I don't regret backing von der Leyen, says Greens chief Eickhout
In his office looking out onto Strasbourg's cathedral, Eickhout defended the Greens' decision to support Ursula von der Leyen's new European Commission in 2024, and again in last week's motion of censure, pointing to green-tinged upcoming laws.
But he said the EU's push to simplify its legislation is going too far under pressure from corporate lobbyists and von der Leyen's centre-right political family in the Parliament, the EPP, led by Manfred Weber.
The 53-strong group he jointly leads with MEP Terry Reinkte is far smaller than it was before last year's European election. So instead of threatening to topple the Commission, Eickhout is appealing to von der Leyen to put the brakes on Weber.
What follows is an edited transcript.
Euractiv: It's a tough time for the Greens. The far-right Patriots are taking the lead on the 2040 climate target, and a massive simplification agenda is upending much of the European Green Deal. Do you regret backing this Commission last year?
Eickhout: I don't regret it, but things need to change. I still stand by the choice because I still see a program where we also have elements where we can work on climate adaptation, industrial policy, and oceans. We still expect the Commission to deliver on that. What annoys me is that it comes so late. For example, the Circular Economy Act is planned for the end of 2026. Where is the urgency that we see on defence? Why is that not on industrial spending? That is a political choice I'm criticising.
But anyone could have told you in July 2024 that the EPP would be dominant in the Parliament, where they are the largest group, and in the Commission, where they have the most commissioners. Weren't you naive to support this Commission?
It's logical that there would be an EPP agenda and we are ready to adapt to shifts in the Parliament. But it's now about how this simplification agenda is being done. The first proposal on Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive and Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD), to be very honest, has nothing to do with simplification. It's creating chaos for companies; they don't know what they have to do. This is stupid simplification. On CSDDD it's just killing a law, it's deregulation.
So, call me naive that I trust von der Leyen when she says we do simplification, not deregulation. She underestimated a bit the beast that she has woken with the simplification, because every nasty lobby is now jumping on it. What I hear now already is that the pharmaceutical lobby is lobbying to change the urban wastewater directive, to avoid the polluter pays principle. This is exactly an example where the omnibus is stupid.
Are you soft-pedalling a bit on von der Leyen, though? After all, most of your focus tends to be on Weber, not her.
I don't think there's a very good relation between her and Weber, and what she is underestimating – and I can even understand that, because there are bigger issues to solve in the world – is that what Weber is doing is also hurting her. It's important that she clearly shows that she's not EPP Weber. And this is, of course, something that she's not eager to do because in her way of communicating, she always tries to stay neutral in everything.
Weber's choice is, 'Do you want to work with the pro Europeans or do you keep on doing what you're doing now?' And that's just strengthening the far right, and it's strengthening chaos, and in the end, it will kill you. But I'm also warning the Commission, this mounting pressure on you will be harder and harder to push back on.
Your Dutch Green Party will soon fully merge with Frans Timmermans' Socialist Party, and you are fighting the upcoming October national election together. Does that mean your MEPs will all move to the Socialists group or the Greens in the European Parliament? And would you go back to join the government if you win?
What we try to do here is stay in both groups. As for me, I really like the European arena, more than the Dutch arena. It's more long-term focused. I like to play chess on a three-dimensional chessboard. If Timmermans calls, we'll have a talk.
(mm)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Euractiv
6 hours ago
- Euractiv
Macron says France will recognise a Palestinian state in September
France will recognise a Palestinian state at the UN General Assembly in September, President Emmanuel Macron announced on Thursday. "True to its historic commitment to a just and lasting peace in the Middle East, I have decided that France will recognise the State of Palestine. I will make a formal announcement at the United Nations General Assembly in September," the French head of state wrote on X and Instagram. Including France, Palestinian statehood is now recognised by 142 countries, according to an AFP tally, though Israel and the United States strongly oppose recognition. France would be the most significant European power to recognise a Palestinian state. In addition, Britain's Prime Minister Keir Starmer said Thursday he would hold an "emergency call" on Friday with both France and Germany on the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. "The urgent priority today is to end the war in Gaza and rescue the civilian population," Macron wrote in the social media post. "We must finally build the State of Palestine, ensure its viability and enable it, by accepting its demilitarisation and fully recognising Israel, to contribute to the security of all in the Middle East." (jp)
Euractiv
7 hours ago
- Euractiv
Germany, France pledge to settle row over FCAS fighter jet by year end
BERLIN – The German and French defence ministers sought to downplay tensions over the European FCAS next-generation fighter jet programme at a meeting on Thursday, but made clear that major questions around the project must be answered before the close of 2025. France's Sébastien Lecornu and Germany's Boris Pistorius both expressed their support for the programme, which also includes Spain and has been riven by conflict between top aerospace contractors, particularly France's Dassault Aviation and Germany's Airbus Defence. "We want to clarify the situation at FCAS by the end of the year. We will need to discuss the obstacles," Pistorius said. Lecornu said the FCAS programme is approaching "the moment of truth" as development move toward building a prototype of the fighter jet, "and of course there are many issues that need to be clarified". Conflict over FCAS burst into public this summer as Dassault's CEO lobbed criticism at key partners in the project, while executives at Airbus Defence fired back. Media reports that Dassault was seeking to reconfigure contracts to take a greater share of the programme triggered further wrangling over the project. "It comes as no surprise in large-scale projects that some of the companies involved not only have a wealth of expertise, but also their own interests and their own will," Pistorius said on Thursday. "We knew that from the outset." The German defence minister said both countries remain "completely clear and unanimous" in their support for FCAS, as well as the Franco-German Main Ground Combat System (MGCS) effort to develop a next-generation main battle tank. His French counterpart, however, sought to keep the future tank programme – in which German defence contractors are taking the lead – separate from the FCAS issue, saying it was a project with a very different timeline and set of agreements. The overriding concern for France and Germany, Lecornu contended, is whether the FCAS project can deliver a fully capable aircraft by 2040, the project's current target delivery date. For the French Air Force, Lecornu noted, those capabilities will include carrying nuclear weapons. "Project management requires a clear organisational structure of the companies' responsibilities and accountabilities," the French minister said. "We are putting a lot on the line with FCAS." Lecornu said that the sprawling complexity of the project – involving numerous contractors – "is of course a weak point, as we may not be able to keep to the schedule." "But the Chinese and others (...) will not wait for us. And if we lose time here with lengthy discussions, then a major battle will already have begun. In 2040, we will either be at the forefront or we will be left behind," he said. "We have developed various scenarios that we will present to the chancellor and the president for a decision." (jp)
Euractiv
7 hours ago
- Euractiv
Roche steps in as Trump aims for 1500% drug price cuts
'We're gonna get the drug prices down – not 30% or 40%. No, we're gonna get them down 1,000%, 1,500%,' said the US president. Euractiv is part of the Trust Project Thomas Mangin Euractiv Jul 24, 2025 15:17 2 min. read News Based on facts, either observed and verified directly by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Amid a crusade against overpriced medicine, US President Donald Trump has promised to bring drug prices down by 1,500%. While the world still puzzles over his maths, the industry appears ready to offer solutions. 'We're gonna get the drug prices down – not 30% or 40%, which would be great. Not 50% or 60%. No, we're gonna get them down 1,000%, 600%, 500%, 1,500%,' said the US president at the White House on 22 July 22. 'Numbers that are not even thought to be achievable, because I've used a certain talent that I have,' he added. The pharmaceutical industry remains one of President Trump's primary targets. In his first term, Trump vowed to lower drug prices – but with little effect. A study by the Rand Corporation estimated that in 2024, drug prices in the United States were 2.7 times higher than in the 32 other OECD countries. The U.S. president continues to put pressure on big pharma groups and is pushing them to relocate to the United States, notably by threatening to impose tariffs of up to 200%. Several European companies have announced massive investments across the Atlantic in recent months. On 22 July, AstraZeneca unveiled a $50 billion investment plan in the United States by 2030. In April, Roche announced a similar investment for production as well as research and development in the U.S. 'We hope the U.S. government will see, through all the investments we and other companies are making, that pharmaceutical firms want to produce the medicines needed in the United States, for the United States,' said Schinecker. (bms, aw)
