Your contact for new licenses
The committees in the European Parliament are being constituted from today. At least the chair and the first deputy must be elected. Three further deputies can be elected later. It has been decided that at least one woman will be appointed as chair or first vice-chair.
The firewall will also be raised: The chairmanship of the Culture Committee and the Transport Committee, which, according to D’Hondt, belongs to the radical right-wing Patriots for Europe Group, will be taken away from it and will go to the Greens (CULT) and the EPP (TRAN). Nela Riehl from Germany, who is new to Parliament and belongs to Volt, becomes chair of CULT. The chairmanship of TRAN goes to Elissavet Vozemberg-Vrionidi. The Italian Antonio Decaro (S&D) is to head the ENVI, while Bogdan Rzonca (EKR) from Poland is to head the Petitions Committee. It remains to be seen whether the PiS politician will get a majority. Who is a member of which committee was decided in plenary on Friday.
The German CDU/CSU group will have three chairmen: David McAllister will again head the Foreign Affairs Committee (AFET), Sven Simon will be head of the Constitutional Committee AFCO, Niclas Herbst will be head of the Audit Committee CONT. The first deputies will be Monika Hohlmeier (CSU) on the Budget Committee BUDG, Christian Doleschal (CSU) on the Internal Market Committee IMCO and Marion Walsmann on the Legal Affairs Committee JURI. The second deputies are Norbert Lins on the Agriculture Committee AGRI, Hildegard Bentele on the Development Committee DEVE.
The committees not only elect their leadership, they also hold their first substantive meeting. The first meeting of the coordinators will take place tomorrow. In addition, the heads of the 20 committees will elect the Chair of the Conference of Committee Chairs (CCC) at 12.30 pm. After the post of President of Parliament, this is perhaps the job with the most influence on legislation. Bernd Lange (SPD) has a good chance of resuming the position. Once all this has been achieved, the European Parliament will go into summer recess on Thursday.
Read the News to find out which other coordinators the S&Ds and Greens have appointed and how much influence the committee chairs actually have.
Have a good start this week!
The EU foreign ministers have long been struggling over the right way to deal with Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orbán and his unilateral actions and blockades in Ukraine policy. Now the dispute has escalated: At the last meeting before the summer break in Brussels, the European chief diplomats were unable to agree on a joint response to Orbán’s sharply criticized “peace mission.”
26 out of 27 ministers agreed to condemn Orbán’s uncoordinated trips to Kyiv, Moscow and Beijing, one participant reported. The 90-minute discussion with Hungary’s Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó had a harsh tone. However, there was a dispute over whether the EU should react by boycotting ministerial meetings in Budapest.
Several large EU countries – including Germany – spoke out against the proposal by Foreign Affairs Commissioner Josep Borrell to ignore an informal meeting in the Gymnich format in Budapest at the end of August and instead convene a Foreign Affairs Council in Brussels. A boycott would not make things any better, according to Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock.
The representatives of France, Spain and Italy expressed similar views. Luxembourg’s Foreign Minister Xavier Bettel even called the boycott idea “nonsense.” Poland and the Baltic countries were on the other side. Lithuania and Sweden had already announced days ago that they would temporarily stop sending ministers to meetings in Hungary.
Those in favor of a boycott argue that Orbán not only violated EU decisions on Ukraine but also gave the impression that he was speaking on behalf of the Council Presidency. Opponents, on the other hand, warn against setting a precedent. If people start boycotting trips to Budapest now, this could also set a precedent for other Council presidencies.
Bettel called for people to travel to Budapest and clearly express their opinions to the Hungarian government. Baerbock criticized Orbán’s “ego trips,” but also warned against scoring an own goal. Poland’s Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski suggested organizing the Gymnich meeting in Ukraine as a compromise. However, this failed because Hungary would have had to agree.
Borrell had the last word – and surprisingly decided to convene “informal meetings of EU foreign ministers in Brussels” after the summer break, as he announced on “X”. “I wouldn’t call it a boycott,” he said at the press conference after the Foreign Affairs Council. After all, Hungary had also been invited. It was more of a symbolic measure
However, it is unclear what practical consequences it will have. Will the foreign ministers now meet in Brussels in August instead of Budapest? Or are there two different dates? Borrell said that he had tried to reach agreement among the EU states on how to proceed. Unfortunately, this was not possible. He therefore decided on his own.
A debate on Syria also ended without a clear result. Eight countries, including Austria and Italy, called for the resumption of contacts with the regime in Damascus. They also proposed the appointment of a Syria envoy. This could strengthen diplomatic relations with all Syrian parties and facilitate the return of refugees, they said.
Germany did not support the proposal. Borrell kept all options open. The EU is not naive and knows that the Syrian regime is working closely with Russia and Iran, he said. However, it was prepared to consider the initiative and work on solutions. More Syrian refugees have recently arrived in Cyprus. A deportation ban is in place in Germany.
The German Association of Motor Trade (ZDK) is calling for the same access to vehicle data as manufacturers. “Non-discriminatory access to vehicle data, resources and functions in accordance with uniform safety standards is a prerequisite for fair competition,” writes the ZDK in a current position paper, made available to Table.Briefings in advance. The EU Commission should bring forward a corresponding regulatory proposal quickly.
The background to the demand is that the Data Act provides for a sector-specific regulation for access to vehicle data, which the Commission has not yet published. As the Commission reports, the proposal will not be published until the new Commission has taken up its work.
According to its own figures, the automotive industry has around 40,000 companies with around 470,000 employees in Germany alone. The companies are not only dependent on manufacturers granting them access to data for repairs and maintenance, but also for the provision of innovative services. The prerequisite is the customer’s consent. So far, however, it has mainly been the manufacturers who have repeatedly tried to restrict access – usually with reference to security aspects or trade secrets.
The discussion is spanning over two dimensions.
Background: The Commission is working on an amendment to Annex X of the EU type-approval framework 858/2018 after recent court rulings have called into question the current industrial approach to secure access to on-board diagnostics (OBD).
The state government of Baden-Württemberg supports the demands of the ZDK. In its requests to the EU institutions for the new term of office, it writes: “The EU must enable good framework conditions for the development of new business models for the supplier industry as well as the motor vehicle trade and crafts.” Specifically, this includes regulating access to vehicle data and functions on a sector-specific basis in line with the EU Data Act. Cybersecurity issues could also be regulated specifically in the sector regulation. The Commission must present the legal acts for concretization quickly.
MEP Damian Boeselager (Volt), who negotiated the Data Act as shadow rapporteur for the Greens, emphasizes that the regulation applies to all connected devices, directly including vehicles. This means that all data that leaves the vehicle belongs to the owner of the vehicle – and not the manufacturer. “The owner must have access to the data that flows back to the manufacturer – and he can forward it in real time to third parties, such as workshops.”
However, Boeselager observes that “manufacturers are trying to wriggle out of this obligation.” The reason given is that vehicle data is personal data. A precedent-setting decision by the Data Coordinators is necessary here in order to clarify which vehicle data is personal and which is not. However, the Data Act only regulates data that leaves the vehicle. The situation is different for data that is to be fed into the vehicle – for example into the infotainment system. Here, a Vehicle Data Act would have to regulate access.
Commercial vehicle manufacturers show that it is perfectly possible to share vehicle data, not only along the value chain, but also across manufacturers. Large fleet operators have different vehicles in their fleets, but want to manage them using standardized systems. This is why the systems of different manufacturers in the telematics sector have been communicating with each other via standardized interfaces for around 20 years. So it works if the customer demands it – and pays for it.
“It is repeatedly argued that there is a market failure, which is why data from vehicles is not shared to a sufficient extent,” says Tobias Schweickhardt from Daimler Truck. “We see it differently in the commercial vehicle sector.” The Data Act will get things moving again. “From our point of view, it is therefore not plausible to directly add a sector-specific law before the Data Act has even taken effect.”
Especially as, in addition to the Data Act, there are already other car-specific regulations that require the provision of data, such as the Repair and Maintenance Information (RMI), the new battery regulation or the Euro 7 emissions regulation. “There are already so many regulations, and the Data Act goes one step further,” says Schweickhardt.
It sounds similar at Volkswagen. According to the company, it is open to cross-sector data exchange. “We see great potential in this,” writes Volkswagen on request. “We are open to sharing data with third parties within a legally secure framework.” The company points out that the European automotive industry has created a uniform interface for accessing vehicle data via the respective manufacturer backend with the Extended Vehicle Standards.
Volkswagen also supports the Data Act. Beyond this, however, Volkswagen sees “no advantage in sector-specific regulation on access to vehicle data.” From the company’s point of view, the Data Act and other existing legal regulations (including RMI and Euro 7) already provide a framework in which the provision of data generated in the vehicle is regulated.
In contrast, the European Association of Automobile Suppliers CLEPA, which represents the automotive industry, is also calling for a comprehensive legislative package. This should include sector-specific legislation to ensure access to internal vehicle data and resources. This is the only way for the industry to unleash the full potential of digital mobility services and ensure a competitive aftermarket, according to the white paper on the new legislative period.
Transparency of data points, harmonized rules and robust cybersecurity management are crucial. CLEPA is also calling for the implementation of the Data Act to be monitored and to test its effectiveness.
Deutsche Umwelthilfe (DUH) criticizes the decisive EU method for determining the climate impact of low-carbon hydrogen. “Because the standard value is set too low, there is a risk that natural gas from particularly emission-intensive production sources will be used primarily for the production of blue hydrogen,” says Julian Schwartzkopff, Team Leader Gas Phase-out at DUH.
Natural gas production in some regions of the USA, for example, is considered to be emission-intensive. According to a study by the Environmental Defense Fund, leakage rates in the Permian, Bakken and Uinta basins are between three and six percent. In contrast, blue hydrogen from Norway, where leakage rates are considered to be lower, could fall behind.
According to the DUH, the imbalance is due to standard values for upstream emissions being set too low. The exact methane emissions are to be measured using a method that the Commission will define in connection with the Methane Regulation. However, the Commission does not have to present this delegated act until August 2027. In the delegated act now being circulated for low-carbon hydrogen, the Commission is therefore temporarily adopting blanket standard values for emissions intensity in various stages of the value chain.
For example, the upstream emissions generated during the extraction of natural gas are five grams of CO2 equivalents per megajoule of hydrogen. This value may be exceeded by 40 percent, so that it is effectively seven grams. According to DUH, however, the standard value should even be 15.5 grams if the greenhouse gas potential is considered over a period of 100 years (GWP100).
This means that a large part of the permissible limit value would already be exhausted by the upstream emissions of methane alone. If a 70 percent reduction in CO2 compared to fossil fuels applies, a maximum total of 28.2 g CO2eq/MJ may be produced.
For its upstream calculations, Umwelthilfe assumes that the leakage is three percent. Secondly, it considers the GWP value from the 2018 Renewable Energy Directive, to which the legal act refers, to be outdated. According to the IPCC’s sixth assessment report from 2021, the GWP100 should be 29.8 and not 25. According to the Methane Regulation, the shorter-term greenhouse effect (GWP20) must also be taken into account. According to DUH, the corresponding factor is 82.5, which means that the standard value for the first 20 years is 43 grams CO2eq – six times the Commission’s assumptions.
The DUH is convinced that the misconceptions continue unabated. Midstream emissions – i.e. those from transportation and processing – are completely missing from the Commission’s draft and are “not applicable” according to the authority.
Leakages of the end product hydrogen, which also warms the climate, are also not taken into account for the time being. According to the Commission, there is still no scientific consensus on the exact GWP. “Relevant values for the global warming potential of hydrogen should be added as soon as the scientific evidence is sufficiently mature,” the draft states.
However, DUH believes it is possible and necessary to apply a provisional default value. The British consultant Richard G. Derwent, for example, puts the GWP100 of hydrogen at a factor of six to ten.
The EU legal framework is relevant not least for the German government’s hydrogen import strategy, which is to be approved by the cabinet on Wednesday. In a draft, the German government explicitly refers to the provisions of the delegated act. On Monday, DUH Federal Managing Director Sascha Müller-Kraenner even called for a complete restriction to green hydrogen: “We demand a clear rejection of the import of fossil-blue hydrogen, a return to the climate targets and an import infrastructure that is tailored to this.”
The committees in the European Parliament are being constituted from today. At least the chair and the first deputy must be elected. Three further deputies can be elected later. It has been decided that at least one woman will be appointed as chair or first vice-chair.
The firewall will also be raised: The chairmanship of the Culture Committee and the Transport Committee, which, according to D’Hondt, belongs to the radical right-wing Patriots for Europe Group, will be taken away from it and will go to the Greens (CULT) and the EPP (TRAN). Nela Riehl from Germany, who is new to Parliament and belongs to Volt, becomes chair of CULT. The chairmanship of TRAN goes to Elissavet Vozemberg-Vrionidi. The Italian Antonio Decaro (S&D) is to head the ENVI, while Bogdan Rzonca (EKR) from Poland is to head the Petitions Committee. It remains to be seen whether the PiS politician will get a majority. Who is a member of which committee was decided in plenary on Friday.
The German CDU/CSU group will have three chairmen: David McAllister will again head the Foreign Affairs Committee (AFET), Sven Simon will be head of the Constitutional Committee AFCO, Niclas Herbst will be head of the Audit Committee CONT. The first deputies will be Monika Hohlmeier (CSU) on the Budget Committee BUDG, Christian Doleschal (CSU) on the Internal Market Committee IMCO and Marion Walsmann on the Legal Affairs Committee JURI. The second deputies are Norbert Lins on the Agriculture Committee AGRI, Hildegard Bentele on the Development Committee DEVE.
The committees not only elect their leadership, they also hold their first substantive meeting. The first meeting of the coordinators will take place tomorrow. In addition, the heads of the 20 committees will elect the Chair of the Conference of Committee Chairs (CCC) at 12.30 pm. After the post of President of Parliament, this is perhaps the job with the most influence on legislation. Bernd Lange (SPD) has a good chance of resuming the position. Once all this has been achieved, the European Parliament will go into summer recess on Thursday.
Read the News to find out which other coordinators the S&Ds and Greens have appointed and how much influence the committee chairs actually have.
Have a good start this week!
The EU foreign ministers have long been struggling over the right way to deal with Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orbán and his unilateral actions and blockades in Ukraine policy. Now the dispute has escalated: At the last meeting before the summer break in Brussels, the European chief diplomats were unable to agree on a joint response to Orbán’s sharply criticized “peace mission.”
26 out of 27 ministers agreed to condemn Orbán’s uncoordinated trips to Kyiv, Moscow and Beijing, one participant reported. The 90-minute discussion with Hungary’s Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó had a harsh tone. However, there was a dispute over whether the EU should react by boycotting ministerial meetings in Budapest.
Several large EU countries – including Germany – spoke out against the proposal by Foreign Affairs Commissioner Josep Borrell to ignore an informal meeting in the Gymnich format in Budapest at the end of August and instead convene a Foreign Affairs Council in Brussels. A boycott would not make things any better, according to Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock.
The representatives of France, Spain and Italy expressed similar views. Luxembourg’s Foreign Minister Xavier Bettel even called the boycott idea “nonsense.” Poland and the Baltic countries were on the other side. Lithuania and Sweden had already announced days ago that they would temporarily stop sending ministers to meetings in Hungary.
Those in favor of a boycott argue that Orbán not only violated EU decisions on Ukraine but also gave the impression that he was speaking on behalf of the Council Presidency. Opponents, on the other hand, warn against setting a precedent. If people start boycotting trips to Budapest now, this could also set a precedent for other Council presidencies.
Bettel called for people to travel to Budapest and clearly express their opinions to the Hungarian government. Baerbock criticized Orbán’s “ego trips,” but also warned against scoring an own goal. Poland’s Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski suggested organizing the Gymnich meeting in Ukraine as a compromise. However, this failed because Hungary would have had to agree.
Borrell had the last word – and surprisingly decided to convene “informal meetings of EU foreign ministers in Brussels” after the summer break, as he announced on “X”. “I wouldn’t call it a boycott,” he said at the press conference after the Foreign Affairs Council. After all, Hungary had also been invited. It was more of a symbolic measure
However, it is unclear what practical consequences it will have. Will the foreign ministers now meet in Brussels in August instead of Budapest? Or are there two different dates? Borrell said that he had tried to reach agreement among the EU states on how to proceed. Unfortunately, this was not possible. He therefore decided on his own.
A debate on Syria also ended without a clear result. Eight countries, including Austria and Italy, called for the resumption of contacts with the regime in Damascus. They also proposed the appointment of a Syria envoy. This could strengthen diplomatic relations with all Syrian parties and facilitate the return of refugees, they said.
Germany did not support the proposal. Borrell kept all options open. The EU is not naive and knows that the Syrian regime is working closely with Russia and Iran, he said. However, it was prepared to consider the initiative and work on solutions. More Syrian refugees have recently arrived in Cyprus. A deportation ban is in place in Germany.
The German Association of Motor Trade (ZDK) is calling for the same access to vehicle data as manufacturers. “Non-discriminatory access to vehicle data, resources and functions in accordance with uniform safety standards is a prerequisite for fair competition,” writes the ZDK in a current position paper, made available to Table.Briefings in advance. The EU Commission should bring forward a corresponding regulatory proposal quickly.
The background to the demand is that the Data Act provides for a sector-specific regulation for access to vehicle data, which the Commission has not yet published. As the Commission reports, the proposal will not be published until the new Commission has taken up its work.
According to its own figures, the automotive industry has around 40,000 companies with around 470,000 employees in Germany alone. The companies are not only dependent on manufacturers granting them access to data for repairs and maintenance, but also for the provision of innovative services. The prerequisite is the customer’s consent. So far, however, it has mainly been the manufacturers who have repeatedly tried to restrict access – usually with reference to security aspects or trade secrets.
The discussion is spanning over two dimensions.
Background: The Commission is working on an amendment to Annex X of the EU type-approval framework 858/2018 after recent court rulings have called into question the current industrial approach to secure access to on-board diagnostics (OBD).
The state government of Baden-Württemberg supports the demands of the ZDK. In its requests to the EU institutions for the new term of office, it writes: “The EU must enable good framework conditions for the development of new business models for the supplier industry as well as the motor vehicle trade and crafts.” Specifically, this includes regulating access to vehicle data and functions on a sector-specific basis in line with the EU Data Act. Cybersecurity issues could also be regulated specifically in the sector regulation. The Commission must present the legal acts for concretization quickly.
MEP Damian Boeselager (Volt), who negotiated the Data Act as shadow rapporteur for the Greens, emphasizes that the regulation applies to all connected devices, directly including vehicles. This means that all data that leaves the vehicle belongs to the owner of the vehicle – and not the manufacturer. “The owner must have access to the data that flows back to the manufacturer – and he can forward it in real time to third parties, such as workshops.”
However, Boeselager observes that “manufacturers are trying to wriggle out of this obligation.” The reason given is that vehicle data is personal data. A precedent-setting decision by the Data Coordinators is necessary here in order to clarify which vehicle data is personal and which is not. However, the Data Act only regulates data that leaves the vehicle. The situation is different for data that is to be fed into the vehicle – for example into the infotainment system. Here, a Vehicle Data Act would have to regulate access.
Commercial vehicle manufacturers show that it is perfectly possible to share vehicle data, not only along the value chain, but also across manufacturers. Large fleet operators have different vehicles in their fleets, but want to manage them using standardized systems. This is why the systems of different manufacturers in the telematics sector have been communicating with each other via standardized interfaces for around 20 years. So it works if the customer demands it – and pays for it.
“It is repeatedly argued that there is a market failure, which is why data from vehicles is not shared to a sufficient extent,” says Tobias Schweickhardt from Daimler Truck. “We see it differently in the commercial vehicle sector.” The Data Act will get things moving again. “From our point of view, it is therefore not plausible to directly add a sector-specific law before the Data Act has even taken effect.”
Especially as, in addition to the Data Act, there are already other car-specific regulations that require the provision of data, such as the Repair and Maintenance Information (RMI), the new battery regulation or the Euro 7 emissions regulation. “There are already so many regulations, and the Data Act goes one step further,” says Schweickhardt.
It sounds similar at Volkswagen. According to the company, it is open to cross-sector data exchange. “We see great potential in this,” writes Volkswagen on request. “We are open to sharing data with third parties within a legally secure framework.” The company points out that the European automotive industry has created a uniform interface for accessing vehicle data via the respective manufacturer backend with the Extended Vehicle Standards.
Volkswagen also supports the Data Act. Beyond this, however, Volkswagen sees “no advantage in sector-specific regulation on access to vehicle data.” From the company’s point of view, the Data Act and other existing legal regulations (including RMI and Euro 7) already provide a framework in which the provision of data generated in the vehicle is regulated.
In contrast, the European Association of Automobile Suppliers CLEPA, which represents the automotive industry, is also calling for a comprehensive legislative package. This should include sector-specific legislation to ensure access to internal vehicle data and resources. This is the only way for the industry to unleash the full potential of digital mobility services and ensure a competitive aftermarket, according to the white paper on the new legislative period.
Transparency of data points, harmonized rules and robust cybersecurity management are crucial. CLEPA is also calling for the implementation of the Data Act to be monitored and to test its effectiveness.
Deutsche Umwelthilfe (DUH) criticizes the decisive EU method for determining the climate impact of low-carbon hydrogen. “Because the standard value is set too low, there is a risk that natural gas from particularly emission-intensive production sources will be used primarily for the production of blue hydrogen,” says Julian Schwartzkopff, Team Leader Gas Phase-out at DUH.
Natural gas production in some regions of the USA, for example, is considered to be emission-intensive. According to a study by the Environmental Defense Fund, leakage rates in the Permian, Bakken and Uinta basins are between three and six percent. In contrast, blue hydrogen from Norway, where leakage rates are considered to be lower, could fall behind.
According to the DUH, the imbalance is due to standard values for upstream emissions being set too low. The exact methane emissions are to be measured using a method that the Commission will define in connection with the Methane Regulation. However, the Commission does not have to present this delegated act until August 2027. In the delegated act now being circulated for low-carbon hydrogen, the Commission is therefore temporarily adopting blanket standard values for emissions intensity in various stages of the value chain.
For example, the upstream emissions generated during the extraction of natural gas are five grams of CO2 equivalents per megajoule of hydrogen. This value may be exceeded by 40 percent, so that it is effectively seven grams. According to DUH, however, the standard value should even be 15.5 grams if the greenhouse gas potential is considered over a period of 100 years (GWP100).
This means that a large part of the permissible limit value would already be exhausted by the upstream emissions of methane alone. If a 70 percent reduction in CO2 compared to fossil fuels applies, a maximum total of 28.2 g CO2eq/MJ may be produced.
For its upstream calculations, Umwelthilfe assumes that the leakage is three percent. Secondly, it considers the GWP value from the 2018 Renewable Energy Directive, to which the legal act refers, to be outdated. According to the IPCC’s sixth assessment report from 2021, the GWP100 should be 29.8 and not 25. According to the Methane Regulation, the shorter-term greenhouse effect (GWP20) must also be taken into account. According to DUH, the corresponding factor is 82.5, which means that the standard value for the first 20 years is 43 grams CO2eq – six times the Commission’s assumptions.
The DUH is convinced that the misconceptions continue unabated. Midstream emissions – i.e. those from transportation and processing – are completely missing from the Commission’s draft and are “not applicable” according to the authority.
Leakages of the end product hydrogen, which also warms the climate, are also not taken into account for the time being. According to the Commission, there is still no scientific consensus on the exact GWP. “Relevant values for the global warming potential of hydrogen should be added as soon as the scientific evidence is sufficiently mature,” the draft states.
However, DUH believes it is possible and necessary to apply a provisional default value. The British consultant Richard G. Derwent, for example, puts the GWP100 of hydrogen at a factor of six to ten.
The EU legal framework is relevant not least for the German government’s hydrogen import strategy, which is to be approved by the cabinet on Wednesday. In a draft, the German government explicitly refers to the provisions of the delegated act. On Monday, DUH Federal Managing Director Sascha Müller-Kraenner even called for a complete restriction to green hydrogen: “We demand a clear rejection of the import of fossil-blue hydrogen, a return to the climate targets and an import infrastructure that is tailored to this.”