Agreement on Data Governance Act + Elmar • Table.Briefings

Dear reader,

Let’s not kid ourselves, there is the threat of another lockdown this winter – but probably only for the unvaccinated. The federal and state governments will decide on Thursday about far-reaching COVID measures: Area-wide 2G and contact restrictions for the unvaccinated are considered likely. But also ghost games and closed bars for all, at least in high incidence areas, are likely to be discussed. Mandatory vaccination – whether general or only for certain occupational groups – will also become an inevitable topic at the federal-state summit due to the rapid spread of the Omicron variant.

Meanwhile, Brussels is taking a soothing tone – at least as far as concerns about an economic crisis caused by the partial shutdown are concerned. Economic Affairs Commissioner Paolo Gentiloni said in an interview with Bloomberg Television that he was not ruling out problems – especially for tourism. But by and large, he said, European economies are “adapted to these kinds of crises because of the vaccines.” Gentiloni expects the economic impact this time to be less than during past infection waves.

In France, a man who has always railed against drastic COVID measures in the past announced his presidential candidacy yesterday. But that is now the least of the problems of far-right journalist and Macron challenger Éric Zemmour, as Tanja Kuchenbecker reports.

Only one year after the European Commission adopted the draft Data Governance Act, it found a common position together with the European Parliament and the Council in the trilogue last night. The agreement was made possible so quickly, among other things, because there was no political trench warfare and all three institutions were in agreement: The DGA is not meant to be parallel legislation to the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), reports Jasmin Kohl. The main goal of the law is to facilitate the use of third-party data.

Last but not least, in today’s Europe.Table, a long-time companion of Angela Merkel, pays homage to the outgoing Chancellor’s European policy: For Elmar Brok, Merkel was Europe’s prima inter pares, shaping the Union through modesty rather than triumphalism. I particularly recommend his contribution to you.

Your
Lukas Knigge

Negotiators reach final agreement on Data Governance Act

By

Jasmin Kohl

With the Data Govern a nce Act (DGA), the Commission wants to create a new type of data governance so that data can be exchanged more easily between sectors and member states and thus used more intensively. The rapporteur in the Industry Committee (ITRE), Angelika Niebler (CSU/EPP), therefore calls the law a “Schengen for data“. Nothing less than a genuine data market is to be created in this way and the foundation laid for a European data economy. Niebler stresses how important trust and fairness are for this: “Only in this way can the EU-wide exchange of data develop its full potential and give rise to new, sustainable business models and innovations.”

Just under a year after the draft was adopted by the Commission, the European Parliament, the Council, and the Commission now reached an agreement in the trilogue last night. The rapid agreement was also possible because all three institutions agreed in principle – the DGA should not be parallel legislation to the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). “We have succeeded in showing that ambitious data protection and innovation-friendly data policy are not opposites, so I very much welcome the agreement today,” said Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE) Committee rapporteur Sergey Lagodinsky (Greens/EFA).

A key objective of the DGA is to facilitate the use of third-party data. For example, if the public sector has data on construction planning, this could be of interest to a private waste disposal company as well as to other companies. At the same time, the waste management company’s real-world traffic data could mean efficiency gains for other companies through better planning capabilities. The DGA envisions three main sources of data:

Data from the public sector
Data donations from private individuals to “data altruistic organizations”
Data from companies, institutions, and individuals via data intermediaries

Data intermediaries are to support buyers and sellers of data in the exchange process. In doing so, they are to act in an exclusively neutral manner, i.e., they are not to use the data they mediate for their own purposes. This should ensure that buyers and sellers are not placed at a competitive disadvantage by third parties using their data. Services that enable data sharing within a closed user group should not be able to act as data intermediaries. The direct relationship between data owner and data user is decisive here. Providers of cloud services, as well as other providers that aggregate, enrich or transform data, can therefore also not act as data intermediaries. The same applies to services that focus on the mediation of content, especially copyrighted content.

“Data altruistic organizations” are also to be created by the DGA. These are to allow data donations to be used by third parties for research purposes, for example. Here, too, it states: If personal data is transferred, the GDPR applies. A “Broad Consent”, i.e., a non-specific consent to the further use of data, is therefore not envisaged.

No additional obligations for public authorities

Public authorities have three different options for handling personal data that they want to offer for reuse in a GDPR-compliant manner. They can either anonymize them or make the data available for processing in a “secure processing environment.” The third option: the actor who wants to reuse the personal data can only do so on-site in the public body.

In the case of anonymization, the European Parliament has also pushed through its demand that the re-identification of anonymized data is prohibited. The only exception: security researchers (hackers) who want to test the robustness of anonymization techniques. Mixed data sets will also be treated as personal data and thus also fall under the GDPR.

According to the Commission’s proposal, public authorities should be obliged to help customers obtain consent for the reuse of data. However, this obligation was a red line for member states. They had argued that this burden was too great for public authorities and thus prevailed in the trilogue.

The Data Governance Act also provides for time limits on exclusive rights of use for data between public bodies and companies, so-called exclusive data-sharing agreements. The Commission’s proposal originally stipulated that a public body could not give a company exclusive access to data for more than three years. The only exception was that a particular service could only be provided by a single company. Parliament prevailed here in the trilogue and limited exclusive data agreements to one year. Existing exclusive data agreements may run for a maximum of two and a half years. This is intended to make more data available to SMEs and start-ups as well, thereby guaranteeing more competition.

Adequacy decisions for data transfers to third countries

It is not only in the case of personal data that the Data Governance Act is intended to sort out anticipated problems: The Act also addresses business concerns that non-personal data shared in Europe could be used unfairly by competitors outside the EU. The Commission can take adequacy decisions for these cases in the form of enforcement acts. During the trilogue, the Parliament could not assert itself to be involved in the decision in the form of delegated acts. In order to assist public bodies and recipients in transferring data to third countries, the Commission can also make use of model contractual clauses.

By means of a delegated act, the Commission should also be able to decide that, for example, highly sensitive health data may be transferred to third countries under certain conditions, such as the highest security precautions. The member states had called for an implementing act here, but the Parliament rejected it outright.

The MEPs also succeeded in their demand that providers of data intermediation services should not be allowed to make their terms and conditions, such as pricing, dependent on whether or to what extent users also use the provider’s other services. Thus, data market providers may not offer their services as a bundle. “The DGA thus ensures that smaller providers can compete with large tech platforms,” says Damian Boeselager (Greens/EFA), shadow rapporteur in ITRE.

Compromise for DGA implementation: 15 months

The Council had required that organizations wishing to be recognized as data altruistic organizations under the DGA must follow concrete rules in the form of a code of conduct. This is intended to strengthen trust in the organizations on which the data donations are based. Originally, the Commission wanted to determine the code of conduct at a later stage in the form of an implementing act. But here, too, the Parliament prevailed and fought the change to a delegated act in order to be involved in the decision.

While the Commission and Parliament had demanded that the regulation be implemented 12 months after entry into force, the Council had insisted on an 18-month implementation period. Ultimately, the three institutions met in the middle: The DGA must be implemented by member states 15 months after entry into force.

The conclusion of negotiations on the DGA, which still needs to be formally confirmed by the Council and Parliament, marks an important building block for the European data economy. Today, the Commission actually wanted to deliver the second building block directly related to the DGA – the Data Act. After all, the data exchanges regulated by the DGA can only function with a sufficient amount of data.

But the draft law, which is intended to prescribe specifically how companies should or even must make their data accessible and usable, fell through the Regulatory Scrutiny Committee at the end of October (Europe.Table reported) and is currently being revised. The Commission plans to present the revised draft in February. With Falk Steiner

Far-right candidate in France: Éric Zemmour’s campaign crumbling

He has long been seen as a challenger to incumbent Emmanuel Macron. Now his candidacy is official: “It is no longer the time to reform France, but to save it,” he declared. Power must be taken away from the minorities and given back to the French people. That is why he wants to run as a candidate, according to the video message on YouTube, which was also broadcast on French television. Zemmour, who has repeatedly been called France’s Donald Trump, has announced his first real election event in Paris for Sunday. With the message on Tuesday, he stole the show from the Republicans, who want to choose their candidate at their party conference from Wednesday to Saturday.

The journalist, who comes from an Algerian-Jewish family, has been stirring up the election campaign for some time. At times he even came second in the polls for the first round of the presidential elections on April 10, with 17 to 18 percent, outstripping his rival Marine Le Pen. But the latest polls put him behind Macron and the far-right Le Pen. He is polling at 14 to 15 percent, compared with Le Pen’s 19 to 20 percent. Macron has been stable at 25 percent for weeks. The runoff between the top two finishers is April 24. So far, both Zemmour and Le Pen have always lost to incumbent Macron in runoff polls. Zemmour’s chances are currently no longer very good.

Even more extreme than Le Pen

His electorate is different from Marine Le Pen’s. He has been able to rally around him the far right, for whom even Le Pen is too soft. But some of his supporters also come from the far right-wing of the conservative Republicans. That’s why at the beginning, there was still speculation that he might well have a chance of becoming Macron’s challenger. But even when he was still in second place in the polls, at the same time, it became clear that not many in France trusted him to hold the top office in the state. This view has deepened in recent weeks.

The commentator, who polemicizes against immigration and Islam, has been convicted several times in recent years for racist remarks. That made many skeptical from the start. He’s been on a book tour for weeks but was making a pitch for his candidacy. At first, his meetings went well, crowds packed the gates and the hall. They cheered “Zemmour President”.

“Disqualified” by missteps

But then there were some lapses, and his campaign began to crumble. In October, at a security fair, he pointed a sniper rifle at journalists, laughing: “Just for fun”.

His chances of being seen as a serious contender diminished further at an appearance in Marseille at the weekend, where he was pelted with eggs, and passers-by shouted “Zemmour get lost”. One of them gave Zemmour the middle finger, to which he responded with the same gesture. Politicians from various parties judged that he had thus disqualified himself. The “stinky finger” (doigt d’honneur in French) was not worthy of a presidential candidate, French media wrote. He was no longer credible as a president because he was too impulsive. Tanja Kuchenbecker

EU supply chain law further delayed

The EU Commission has to postpone the presentation of the planned due diligence law again. According to EU circles, the Committee for Regulatory Control has raised objections to the project, yet again. Accordingly, the proposal could be delayed until February or March.

The proposal, last scheduled for December 8th, no longer appears on the updated agenda of the College of Commissioners. In circles of the authority, it was said that work on the law was continuing at full speed. However, “quality trumps speed”. The Regulatory Scrutiny Board, a body of Commission officials and external experts, had already rejected a first draft by Justice Commissioner Didier Reynders in early summer because of shortcomings. Since then, Industry Commissioner Thierry Breton has shared responsibility for the issue.

There are considerable reservations in industry about a law that could impose far-reaching due diligence obligations on companies with regard to social and ecological conditions at their suppliers. Particularly controversial are the questions of the possibility of legal action by affected parties in third countries and the liability of management. tho/chw

Procurement: Trade Committee adopts draft

The European Union is making progress in new guidelines for the European market that intends to encourage China to open up in the field of public procurement. The draft of the so-called “International Procurement Instrument” (IPI) was adopted on Tuesday by the European Parliament’s Committee on International Trade. MEPs thus approved two types of IPI measures, which the EU Commission can utilize to address unequal access to public procurement markets. The first measure is the price adjustment mechanism proposed by EU member states. The second potential measure is to exclude a company from tendering altogether.

In addition, the Committee has reduced the number of exceptions to two, where contracting authorities can refuse IPI measures:

when bids are only made by companies located in countries to which IPI applies, and
in cases where the public interest predominates.

The areas of public health or environmental protection are mentioned as examples. The draft sees companies from developing countries excluded from the IPI requirements. Different threshold values are to apply to public tenders: starting at €10 million for construction tenders and starting at €5 million for goods and services.

The bill is to be voted on in January in the plenary of the EU Parliament. There are still disagreements between the European Parliament and the EU Council on the implementation of the IPI, explained Daniel Caspary, the CDU politician in charge of the draft position of the European Parliament on IPI. The EU Council wants to place the decision-making power in the Member States, the EU Parliament sees it with the EU Commission.

The IPI is not a regulation “against China”, stressed Reinhard Buetikofer, a Greens politician. However, the People’s Republic was the elephant in the room on this issue. China had not kept its promise to open up its procurement market, Buetikofer stated. The new requirements must now be implemented without loopholes. ari

Microelectronics IPCEI to be ready soon

The Federal Ministry of Economics wants to register the European funding project for the chip industry with the EU Commission soon. The pre-notification procedure for the new IPCEI Microelectronics is to be initiated in December, a BMWi spokeswoman said in response to an inquiry. For this purpose, the ministry, together with the 20 other participating member states, must submit descriptions of the overall project as well as the numerous individual projects that are to receive state funding.

The industry is pushing for a quick start of the IPCEI. In order for the companies to be able to start the concrete projects in 2022, a quick notification to the Commission is necessary, said Stephan zur Verth, Chairman of the Semiconductor Components Division at ZVEI. In addition, he called for pushing ahead now with preparations for another IPCEI project for the period after 2025. The classification as an “important project of common European interest” enables the member states to extensively promote research-oriented technology projects. A first microelectronics IPCEI was approved by the EU competition authorities at the end of 2018.

Internal Market Commissioner Thierry Breton also wants to present a draft European Chips Act as early as the beginning of 2022. The French Council Presidency should then push ahead with the project to strengthen the semiconductor industry in Europe, despite concerns from Competition Commissioner Margrethe Vestager and northern European countries. The declared goal is to increase Europe’s share of global chip production from the current eight percent to 20 percent by 2030. Zur Verth called this target “highly ambitious.” If the market doubles by 2030 as forecast, production capacities in Europe would have to increase fivefold.

Breton particularly wants to promote the production of chips with ultra-small structure sizes of less than five nanometers, which would be needed for high-speed computers, edge computing, and connected driving, for example. Bringing such factories to Europe makes sense, said zur Verth. However, this should not neglect the need for chips with larger structural widths, which are needed in the automotive industry, for example. “Leading-edge is not just two nanometers,” he said. He added that local manufacturing must be geared to the needs of European industry. The BDI argues similarly.

The current supply problems with semiconductors cannot be “solved in the short term by political means,” according to the ZVEI expert. The bottlenecks could last until 2023. tho

Smart meters and co.: Digitization of the energy transition

In order to achieve climate targets and conserve resources, energy must be used more efficiently. The role that digital technologies can play in this was one of the central topics at the fourth Digital Energy Conference of the IT industry association Bitkom. “Without digitization, the energy transition will not succeed,” said Bitkom Executive Committee member Michael Hartmann at the gathering of the tech and energy industries on Tuesday.

According to a Bitkom study, digitalization in the building sector alone could contribute to a third of the climate targets in 2030, for example, by optimizing heating systems with data from apartments and houses. According to the CEO of energy service provider Techem, data protection must be preserved, but it must not become an “obstacle to energy efficiency“.

Digitalization will also play a key role in the future design of the electricity market. The plans of the traffic light coalition to significantly accelerate the expansion of renewable energies and to increase their share of the energy mix accordingly are “absolutely right”, said BMWi State Secretary Andreas Feicht at the conference.

However, the new targets also lead to an increasing challenge for the energy system. Two hundred gigawatts of photovoltaics are already a lot in themselves. In addition, the volatile structure of solar energy will lead to “enormous peaks”, which in turn will place a considerable burden on the distribution grids. Finally, solar energy will not be evenly distributed across the country but instead concentrated in the south, while wind power will dominate in the north.

Smart meters as an intelligent solution

In addition, energy generation is becoming more and more decentralized, and the expansion of PV, in particular, means that green electricity is increasingly being fed into the grid by consumers themselves. Feicht is convinced that digitalization is the only way to control such a system. “We need to further reduce transaction costs and find automated, software- and AI-based ways.” In doing so, the implementation must be accelerated just as much as the expansion of renewables itself in order to be able to guarantee both supply and system security.

In this regard, the CDU politician is focusing in particular on the smart meter gateway and is calling for a stronger commitment to the widespread use of the smart metering system. “Nobody is against the technology, but nobody wants to pay for it. We have to put this stubborn view at the back of our minds,” said Feicht. This applies to consumers as well as producers, he added.

Since January 2020, all households with annual electricity consumption of more than 6000-kilowatt hours (kWh) have been required to have smart meters installed. This also applies to households that generate their own electricity if the system supplies a connected electrical load of more than seven kilowatts (kW). Below that, installation is voluntary. The average annual electricity consumption of a four-person household is between 3000 and 4000 kWh.

The smart meter gateway was developed according to the specifications of the German Federal Office for Information Security and connects the digital electricity meter and flexible consumption and generation devices to the smart grid. It can help detect devices with high power consumption, provides energy-saving tips based on consumption data, and can control digital household appliances. til

Habeck brings Hajduk, Giegold, Graichen and Philipp into his ministry

Minister-designate for the Economy and Climate Robert Habeck is ordering his house even before the Greens vote on the coalition agreement with the SPD and FDP. The experienced finance and budget politician and former Hamburg environmental senator Anja Hajduk will become the vice chancellor’s head of office and coordinator, a Green spokeswoman confirmed on Tuesday.

As state secretary, Hajduk coordinates cooperation with other ministries, as first reported by “Der Spiegel”. Habeck’s ministry is considered the key department for the transformation of the economy towards climate neutrality. In this context, disputes with the future Finance Minister Christian Lindner (FDP) about money for investments are pre-programmed. Hajduk is regarded as a pragmatist: As Hamburg senator in 2008, she approved the construction of a new coal-fired power plant in Hamburg-Moorburg, which the Greens had previously rejected as a “climate monster”. Hajduk felt legally compelled to approve the project but made sure it was subject to water law requirements.

With European politician and Attac co-founder Sven Giegold and Patrick Graichen from Agora Energiewende, Habeck is gaining further well-known personalities as civil servant state secretaries for his ministry. With the Schleswig-Holstein State Secretary for Finance, Udo Philipp, a former private equity manager who, together with Giegold, founded the citizens’ movement Finanzwende, is also moving into the Ministry of Economics. rtr

Court of Auditors president rejects mismanagement allegations

The European Court of Auditors President Klaus-Heiner Lehne has rejected accusations of mismanagement but at the same time announced reforms. There will be changes to the Court’s rules on representation expenses and the driving service, Lehne announced at a hearing in the European Parliament in Brussels on Tuesday.

The French daily “Libération” had reported about a “fictitious” apartment of Lehne in Luxembourg and inflated expense claims. Lehne had received rent subsidies of €325,000 for the apartment. In addition, she accused the CDU politician of continuing to engage in party politics, contrary to official rules. Thereupon, the budgetary control committee convened a special meeting.

“The accusations are false,” Lehne declared several times. He had resigned from all functions in the CDU in 2014. In addition, he does not receive any rent allowances. Lehne admitted, however, that he shares his Luxembourg apartment with several associates. “It is my private matter where and with whom I live,” he said.

CSU politician Hohlmeier also criticized

Several members of the committee expressed doubts about Lehne’s account. It was “unusual” for the president of an EU institution to live in a shared apartment, said German MEP, Daniel Freund. Lehne has a role model function, stressed Belgian parliamentarian Olivier Chastel. The hearing could only be the beginning of a detailed clarification, Chastel said. For this purpose, external auditors would have to be called in. French MEP Pierre Karleskind expressed similar views. Without an external audit, he was not prepared to support the discharge for 2020, which was still outstanding.

The chairwoman of the committee, German CSU politician Monika Hohlmeier, also came in for criticism. She had rejected the accusations of “Libération” in a tweet and referred to “her own investigations”. In doing so, she had pre-empted the hearing, Karleskind said. In her closing remarks, Hohlmeier recommended that the internal auditor of the Court of Auditors be called in.

Committee members are now to be given the opportunity to see housing records, attendance records, and other files and to ask further written questions. The deadline has been set for December 7th. ebo

UK calls on Facebook to sell Giphy

The British competition watchdog is demanding that Facebook sell its GIF database provider Giphy. The CMA said this would protect millions of users and support competition and innovation in the online advertising market on Tuesday, explaining its decision. The deal, announced in May 2020, has already seen a potential rival disappear from the market.

US group Facebook, which is currently rebranding itself as Meta, criticized the order. “We are looking at the decision and considering all options, including an appeal,” a spokesman said. The CMA had already imposed a fine of £50.5 million (the equivalent of just under €60 million) in October for breaches of conditions relating to a review of the Giphy purchase. The authority had already hinted in August that it might be in favor of a sale.

Rasmus Andresen, MEP, shadow rapporteur for the Greens/EFA on the Digital Markets Act (DMA) in the Industry Committee, welcomed the British move: “The British competition authority has understood the signs of the times. The quasi-monopolists of Meta and Co must not be allowed to exploit their market power unhindered.” The example shows that “killer buyouts” undermine fair competition and increase dependence on large digital American corporations, Andresen said. Europe’s Greens are calling for more significant consideration to limit such buyouts in the DMA and are also calling for a revision of competition law.

According to media reports, Facebook has put around $400 million on the table for Giphy. There was then much criticism worldwide that the market power of Facebook and other technology groups is becoming too great. rtr/luk

Angela Merkel – prima inter pares

By Elmar Brok

Elmar Brok was a member of the European Parliament from 1980 to 2019.

In her 16 years as German Chancellor, Angela Merkel has become a defining figure of the EU. Her adoption at the last meeting of the European Council of Heads of State and Government (ER) across all borders has expressed this. The high regard in which she is held is based on her European convictions and her ability to reach compromises and decisions with a high degree of expertise and patience.

She, therefore, quickly became prima inter pares in the ER and in the preparatory meetings of the Heads of State and Government of the European People’s Party. I could observe her from 2005 to 2017 as a participant of the EPP meetings, but sometimes also in the ER or in its direct environment. When she walked into an EPP meeting, she was immediately given the floor. She usually influenced the direction in the meeting, which then became the common position in the ER.

Unlike some “important” men, she was always perfectly prepared in the matter. She knew the state of the discussion as well as the goals and interests of the others quite well, based on previous briefings, but also on her own conversations and telephone calls with other summit participants. Since she had all this in her head and – unlike some others – didn’t have to constantly wait for notes from staff, she was able to react quickly. Thus she was always in a position to point out ways of reaching agreements, to overcome vetoes.

She cooperated with others, approached individuals or groups in meetings and outside, brought disputants together for discussions in small circles, built bridges. She did not sit passively by to make sure that German interests were not violated but made mostly successful efforts to advance the common European cause in the German interest as well.

With humor against vain men

Yet, she seemed modest and without vanity. Unlike some of the men she could make fun of – although never publicly. She used her charm, her subtle humor, but she could also be quite straightforward. She was also not afraid to influence decisions in other member states through the EPP or in different ways, very informally and without publicity.

Angela Merkel is a very convinced European. However, this is fed by sources other than Konrad Adenauer from the Rhineland and Helmut Kohl from the Palatinate, who were decisively shaped by the war and the post-war period.

I can only recommend reading the Chancellor’s speech to the European Parliament on January 17th, 2007, at the beginning of the German Presidency. This is one of the few moments when she opened up and spoke about her basic attitudes and motives. She spoke then as a woman who had lived 35 years of her life in the bondage of a socialist dictatorship – and only 17 years in the freedom she had associated with the EU before and after the fall of communism, and with protection from the US.

Her thoughts, which revolved around freedom, diversity, and, above all, tolerance, were linked to the recognition that guaranteeing such values is also part of and the reason for cooperation in the EU. She was always proud of a sentence in the “Berlin Declaration” of the three EU institutions of March 25th, 2007, on the 50th anniversary of the Treaties of Rome: “We citizens of the EU are united in our happiness”.

In my opinion, Angela Merkel has never consciously betrayed these principles in her European policy, despite all the detours, compromises, and tactics.

Chancellor of the crises

Let me explain your European policy by means of a few events.

Even as leader of the opposition in 2004, she was one of the key EPP politicians who successfully torpedoed the proposal by Schröder and Chirac to elect the liberal Verhofstadt as Commission President. Bypassing the incumbent Chancellor, she pushed through the Christian Democrat Barroso. She rejected my proposal to celebrate this in the media because, in the long term, this could prove tactically wrong. Even here, her restraint and caution proved superior to short-term triumphalism.

There are political times when a good chancellor has little opportunity to make history. That was also Helmut Schmidt’s problem, despite all his merits. On the other hand, Helmut Kohl was able to play a lasting formative role in far-reaching EU integration steps and in unification because of the historical events and the personnel situation in international politics, which he took advantage of with a great deal of confidence-building. Angela Merkel’s European policy, on the other hand, consisted mostly of crisis management.

At the beginning of her chancellorship, she was confronted with the failure of the EU Constitution. She immediately became the driving force in the Slovenian-German-Portuguese trio presidency (2006/2007) to rewrite the draft constitution in the form of a classic EU treaty. In this way, she saved over 90 percent of the content in the Lisbon Treaty, which would not exist without her. This represented a huge step forward, the possibilities of which have not yet been fully exploited.

This treaty constitutes primary law, stands above national law, and is based on the Community method. The EU is only successful in those areas where it can take directly legally binding decisions, if possible by a majority in the Council (e.g., the internal market).

Defending the unity of the EU

Later, Angela Merkel tried on several occasions to place the classic intergovernmental approach on an equal footing with it – she blasphemously called it the “Union method”. As with the Schengen Treaty, Kohl always saw this approach only as an intermediate step.

Despite some attempts and temptations, especially from France, she has always defended the legal and institutional unity of the EU. It thus prevented the EU states from being permanently divided into first- and second-class members.

The second major crisis – the financial crisis coming out of the US – has also not caused her to become divisive, despite harsh attacks, especially from within her own ranks. I once heard her say in a small circle after a meeting of the CDU/CSU parliamentary group in the Bundestag that the euro would not fail with her – even if she did not have a majority for it in the group.

Also, out of concern for this group and because of the attitude of the Federal Constitutional Court, it was sometimes somewhat hesitant in its decisions on Greece. Just as she was in the run-up to the refugee crisis. But in the end, painfully, she found viable solutions and pushed them through.

Where she failed

It has been understood that certain issues can no longer be solved by the nation-state alone. Parts of the professors and the electorate of its own party have not yet understood that in this global order, a purely national economic, monetary and financial policy no longer works. Especially not for an extremely export-dependent country like Germany – politically and economically.

That is why, in the pandemic, as we know it today, she successfully pushed through the joint vaccine supply and the Next Generation EU reconstruction program linked to climate financing, together with Macron.

With the three French presidents of her term in office, she has wisely pushed ahead with the cooperation that is indispensable for the EU – with all due respect to the Grande Nation. Only in the case of the Sorbonne speech did she leave Macron hanging. The attempt to define European sovereignty and strategic autonomy as something that is not directed against the identity of nation-states and not against the US was unfortunately omitted. Their risk aversion is certainly one reason for their success and also their long tenure. As a result, perhaps one or two opportunities have not been seized.

Its policy against Brexit has failed because of ideologues in London. And, as we see these days in Ostpolitik, because of Putin’s ruthless obstinacy. But here, too, her willingness to keep trying must be appreciated.

Overall, it has been the anchor of Europe in difficult times. Out of crises, it has mostly made progress. And earned so much respect from the people of Europe for herself and Germany.

“I want my life back,” Luxembourg’s economy and health minister said about a year ago when he quit the government. Before that, the very liberal and business-friendly socialist deputy prime minister – also known for buying land for Greek yogurt producers – got himself elected to quite a few boards of directors. After that, Etienne Schneider was occasionally seen whizzing by with his skateboard and bomber jacket until he moved to Brussels with Chihuahua T-Rex and his husband.

Meanwhile, “I want my life back” could also become a socialist slogan. Dan Kersch, the minister of labor and sports and deputy prime minister, and Romain Schneider, the minister of agriculture and social security, also want their lives back. The former will subsequently go to parliament as a deputy – a part-time job after all. The other will take his well-paid congé politique. But as the Green deputy prime minister, François Bausch told the colleagues of RTL Luxembourg: Being a minister is a back-breaking job, and Schneider already has several governments and ministerial posts behind him.

Now two aging white men are being replaced by… you guessed it… two aging white men: Parliamentary Party leader Georges Engel, and Claude Haagen, better known for his corrupt deals as Dikrich Minister. Deputy Prime Minister, meanwhile, became Health Minister Paulette Lenert – who, though never elected but asked to join the government by her colleagues – tops the political monitor.

A few days later, the announcement: Liberal Finance Minister Pierre Gramegna probably had the same wish list as his socialist colleagues. He too wants his life back “for personal reasons”. Who will replace him is not yet known. But the DP also has a few aging white men up its sleeve. Charlotte Wirth

EUROPE.TABLE EDITORS

Till
Hoppe

Charlotte
Wirth

Falk
Steiner

Timo
Landenberger

Corinna
Visser

Lukas
Knigge

Eric
Bonse

Sarah
Schaefer

Manuel
Berkel

Lisa-Martina
Klein

Markus
Grabitz

Stephan
Israel

Claire
Stam

Dear reader,

Let’s not kid ourselves, there is the threat of another lockdown this winter – but probably only for the unvaccinated. The federal and state governments will decide on Thursday about far-reaching COVID measures: Area-wide 2G and contact restrictions for the unvaccinated are considered likely. But also ghost games and closed bars for all, at least in high incidence areas, are likely to be discussed. Mandatory vaccination – whether general or only for certain occupational groups – will also become an inevitable topic at the federal-state summit due to the rapid spread of the Omicron variant.

Meanwhile, Brussels is taking a soothing tone – at least as far as concerns about an economic crisis caused by the partial shutdown are concerned. Economic Affairs Commissioner Paolo Gentiloni said in an interview with Bloomberg Television that he was not ruling out problems – especially for tourism. But by and large, he said, European economies are “adapted to these kinds of crises because of the vaccines.” Gentiloni expects the economic impact this time to be less than during past infection waves.

In France, a man who has always railed against drastic COVID measures in the past announced his presidential candidacy yesterday. But that is now the least of the problems of far-right journalist and Macron challenger Éric Zemmour, as Tanja Kuchenbecker reports.

Only one year after the European Commission adopted the draft Data Governance Act, it found a common position together with the European Parliament and the Council in the trilogue last night. The agreement was made possible so quickly, among other things, because there was no political trench warfare and all three institutions were in agreement: The DGA is not meant to be parallel legislation to the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), reports Jasmin Kohl. The main goal of the law is to facilitate the use of third-party data.

Last but not least, in today’s Europe.Table, a long-time companion of Angela Merkel, pays homage to the outgoing Chancellor’s European policy: For Elmar Brok, Merkel was Europe’s prima inter pares, shaping the Union through modesty rather than triumphalism. I particularly recommend his contribution to you.

Your
Lukas Knigge

Negotiators reach final agreement on Data Governance Act

By

Jasmin Kohl

With the Data Govern a nce Act (DGA), the Commission wants to create a new type of data governance so that data can be exchanged more easily between sectors and member states and thus used more intensively. The rapporteur in the Industry Committee (ITRE), Angelika Niebler (CSU/EPP), therefore calls the law a “Schengen for data“. Nothing less than a genuine data market is to be created in this way and the foundation laid for a European data economy. Niebler stresses how important trust and fairness are for this: “Only in this way can the EU-wide exchange of data develop its full potential and give rise to new, sustainable business models and innovations.”

Just under a year after the draft was adopted by the Commission, the European Parliament, the Council, and the Commission now reached an agreement in the trilogue last night. The rapid agreement was also possible because all three institutions agreed in principle – the DGA should not be parallel legislation to the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). “We have succeeded in showing that ambitious data protection and innovation-friendly data policy are not opposites, so I very much welcome the agreement today,” said Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE) Committee rapporteur Sergey Lagodinsky (Greens/EFA).

A key objective of the DGA is to facilitate the use of third-party data. For example, if the public sector has data on construction planning, this could be of interest to a private waste disposal company as well as to other companies. At the same time, the waste management company’s real-world traffic data could mean efficiency gains for other companies through better planning capabilities. The DGA envisions three main sources of data:

Data from the public sector
Data donations from private individuals to “data altruistic organizations”
Data from companies, institutions, and individuals via data intermediaries

Data intermediaries are to support buyers and sellers of data in the exchange process. In doing so, they are to act in an exclusively neutral manner, i.e., they are not to use the data they mediate for their own purposes. This should ensure that buyers and sellers are not placed at a competitive disadvantage by third parties using their data. Services that enable data sharing within a closed user group should not be able to act as data intermediaries. The direct relationship between data owner and data user is decisive here. Providers of cloud services, as well as other providers that aggregate, enrich or transform data, can therefore also not act as data intermediaries. The same applies to services that focus on the mediation of content, especially copyrighted content.

“Data altruistic organizations” are also to be created by the DGA. These are to allow data donations to be used by third parties for research purposes, for example. Here, too, it states: If personal data is transferred, the GDPR applies. A “Broad Consent”, i.e., a non-specific consent to the further use of data, is therefore not envisaged.

No additional obligations for public authorities

Public authorities have three different options for handling personal data that they want to offer for reuse in a GDPR-compliant manner. They can either anonymize them or make the data available for processing in a “secure processing environment.” The third option: the actor who wants to reuse the personal data can only do so on-site in the public body.

In the case of anonymization, the European Parliament has also pushed through its demand that the re-identification of anonymized data is prohibited. The only exception: security researchers (hackers) who want to test the robustness of anonymization techniques. Mixed data sets will also be treated as personal data and thus also fall under the GDPR.

According to the Commission’s proposal, public authorities should be obliged to help customers obtain consent for the reuse of data. However, this obligation was a red line for member states. They had argued that this burden was too great for public authorities and thus prevailed in the trilogue.

The Data Governance Act also provides for time limits on exclusive rights of use for data between public bodies and companies, so-called exclusive data-sharing agreements. The Commission’s proposal originally stipulated that a public body could not give a company exclusive access to data for more than three years. The only exception was that a particular service could only be provided by a single company. Parliament prevailed here in the trilogue and limited exclusive data agreements to one year. Existing exclusive data agreements may run for a maximum of two and a half years. This is intended to make more data available to SMEs and start-ups as well, thereby guaranteeing more competition.

Adequacy decisions for data transfers to third countries

It is not only in the case of personal data that the Data Governance Act is intended to sort out anticipated problems: The Act also addresses business concerns that non-personal data shared in Europe could be used unfairly by competitors outside the EU. The Commission can take adequacy decisions for these cases in the form of enforcement acts. During the trilogue, the Parliament could not assert itself to be involved in the decision in the form of delegated acts. In order to assist public bodies and recipients in transferring data to third countries, the Commission can also make use of model contractual clauses.

By means of a delegated act, the Commission should also be able to decide that, for example, highly sensitive health data may be transferred to third countries under certain conditions, such as the highest security precautions. The member states had called for an implementing act here, but the Parliament rejected it outright.

The MEPs also succeeded in their demand that providers of data intermediation services should not be allowed to make their terms and conditions, such as pricing, dependent on whether or to what extent users also use the provider’s other services. Thus, data market providers may not offer their services as a bundle. “The DGA thus ensures that smaller providers can compete with large tech platforms,” says Damian Boeselager (Greens/EFA), shadow rapporteur in ITRE.

Compromise for DGA implementation: 15 months

The Council had required that organizations wishing to be recognized as data altruistic organizations under the DGA must follow concrete rules in the form of a code of conduct. This is intended to strengthen trust in the organizations on which the data donations are based. Originally, the Commission wanted to determine the code of conduct at a later stage in the form of an implementing act. But here, too, the Parliament prevailed and fought the change to a delegated act in order to be involved in the decision.

While the Commission and Parliament had demanded that the regulation be implemented 12 months after entry into force, the Council had insisted on an 18-month implementation period. Ultimately, the three institutions met in the middle: The DGA must be implemented by member states 15 months after entry into force.

The conclusion of negotiations on the DGA, which still needs to be formally confirmed by the Council and Parliament, marks an important building block for the European data economy. Today, the Commission actually wanted to deliver the second building block directly related to the DGA – the Data Act. After all, the data exchanges regulated by the DGA can only function with a sufficient amount of data.

But the draft law, which is intended to prescribe specifically how companies should or even must make their data accessible and usable, fell through the Regulatory Scrutiny Committee at the end of October (Europe.Table reported) and is currently being revised. The Commission plans to present the revised draft in February. With Falk Steiner

Far-right candidate in France: Éric Zemmour’s campaign crumbling

He has long been seen as a challenger to incumbent Emmanuel Macron. Now his candidacy is official: “It is no longer the time to reform France, but to save it,” he declared. Power must be taken away from the minorities and given back to the French people. That is why he wants to run as a candidate, according to the video message on YouTube, which was also broadcast on French television. Zemmour, who has repeatedly been called France’s Donald Trump, has announced his first real election event in Paris for Sunday. With the message on Tuesday, he stole the show from the Republicans, who want to choose their candidate at their party conference from Wednesday to Saturday.

The journalist, who comes from an Algerian-Jewish family, has been stirring up the election campaign for some time. At times he even came second in the polls for the first round of the presidential elections on April 10, with 17 to 18 percent, outstripping his rival Marine Le Pen. But the latest polls put him behind Macron and the far-right Le Pen. He is polling at 14 to 15 percent, compared with Le Pen’s 19 to 20 percent. Macron has been stable at 25 percent for weeks. The runoff between the top two finishers is April 24. So far, both Zemmour and Le Pen have always lost to incumbent Macron in runoff polls. Zemmour’s chances are currently no longer very good.

Even more extreme than Le Pen

His electorate is different from Marine Le Pen’s. He has been able to rally around him the far right, for whom even Le Pen is too soft. But some of his supporters also come from the far right-wing of the conservative Republicans. That’s why at the beginning, there was still speculation that he might well have a chance of becoming Macron’s challenger. But even when he was still in second place in the polls, at the same time, it became clear that not many in France trusted him to hold the top office in the state. This view has deepened in recent weeks.

The commentator, who polemicizes against immigration and Islam, has been convicted several times in recent years for racist remarks. That made many skeptical from the start. He’s been on a book tour for weeks but was making a pitch for his candidacy. At first, his meetings went well, crowds packed the gates and the hall. They cheered “Zemmour President”.

“Disqualified” by missteps

But then there were some lapses, and his campaign began to crumble. In October, at a security fair, he pointed a sniper rifle at journalists, laughing: “Just for fun”.

His chances of being seen as a serious contender diminished further at an appearance in Marseille at the weekend, where he was pelted with eggs, and passers-by shouted “Zemmour get lost”. One of them gave Zemmour the middle finger, to which he responded with the same gesture. Politicians from various parties judged that he had thus disqualified himself. The “stinky finger” (doigt d’honneur in French) was not worthy of a presidential candidate, French media wrote. He was no longer credible as a president because he was too impulsive. Tanja Kuchenbecker

EU supply chain law further delayed

The EU Commission has to postpone the presentation of the planned due diligence law again. According to EU circles, the Committee for Regulatory Control has raised objections to the project, yet again. Accordingly, the proposal could be delayed until February or March.

The proposal, last scheduled for December 8th, no longer appears on the updated agenda of the College of Commissioners. In circles of the authority, it was said that work on the law was continuing at full speed. However, “quality trumps speed”. The Regulatory Scrutiny Board, a body of Commission officials and external experts, had already rejected a first draft by Justice Commissioner Didier Reynders in early summer because of shortcomings. Since then, Industry Commissioner Thierry Breton has shared responsibility for the issue.

There are considerable reservations in industry about a law that could impose far-reaching due diligence obligations on companies with regard to social and ecological conditions at their suppliers. Particularly controversial are the questions of the possibility of legal action by affected parties in third countries and the liability of management. tho/chw

Procurement: Trade Committee adopts draft

The European Union is making progress in new guidelines for the European market that intends to encourage China to open up in the field of public procurement. The draft of the so-called “International Procurement Instrument” (IPI) was adopted on Tuesday by the European Parliament’s Committee on International Trade. MEPs thus approved two types of IPI measures, which the EU Commission can utilize to address unequal access to public procurement markets. The first measure is the price adjustment mechanism proposed by EU member states. The second potential measure is to exclude a company from tendering altogether.

In addition, the Committee has reduced the number of exceptions to two, where contracting authorities can refuse IPI measures:

when bids are only made by companies located in countries to which IPI applies, and
in cases where the public interest predominates.