative reform steps, and adhering to EU values.

Ukraine plan

The Ukraine plan sets out a coherent approach and clear priorities for reform in Ukraine. Its structure is defined by Article 17 of Regulation (EU) 2024/792. The plan ensures Ukraine’s ownership of implementation of the Ukraine Facility, as it was the responsibility of Ukraine’s government to draft it. Ukraine’s parliament, the Verkhovna Rada, and Ukrainian civil society were consulted by the government during the plan’s drafting and it was then assessed by the European Commission. The plan constitutes the basis for support provided under Pillar I of the facility – covering direct financial support. However, all measures financed under Pillar II (investments) and Pillar III (accession assistance) should equally support the objectives and implementation of the Ukraine plan.

The Commission endorsed the plan on 15 April 2024 on the basis of the criteria set out in Article 18 of Regulation (EU) 2024/792. On 14 May 2024, the Council adopted an implementing decision approving the plan. Payments to Ukraine will be disbursed by the EU subject to the implementation of the 69 reforms and 10 investments agreed, on the basis of 130 reform indicators and 16 investment indicators set out in the annex to the Council implementing decision.

The plan’s first part defines basic reforms that lay the foundations for accelerating economic recovery and strengthening institutional capacity in the areas of public administration reform, public financial management, the judicial system and the fight against corruption and money laundering. The second part outlines the reforms needed to develop the economy and improve citizens’ welfare in areas such as financial markets, human capital and decentralisation and regional policy. The third part focuses on priority sectors whose rapid development will stimulate broad economic growth, such as the energy sector, the agri-food sector, the green transition and environmental protection.

Ukraine Facility payments

Pillar I of the facility consists of €33 billion in loans and €5.27 billion in grants. Grants are paid out through the EU budget, through a new thematic special instrument, the Ukraine Reserve, set up over and above the EU’s budget expenditure ceilings. The loans will be guaranteed by the EU budget ‘headroom’. Funds from Pillar I are dedicated to providing Ukraine with direct financial assistance. At least 20 % of investments under the Ukraine plan must support climate change mitigation, adaption, environmental protection or the green transition. Furthermore, at least 20 % of Pillar I grants must go to sub-national authorities and local self-government.

Two tranches of exceptional bridge financing – consisting of €6 billion in loans – were disbursed in March and April 2024. On 28 June 2024, the Commission disbursed almost €1.9 billion in pre-financing to Ukraine, bringing total EU support transferred to Ukraine under the Facility to €7.9 billion in loans.

On 22 May 2024, the EU and Ukraine signed a framework agreement in accordance with Article 9 of Regulation (EU) 2024/792. The agreement stipulates the terms for management, control, reporting, auditing and information sharing in relation to the Ukraine Facility funds. The EU and Ukraine also signed a loan agreement setting out the provisions for the management and implementation of funding borrowed by the Commission. Grant payments will be based on financing agreements. Each quarter, the Commission will pay funds to Ukraine subject to the qualitative and quantitative reform steps being fulfilled and a positive Council implementing decision. Table 1 outlines the heavily frontloaded preliminary annual payment schedule for Pillar I grants and loans.

Table 1 – Ukraine Facility Pillar 1 preliminary annual financing schedule (2024–2028)

20242025202620272028State budget support€16 billion€12.5 billion€7.2 billion€1.2 billion€1.32 billion**The transfer in 2028 is expected to be completed in January and provides financing for the indicators met in Q4 2027. Data source: Ministry of Economy of Ukraine. Scrutiny mechanisms

Transfers of the quarterly tranches are conditional on implementation of the Ukraine plan quantitative and qualitative reform steps during the previous quarter. The Commission assesses their fulfilment before proposing a Council implementing decision. Following Council approval – or amendment – the Commission adopts the financing decision authorising disbursement of the non-repayable support. The Commission also monitors the facility’s implementation against the indicators defined in the Ukraine plan, and will track progress on a publicly available Ukraine plan scoreboard, at the latest from 1 January 2025 (Article 21, Regulation (EU) 2024/792). The Commission will inform Parliament on progress, reforms and payment scheduling, including through the Ukraine Facility dialogue (Article 37 of Regulation (EU) 2024/792).

Ukraine investment framework

Pillar II is the Ukraine investment framework, which provides grants and guarantees to de-risk private and public investment. That pillar is equipped with €6.97 billion in grants and is expected to incentivise investments of up to €40 billion. Micro-, small and medium-sized business will receive a minimum of 15 % of those guarantees. A first round of guarantee and grant agreements were signed during the 2024 Ukraine Recovery Conference in Berlin and comprised €1.4 billion in blended finance grants and loan guarantees, seeking to unlock €6 billion in investments.

Use of immobilised Russian assets

Parliament has insisted repeatedly that Russia must pay for the massive damage caused by the war and that immobilised Russian assets should be confiscated. On 21 May 2024, the Council adopted a set of legal acts ensuring that the net profits generated from extraordinary revenues accruing to central securities depositories (CSDs) in the EU, as a result of the implementation of the EU restrictive measures, will be used for further support for Ukraine. These profits will be used to support Ukraine’s defence industry capacities and the country’s reconstruction, according to the following key: 90 % to the European Peace Facility, an off-budget instrument, and 10 % to programmes financed from the EU budget. This would give Ukraine revenue of approximately €3 billion per year. On 14 June 2024, G7 leaders agreed to launch ‘extraordinary revenue acceleration (ERA) loans’ for Ukraine, in order to make available approximately US$50 billion in additional funding for Ukraine by the end of 2024. Those loans would be serviced and repaid by future flows of extraordinary revenues stemming from immobilised Russian sovereign assets held in G7 jurisdictions. The implementation of that agreement would require the EU to draw up new and amended rules.

A set of draft legal acts from the European Commission and the European External Action Service is expected in the coming months, to implement the most recent G7 leaders’ agreement on the use of extraordinary revenues from immobilised Russian assets.

Read this ‘at a glance note ‘on ‘Ukraine Facility: State of play‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Written by Rafał Mańko.

Sixty years ago, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled on the conflict between a rule of Community law, part of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (EEC) (‘EEC Treaty’), and a subsequent rule of national law, part of a legislative act adopted by a Member State parliament. The ECJ ruled that such a conflict should be resolved in line with the primacy of EU law principle that national courts must apply. The Costa v Enel case concerned an Italian nationalisation law, which created a national electricity enterprise – ‘Enel’ –transferring all existing electricity enterprises operating in Italy to it, upon compensation (‘Enel Law’). Nicolino Flaminio Costa, a Milan advocate, was a customer of one of the electricity companies affected by the nationalisation. Urged by Professor Gian Galeazzo Stendardi, his colleague from the Milan Bar Council and an astute supporter of the primacy and direct effect of Community law, Costa did not allow Enel employees to check his energy meter, and refused to pay his first bill from Enel. Two lawsuits before a local small claims court followed, where Stendardi represented Costa. In the first, judge Antonio Carones made a preliminary reference only to the Italian Constitutional Court (ICC), asking it to evaluate the Enel Law’s conformity with the Italian Constitution and the EEC Treaty. The ICC not only confirmed the Enel Law’s constitutionality but also declared that a later Italian law must prevail over earlier Community law. When a second bill arrived, Costa sued again. This time, the case came before judge Vittorio Emanuele Fabbri, who filed two preliminary references, to the ICC and the ECJ.

Before the ECJ, the Italian government argued that judge Fabbri’s reference was ‘absolutely inadmissible’ because a later Italian law must prevail over the EEC Treaty. However, the ECJ declared the reference admissible, stating that a rule of Community law having direct effect must prevail over any national law that contravenes it. The ECJ argued that, if an opposite view were accepted, the uniformity of Community law across the Member States would be adversely affected, as any state could simply derogate from a selected Treaty rule by passing a domestic law. On the substance, the ECJ found that most Treaty rules invoked by the Italian judge did not have direct effect, so could not affect the case, save for two: the freedom of establishment and the prohibition on monopolies. It was left to the national judge to decide whether the latter of them was possibly breached.

Read the complete briefing on ‘Costa v Enel judgment: 60 years on The making of the doctrine of primacy of EU law‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Written by Silvia Kotanidis.

With the 2024 elections now over, during its first part-session, from 16 to 19 July 2024, the new Parliament is due to vote in a secret ballot on whether to approve the European Council’s chosen candidate for President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen. She was the lead candidate for the European People’s Party. In Parliament, the candidate needs to secure 361 votes, i.e. an absolute majority of all Members (currently 720).

The President of the European Commission has taken on an ever more prominent leading role within the College of Commissioners, with the increasingly presidential system rather eclipsing the principle of collegiate decision-making.

The Commission President also plays a crucial role in relations between the European Parliament and the Commission. When presenting their priorities to Parliament prior to being elected, the candidate for Commission President sets the course for the whole term, during which they will be called to account by Parliament. Building on this, Parliament plays an increasingly prominent role in political agenda-setting, shaping the EU’s legislative programming together with the Commission and the Council.

Although more in-depth assessments of the 2019-2024 Commission presided over by Ursula von der Leyen will be made in the coming months, her presidency has been characterised by several severe crises, with the pandemic and international conflict presenting a stress test for her agenda. However, these issues did not prevent delivery on the majority of the Commission’s priority initiatives.

This updates a 2019 briefing by the same author, itself an update of a 2014 briefing by Eva-Maria Poptcheva.

Read the complete briefing on ‘Role and election of the President of the European Commission‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Written by Silvia Kotanidis.

At the January 2022 plenary sitting, the European Parliament (EP) is due to elect its 31st President, to hold office for the second half of the current term, up to the next European elections, following which the new Parliament will elect its President in July 2024. The President has an important and increasingly visible function in the EU institutional and international setting, mirroring the influential role of the Parliament as shaper of EU policies and as co-legislator. This is a further update of an ‘at a glance’ note, the most recent edition of which was published in June 2019.

Read this ‘at a glance note ‘on ‘How is the European Parliament’s President elected?‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Listen to podcast ‘Rules on ‘revolving doors’ in the EU‘ on YouTube.

Please accept YouTube cookies to play this video. By accepting you will be accessing content from YouTube, a service provided by an external third party.

YouTube privacy policy

If you accept this notice, your choice will be saved and the page will refresh.

Accept YouTube Content

Written by Clare Ferguson.

After the excitement of the European elections, the 720 newly elected Members of the European Parliament take office on 16 July. Their first tasks will be crucial in the organisation of the tenth Parliament (sitting from 2024 to 2029). The agenda for the parliamentary session in Strasbourg from 16‑19 July 2024 is at first, therefore, dedicated to electing certain of their peers to Parliament’s most important offices.

This first, constitutive session will open on Tuesday morning (under revised Rules of Procedure, which enter into force that day). Members cannot take part in debates or votes until the President has been elected. Therefore, electing a new President is Members’ first task. Voting should begin on Tuesday morning. The political groups (or individual Members amounting to 1/20th of the whole Parliament), propose the presidential candidates. To form a political group, a minimum of 23 MEPs, elected in at least one quarter (currently seven) of the EU Member States, is required (Rule 33). With political group formation taking place right up to the wire this time, political alliances are difficult to predict, but having already announced her candidacy, it is widely expected that outgoing President Roberta Metsola will gain a second two-and-a-half year mandate. Members elect their President by absolute majority, in a secret ballot (with up to four rounds, under Rule 16).

Once the new President takes the chair, the elections to Parliament’s Bureau follow. Traditionally, the holders of these key posts reflect the numerical strength of the political groups, and also respect geographical and gender balance, and negotiations among the political groups ensure this balance. The 14 Vice-Presidents are elected in a single ballot by an absolute majority of votes cast (two further rounds of voting are possible, under Rule 17, to fill any remaining seats). Each responsible for specific aspects of parliamentary business, Vice-Presidents chair debates when the President cannot. Parliament then elects five Quaestors, by absolute majority, in up to three ballots (under Rule 18). They are responsible for administrative and financial matters directly concerning Members and their working conditions. The President and Vice-Presidents make up the new Bureau of the Parliament, with the Quaestors participating in an advisory capacity.

Before Parliament’s committees can hold their constitutive meetings, the Conference of Presidents (of the political groups) proposes the number of Members to sit on each committee. Members are due to vote on these numbers on Wednesday (under Rule 212), following which the political groups can appoint the Members of each committee. The committees should then elect their chairs and vice-chairs during meetings planned for 23 July. These appointments are generally the subject of an informal agreement among the political groups, based on using the d’Hondt method, and are expected to reflect the plurality of Member States and a fair representation of political views.

The strength of the political groups in Parliament is therefore at its most evident at this point in the legislature, as their preferred candidates for the Bureau and committee offices find out how much support they have. Negotiations to form these political groups (Members sit with others of similar political persuasion, rather than by nationality) began immediately after the June 2024 elections, and reflect the changes in the political landscape foreshadowed by the results. Political groups must comply with certain rules before informing Parliament’s Secretary-General of their composition. Some are closely aligned with a European political party, whereas others draw their membership from a wider range of national parties. Their presidents meet in the Conference of Presidents, chaired by the President of Parliament.

Once Parliament’s President is in place, it will be time to turn to the appointment of the next European Commission. While the majority of EU leaders endorsed a second mandate for Ursula von der Leyen during the 27 June European Council meeting, she still needs the support of an absolute majority of Members of Parliament – at least 361). Members are set to vote on the candidate for Commission President during this session, by secret ballot on Thursday. If von der Leyen does not obtain the required majority, the European Council would need to propose a new candidate within a month, and Parliament would then vote on the new candidate at the session scheduled for September. Von der Leyen is scheduled to present her priorities to Parliament on Thursday morning, before the vote. These will set the course for the whole term, against which Members scrutinise the Commission’s progress. Together, the new Commission President and EU leaders then propose their candidates for Commissioner posts. Parliament organises hearings of the Commissioners-designate, so that Members from the relevant parliamentary committees can assess their suitability. Members will then decide whether to approve the Commission as a whole at a plenary session later in the year.

Members are also due to hear statements on Wednesday morning from the European Council and the Commission on the conclusions of the European Council meeting of 27 June. However, as the process of appointing Parliament’s office-holders takes up considerable time, the customary statement on the priorities of the incoming Council Presidency, held by Hungary, which began on 1 July, is likely to take place during the September session.

• European Parliament Plenary Session July 2024
• Electing the European Parliament’s President
• Results of the May 2024 European elections
• European Parliament Rules of Procedure 2024‑2029
• Understanding the d’Hondt method: Allocation of parliamentary seats and leadership positions
• Rules on political groups in the European Parliament
• Role and election of the President of the European Commission
• Timeline to new EU institutional leadership
• Outcome of the European Council meeting of 27 June 2024
• How plenary works

Written by Silvia Kotanidis.

The ‘revolving doors’ phenomenon has frequently caught media and public attention in recent years. This publication offers an overview of how the post term activities of members of the EU institutions –Commissioners and Members of the European Parliament, as opposed to staff members – are regulated by the EU institutions. The European Ombudsman has looked into the issue of revolving doors in the context of several individual cases; on a few occasions this has ended in an unsatisfactory outcome for the institution or body under investigation and prompted the European Ombudsman to make specific recommendations to avoid a repeat of maladministration in future cases. At EU level, almost all institutions place some restrictions on post-term activities, while a comparative overview of EU Member States shows that just a small number of them legislate for this aspect of the post-term activity of parliamentarians.

Read the in-depth analysis on ‘Rules on ‘revolving doors’ in the EU: Post-mandate restrictions on members of EU institutions and parliamentarians in Member States‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Listen to podcast ‘Rules on ‘revolving doors’ in the EU‘ on YouTube.

Please accept YouTube cookies to play this video. By accepting you will be accessing content from YouTube, a service provided by an external third party.

YouTube privacy policy

If you accept this notice, your choice will be saved and the page will refresh.

Accept YouTube Content

Written by Naja Bentzen.

Misleading information can throw any of us off course. Both misinformation – mistakes without ill intent – and disinformation – created and spread with the aim of fooling people – can make it hard to take informed decisions. Fast evolving technologies – including deepfake video and audio – make it too easy to produce and spread deceptive content very rapidly. Many of us worry about the effect: some 85 % of people worldwide are concerned about the impact of disinformation on their fellow citizens; 87 % think disinformation has already affected political life in their country; and 38 % of EU citizens list false and/or misleading information as a threat to democracy. These tips will help you steer around falsehoods.

Fact-checking compass

Read this infographic on ‘Fact-checking compass: How to spot information manipulation‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Please accept YouTube cookies to play this video. By accepting you will be accessing content from YouTube, a service provided by an external third party.

YouTube privacy policy

If you accept this notice, your choice will be saved and the page will refresh.

Accept YouTube Content

The European Union strongly condemned Russia’s unprovoked attack on Ukraine on 24 February 2022. Now, more than two years later, the war has already claimed over 10 000 civilian lives, and generated at least 3.5 million internal refugees and 6.3 million Ukrainians have fled the country. The ongoing attack has reverberated beyond Ukraine’s borders, affecting food security, energy prices and inflation both in the EU and beyond. The European Parliament labelled Russia’s war ‘the most outrageous act of aggression conducted by the political leadership of a given country in Europe since 1945’. The EU’s response has been structured along three axes: political, economic and military support for Ukraine; isolation and containment of Russia; and enhancement of EU and EU neighbourhood resilience.

Parliament’s extraordinary meeting of 1 March 2022, where it adopted a resolution unequivocally condemning Russia’s aggression and setting the direction for the EU response, was one of the first international gatherings Ukraine’s President, Volodymyr Zelenskyy attended. Parliament’s President, Roberta Metsola, was the first EU leader to visit Kyiv, on 1 April 2022.

Since then, Parliament has dealt with more than 40 legislative files of paramount importance for Ukraine and adopted over 30 non-legislative resolutions on aspects of EU support for Ukraine, including: several rounds of macro-financial assistance; the Act in Support of Ammunition Production (ASAP); and the Ukraine Facility, earmarking €50 billion for Ukraine’s reconstruction.

Parliament has also unwaveringly supported Ukraine’s EU membership aspirations, advocating successfully in June 2022 for Ukraine to be granted candidate country status, and in December 2023 for Member States to start accession negotiations. During EU-Ukraine Parliamentary Association Committee meetings, Members have discussed parliamentary follow-up to Ukraine’s official accession request with their Ukrainian counterparts, as well as EU military and humanitarian support, sanctions, accountability for violations of international humanitarian law and war crimes, and preparations for Ukraine’s reconstruction.

Moreover, Parliament has used its powers to advocate a tougher policy of containment towards Russia. It supports economic sanctions (including a November 2023 resolution making specific recommendations on sanctions enforcement, monitoring and circumvention), and urges the EU to explore ways to confiscate frozen Russian assets and use them for Ukraine’s reconstruction. In May 2024, the Council approved a plan to use €3 billion of the profits from these frozen assets to support Ukraine. The EU recently adopted a 14th comprehensive package of sanctions, cracking down on circumvention and adopting energy measures, as well as listing additional individuals and entities for sanction.

Other initiatives Parliament champions include the ‘Generators of Hope’ campaign to supply Ukraine with energy equipment for the winter. In December 2022, the European Parliament awarded the 2022 Sakharov Prize to the brave people of Ukraine. 

Parliament is therefore employing its budgetary, agenda-setting, external action and law-making powers to mobilise solid EU support for Ukraine’s defence against Russia’s aggression, and to ensure that the EU honours its pledges. 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 Alessandro D’Alfonso, Martin Höflmayr and Giulio Sabbati, with David Kläffling.

The European Union’s economic outlook for 2024 reflects cautious optimism, with gross domestic product (GDP) growth estimated at 1.0 % for the EU and 0.8 % for the euro area. As inflation is projected to continue declining towards the European Central Bank’s 2 % target by 2025, a soft landing is within reach. Near-term growth is mainly driven by real wages and private consumption, while high interest rates keep private investment sluggish. This marks a slight improvement from the previous forecast for the EU, while the euro area forecast remains unchanged. Economic expansion in southern EU countries continues to outpace that of those in the north and west, promoting convergence. Unemployment rates continued to fall in the Member States with the highest rates, leading to a further reduction in disparities across the EU. Overall, the EU unemployment rate at the beginning of 2024 stood at a record low of 6.0 %. This positive momentum coincides with the 20th anniversary of the EU’s enlargement to 10 additional Member States, highlighting the single market’s beneficial integration effects.

Launched as a response to the socioeconomic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, Next Generation EU (NGEU) and its Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) have also supported recovery and economic convergence in the EU. Against the backdrop of new EU fiscal rules, in place as of this year, NGEU and the RRF are expected to continue playing a significant role in financing strategic investment and reform up to 2026. In that context, this publication aims to track the state of the EU economy. It builds on a well-established EPRS series, ‘Monitoring the EU’s economic outlook’, becoming quarterly.

Read this infographic on ‘Economic Outlook Quarterly: A soft landing within reach‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

RRF payments so far, % committed resources Composition of NGEU and RRF resources Next Generation EU (NGEU) EU inflation
Harmonised index of consumer prices (HICP) monthly data, % HICP in the EU
EU inflation, share of HICP items by change in annual inflation rate, % Unemployment rate by gender in the EU Member States
Q1-2024, % of the labour force Total unemployment rate in the EU General government balance, European Commission spring forecast, % of GDP Government consolidated gross debt, change Q4-2019 vs Q4-2023, percentage points of GDP Quarterly GDP growth in the EU Member States
% change, Q4-2019 and Q1-2024 GDP growth in the EU
Quarterly, % change compared to same period in previous year

Written by Silvia Kotanidis.

To allocate seats in collegiate bodies, such as parliaments, a method is needed to translate votes proportionally into whole seats. The d’Hondt method is a mathematical formula that is used widely in proportional representation systems, although it leads to less proportional results than other seat allocation systems, such as the Hare-Niemeyer or Sainte-Laguë/Schepers methods. Moreover, the d’Hondt method tends to favour the electoral lists that win the most votes, to the detriment of those with fewer votes. However, it is effective in facilitating majority formation and therefore in securing parliamentary operability.

The d’Hondt method is used by 15 EU Member States for elections to the European Parliament. It is also used within Parliament as the formula for distributing the chairs of the parliamentary committees and delegations among the political groups, and among the national delegations within some political groups. This proportional distribution of leadership positions within Parliament prevents the dominance of political life by just one or two large political groups, ensuring that smaller political groups also have a say in setting the political agenda. Some argue, however, that this approach limits the impact of election results on the political direction of decision-making within Parliament; they would call instead for a ‘winner-takes-all’ strategy.

Many national parliaments in the EU also distribute committee chairs and other posts proportionally among political groups, either using the d’Hondt method or through more informal means. Others apply a ‘winner-takes-more’ approach, reserving only certain committee chair posts with particular relevance to government scrutiny for opposition groups. In the US House of Representatives, all committee chairs are selected from the majority party.

This updates a 2019 briefing, which itself updated a 2016 briefing by Eva-Maria Poptcheva.

Read the complete briefing on ‘Understanding the d’Hondt method: Allocation of parliamentary seats and leadership positions‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Written by Costica Dumbrava with Hugo Carmona Bas (1st edition).

In March 2023, the European Commission presented a proposal for a directive to expand the use of digital tools and processes in EU company law. The directive would seek to facilitate companies’ cross-border activities by reducing bureaucracy and administrative burdens (such as when setting up subsidiaries and branches in another Member State), increase transparency and boost trust in the business environment across the EU. The proposal is expected to contribute to the creation of a more integrated and digitalised single market, reducing administrative costs for companies by up to €437 million per year.

The proposal falls under the ordinary procedure, where Parliament and the Council act as co‑legislators. In April 2024, Parliament adopted its position on first reading. The directive is subject to the corrigendum procedure and Parliament must approve the final text before formal adoption by the Council and publication in the Official Journal.

Complete version

• July 2024: Enhanced digital tools and processes in company law (1st edition)

Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directives 2009/102/EC and (EU)
2017/1132 as regards further expanding and upgrading the use of digital tools and processes in company lawCommittee responsible:Legal Affairs (JURI)COM(2023) 0177
20.3.2023Rapporteur:Emil Radev (EPP, Bulgaria)2023/0089(COD)Shadow rapporteurs:Maria-Manuel Leitão-Marques (S&D, Portugal)
Angel Dzhambazki (ECR, Bulgaria)Ordinary legislative
procedure (COD)
(Parliament and Council
on equal footing –
formerly ‘co-decision’)Committee for opinion:Internal Market and Consumer Protection (IMCO)Next steps expected: Final adoption

Written by Yann-Sven Rittelmeyer.

Introduction to Hungary’s parliamentary system

Hungary is a parliamentary democracy with a unicameral parliament, the Országgyűlés (National Assembly). The structure and functioning of Hungary’s political system are determined by the Fundamental Law of 25 April 2011, which has been amended 12 times since its entry into force in 2012.

The National Assembly elects the President of the Republic (head of state), whose role is primarily representative but entails some complementary and controlling competences vis-à-vis the legislative, executive and judicial powers. The executive power is exercised by the Prime Minister, proposed by the President and elected by the National Assembly. The Prime Minister chooses the ministers, who together with him/her, compose the government. The Prime Minister also defines the government’s general policy. Ministers are accountable for their actions to both the National Assembly and the Prime Minister. Only the Prime Minister can dismiss them, and the government’s mandate is linked to that of the Prime Minister.

This briefing is part of an EPRS series on national parliaments and EU affairs. It offers an overview of the way the EU Member States’ national parliaments are structured and how they process, scrutinise and engage with EU legislation. It also refers to relevant publications by national parliaments.

The National Assembly is Hungary’s supreme organ of popular representation. It is in charge of adopting and amending the Fundamental Law, adopting legislative acts, and scrutinising the government’s activities. The members of the National Assembly are elected every 4 years by universal, equal, direct and secret vote. The Act CCIII of 2011 on the election of members of the National Assembly reformed the electoral system by establishing a single-round election with 106 members elected in individual voting districts and 93 members elected through national-level lists. The reform allowed Hungarian citizens living abroad to participate in the ballot (although they can only vote for national party lists), and national minorities to elect national minorities members.

The European Parliament and the European Commission have repeatedly raised concerns about the current functioning of Hungary’s constitutional and electoral system. According to the most recent resolution adopted by the European Parliament, the Hungarian government is responsible for the ‘persistent systemic and deliberate breach of democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights in Hungary’.

Read the complete briefing on ‘The Hungarian Parliament and EU affairs‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Whatever kind of paid work you do, you want a fair wage. In recent years, wage inequality has grown in many European Union countries, and more employed people have become at risk of poverty. In 2017, the EU institutions announced non‑binding guidelines for policy action – the European Pillar of Social Rights. This affirmed workers’ rights to fair pay that provides a decent standard of living in the EU. Minimum wages set in the EU therefore seek to protect those who work, while minimum income schemes target people who do not get sufficient income from work. Both policy measures are the responsibility of national governments, but the EU supports and complements their action.

The European Parliament has long advocated EU guidelines on minimum wages to prevent poverty. In 2019, it called on the European Commission to put forward a legal instrument to ensure fair minimum wages for workers across the EU. In response, in her 2020 State of the Union speech, Commission President Ursula von der Leyen spoke out against ‘social dumping’ and announced a first EU legislative initiative. A month later, the Commission proposed a directive on adequate minimum wages. These rules sought to ensure workers have access to minimum wage protection set at adequate levels, and, to strengthen collective bargaining as the main instrument for ensuring fair pay.

After much negotiation, the Council and Parliament reached an agreement on the new rules in June 2022. They agreed on a framework to promote collective bargaining on wage setting, as well as adequate statutory minimum wage levels, while also improving effective access to minimum wage protection for all workers. Parliament wanted to oblige EU countries to develop action plans, and to ensure full respect for workers’ rights to join a union and to bargain collectively, but the Council opposed this. EU countries have until 15 November 2024 to implement the new rules.

The Commission then proposed to recommend that EU countries update their minimum income schemes, as existing schemes play varying roles in national social protection systems, with a wide range of design, generosity and accessibility. While the Council adopted the slightly modified recommendation in January 2023, two months later Parliament called on the Commission to consider a stronger legal instrument (a directive) to address the cost of living crisis. However, the Commission responded that no legal basis allowed it to propose a directive.

By ensuring wage inequality stays on the agenda, and by helping shape EU law, Parliament is keeping the pressure up in the debate around minimum wage and minimum income. 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 Marc Jütten (Members’ Research Service) with Kadri Paris (Transatlantic Relations and Global Governance Unit, DG for External Policies).

G7 leaders gathered under the Italian presidency from 13 to 15 June 2024 in Apulia, Italy, for the 50th G7 Summit. The summit was a demonstration of the G7’s unity and determination in the face of intense challenges to the rules-based multilateral order and international peace and security: Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine and the war in Gaza. In the presence of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the leaders agreed to provide US$50 billion in additional funding to Ukraine from frozen Russian sovereign assets. The leaders also backed the comprehensive deal on Gaza outlined by United States (US) President Joe Biden. The Italian presidency put special focus on energy cooperation with Africa as a priority for the G7.

Background

On 1 January 2024, Italy took over the G7 presidency from Japan (Canada will follow in 2025). While the Italian presidency did not present a ‘roadmap’, its guiding priorities were: artificial intelligence (AI), Ukraine, Gaza, migration and Africa. Whereas the Japanese presidency had focused primarily on the economic security agenda and related policies, Italy identified Africa as a new priority topic for its presidency. This initiative is in line with the Mattei plan for Africa, which seeks to position Italy as an energy hub between Africa and Europe, investing in gas and hydrogen pipelines between the two continents.

In addition, the Italian presidency placed the focus on AI, carrying forward the Hiroshima AI process launched by the G7 last year. As was the case with the two previous G7 summits, Russia’s war of aggression on Ukraine overshadowed the gathering and put the focus on G7 support for Ukraine. This year, another conflict in the EU’s neighbourhood, in Gaza, was added to the agenda.

The Group of Seven (G7)
The G7 Speakers’ Meeting provides an opportunity for the presidents of the parliaments of the G7 countries and of the European Parliament to meet annually to discuss parliamentary responses to international issues. The next meeting will take place in from 5 to 7 September 2024, in Verona, Italy.
The group meets annually to discuss issues such as global economic governance, international security, and, most recently, artificial intelligence (AI).
The aggregate gross domestic product (GDP) of G7 member states represents about 30 per cent of the global economy.
The G7 is home to over 776 million people.
The G7 Speakers’ Meeting provides an opportunity for the presidents of the parliaments of the G7 countries and of the European Parliament to meet annually to discuss parliamentary responses to international issues. The next meeting will take place in from 5 to 7 September 2024, in Verona, Italy.

The EU was represented at the summit by Charles Michel, President of the European Council, and Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission. Ahead of the summit, Michel published an article entitled ‘Forging a new era of cooperation‘ in which he outlined three key areas on which the G7 should focus: (i) partnering more closely with Africa; (ii) tackling food insecurity and strengthening global food systems; and (iii) strengthening health systems across Africa.

In line with previous G7 presidencies, the Italian presidency had invited representatives of other states and international organisations to take part in some working sessions, illustrating the G7 ambition to foster alliances with countries from the ‘Global South’. Overall, the leaders of eleven countries and five international organisations participated, including: Luis Inácio Lula da Silva, President of Brazil – holder of this year’s G20 presidency; Narendra Modi, Prime Minister of India; Javier Milei, President of Argentina; Mohamed Ould Ghazouani, President of Mauritania, in his capacity as Chair of the African Union (AU); and Pope Francis, who addressed the leaders in a session on AI.

Outcome of the summit

During the summit, G7 leaders held six working sessions:

• Africa, climate change and development
• The ongoing situation in the Middle East
• Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine
• Migration
• Indo-Pacific / Economic security
• Artificial intelligence and energy / Africa and the Mediterranean region

On 14 June, the G7 leaders adopted a 36-page communiqué. The document starts with a preamble in which the G7 stresses various commitments ‘to meet global challenges at a crucial moment in history’. It states that the G7 stands ready to support Ukraine’s fight for freedom and its reconstruction, for as long as it takes, and commits to taking concrete steps to address the triple crisis of climate change, pollution, and biodiversity loss. The communiqué then addresses a wide range of topics, including: the conflict in Gaza; freedom of navigation in the Red Sea; Iran; fostering partnerships with African countries; sustainable development and food security; the Indo-Pacific region; and AI. China is a recurring theme, with the summit’s final communiqué referencing the country 29 times. It expresses concern about China’s trading practices – including its harmful overcapacity and market distortions – and calls on China to cease the transfer of dual-use materials to Russia.

However, media attention was drawn first and foremost to the G7 leaders’ commitment to provide US$50 billion in additional funding to Ukraine from Russia’s frozen state assets (despite complex legal challenges). The details of the financing arrangement will be spelt out in the coming months, and the loan will be issued by the end of the year. On the margins of the summit, Ukraine signed bilateral security agreements with the US and Japan.

The second key message from Apulia concerned the war in Gaza. G7 leaders stood united behind the comprehensive deal outlined by the US government, involving a three-step approach that could lead to an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, the release of all hostages, and a credible pathway towards peace under a two-state solution. Leaders also called for a significant and sustained increase in humanitarian assistance.

On the Italian presidency’s key priority, the G7 leaders (including the EU) and African partners adopted a joint statement on energy for growth in Africa. The initiative is about helping to develop clean energy projects, attract private capital and concessional finance, and overcome barriers to investment in clean energy across Africa. The G7 also introduced the Apulia food systems initiative, designed to strengthen global food security.

Marking a reversal compared with the Hiroshima communiqué, this year’s outcome document made no reference to ‘access to safe and legal abortion’, but it kept the call to guarantee comprehensive sexual and reproductive health services and rights for all.

In addition to the summit declarations, the G7 leaders and ministerial actors adopted a number of statements and documents prior to the summit, such as the G7 leaders’ statement on synthetic drugs threats and the G7 leaders’ statement on Iran’s attack against Israel.

Observers’ views

According to experts, the Apulia Summit gave a strong performance on its key issues, producing at least 469 commitments. Oxfam welcomed the fact that for the first time in their 50-year history, G7 leaders had all agreed to increase taxes on the richest people. On a more general note, some observers repeated their call to institutionalise the G7 with permanent staff and a secretariat, and to expand membership to include Australia and the Republic of Korea.

Looking ahead, the Apulia Summit took place in a climate of uncertainty for the future unity of the group, not least with the possibility of a second Trump term and the rise of alternative institutions, such as the G20 and BRICS+.

Read this briefing on ‘Outcome of the 50th G7 Summit, held in Apulia, Italy‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.

Written by David de Groot with Titouan Faucheux (1st edition).

Employers in the EU face labour shortages in many sectors of the economy, a situation that could further deteriorate in the coming decades. In the context of a global race for talent, facilitating international recruitment is a priority for the EU.

Announced on 27 April 2022, the European Commission launched an EU talent pool pilot initiative specifically addressed towards workers fleeing the war in Ukraine to facilitate their access to the EU labour market.

On 15 November 2023, as part of the talent mobility package, the Commission subsequently published a legislative proposal for a regulation to establish an EU talent pool available to third-country nationals residing in third countries.

In the European Parliament (ninth legislative term), the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE) was responsible for the file. On 6 February 2024, the LIBE committee’s rapporteur presented her draft report. The Employment and Social Affairs (EMPL), Culture and Education (CULT) and Development (DEVE) committees published their opinions on 19 February and 8 and 11 April 2024 respectively. Work will continue during the 10th legislative term.

The Council agreed its general approach on 13 June 2024.

Complete version

• July 2024: Proposal establishing an EU talent pool (1st edition)

Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing an EU Talent Pool Committee responsible:Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE)COM(2023) 716
15.11.2023Rapporteur:Abir Al-Sahlani (Renew, Sweden)2023/0404(COD)Shadow rapporteurs:To be appointedOrdinary legislative
procedure (COD)
(Parliament and Council
on equal footing –
formerly ‘co-decision’)Next steps expected: Committee vote on draft report