European industry and economy ministers are convening today for the Competitiveness Council (COMPET) meeting in Brussels. The first item on the agenda is the regulation to combat late payment in commercial transactions. As an EU directive from 2011 did not have the desired effect, the EU Commission proposed a directly applicable regulation instead last September. It should make a maximum payment period of thirty days the standard in commercial transactions and introduce automatic penalty interest for late payment.
The proposal was part of the SME relief package, as it is primarily intended to support small companies whose cash flow is often affected by the slow payment behavior of large companies. However, many member state governments are not in favor of the proposal. They fear legal uncertainty due to the direct application of the regulation. In addition, it is unclear to many whether the regulation would help SMEs, as most of them are not only creditors but also debtors. The Council debate will be broadcast via livestream.
The ministerial exchange on the EU Commission’s Single Market and Competitiveness Report will not be broadcast. The Belgian Council Presidency is hoping for a discussion on the success indicators of an integrated internal market and on how the EU can pursue an industrial policy that does not lead to a subsidy race and fragmentation of the internal market. Ministers from small and medium-sized states in particular criticized the loosened EU state aid rules for their market-distorting effect.
Another item on the agenda will be a debate on the EU Supply Chain Act. The Belgian Council Presidency has not yet given up on the law: With a new compromise proposal, it is attempting to address objections from the member states to reach an agreement after all. Among other things, the proposal would significantly limit the scope of the law.
We hope you have a great day!
The Christian Democrat EPP party family wants a stricter approach to asylum legislation. Asylum procedures should take place in third countries. To this end, migration agreements are to be concluded with other non-EU countries. This should ensure that “asylum seekers receive protection in a civilized and safe manner”. This is stated in the manifesto with which the EPP is entering the European election campaign. It was adopted by a large majority at the EPP congress with 800 delegates in Bucharest.
The EPP stands by the Geneva Refugee Convention and the European Convention on Human Rights. However, neither convention stipulates that people seeking protection have the right to freely choose the country that grants them protection.
Once the system of third countries has been successfully implemented, the EPP wants to advocate a quota system. “We propose admitting a quota of people in need of protection into the EU as part of annual humanitarian quotas for vulnerable people.” The demand for fixed quotas for refugees admitted on humanitarian grounds is new.
Contrary to original plans, the manifesto makes concessions on the demand to abandon the unanimity principle for votes in the Council. Following criticism from Eastern European member states, there is now only talk of “abandoning the principle of unanimity for sanctions against totalitarian regimes and in defense of the internal market”.
The CDU and CSU’s demand to overturn the ban on combustion engines in 2035 is not included in the manifesto. Instead, the EPP only advocates technological neutrality. The aim is to “develop alternative fuels, hydrogen technologies and new propulsion systems for vehicles, aircraft and ships”. It was reported that the Swedish member party pushed through this change.
The Austrian delegation abstained from voting on the manifesto. The ÖVP provided 23 delegates. The party and Federal Chancellor Karl Nehammer do not want to support the demand to grant Romania and Bulgaria full admission to the Schengen area. The Austrian EPP member party is also calling for a move away from the ban on combustion engines.
Originally, the EPP congress was supposed to take place in Austria, according to reports. However, the ÖVP rejected the offer from Manfred Weber (CSU), EPP party and parliamentary group leader. As a result, the EPP took the party event to Romania, where presidential and parliamentary elections are taking place this year, to kick off the election campaign.
Ursula von der Leyen is to be elected as the EPP’s lead candidate at the two-day congress on Thursday. The socialist party family had only acclaimed its top candidate, Nicolas Schmit. Von der Leyen, on the other hand, must stand for election. At a congress in Helsinki in 2018, the EPP elected Manfred Weber as its lead candidate with just under 79% of delegates. Weber had an opposing candidate, Alexander Stubb, the current President of Finland. Ursula von der Leyen will not have an opposing candidate. She is therefore expected to achieve an approval rating of at least 80 percent.
The French delegation of the Républicains has announced a headwind. However, the party, which used to be the head of government in France, has lost a lot of strength. It now only has 23 delegates in Bucharest. The CDU and CSU together have 85 delegates. 13 out of 19 Slovenian delegates have also already made up their minds and will not vote for von der Leyen. How many of the delegates will ultimately vote for the candidate in a secret ballot will be known this Thursday around midday.
Behind the scenes at the congress, which was also attended by party leader Friedrich Merz (CDU), Jens Spahn and the General Secretary of the NRW CDU, Paul Ziemiak, the personnel line-up of the Christian Democrats after the election was also discussed. Four top jobs are up for grabs: The EPP is likely to become the strongest force in the European Parliament again and therefore has a good chance of pushing through Ursula von der Leyen as Commission President. The party family will also demand that Parliament President Roberta Metsola can continue for the first two and a half years of the parliamentary term.
The other two top jobs, Council President and Commissioner for Foreign Affairs/Commissioner for Defense, are likely to be claimed by the socialist PES party family and by the liberals if they support von der Leyen as Commission President.
However, the EPP could also lay claim to the presidency of the Council. One hears the argument that the EPP has gained influence in the Council: 15 out of 27 member states are already governed by EPP member parties. Romania’s President Klaus Iohannis is said to have ambitions.
What was heard on the sidelines of the congress fits in with this: Iohannis wants to hold this year’s presidential elections in his country earlier, in September. The decision would then be made in Romania when the successor to Council President Charles Michel takes office in December.
The co-leader of the ECR Group in the European Parliament, Nicola Procaccini, rejects the syringe candidate principle. In an interview with Table.Briefings, Nicola Procaccini (Fratelli d’Italia), who is considered a confidant of Giorgia Meloni, said: “It is not within the competence of the European Parliament to choose the Commission President. That is a matter for the Council.” It would be an “overstretching” of the European treaties if the Parliament were to claim this right for itself.
“The Parliament elects the Commission President, but does not choose him or her.” He could not say whether the European conservative party family EKR, which is led by Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, would nominate a top candidate for the election.
The ECR Group in the European Parliament currently has 68 MEPs. According to Manuel Müller’s seat projection, it could increase to 78 seats after the European elections. Fidesz, the previously non-attached Hungarian delegation, has announced its intention to join. In addition, Nicolas Bay, the only Reconquête MEP from France, has joined the ECR Group. Reconquête is led by the right-wing populists Éric Zemmour and Marion Maréchal.
With 25 MEPs, the Polish former governing party PIS has the largest number of MEPs in the ECR Group, as well as the Co-Chairman Ryszard Antoni Legutko. The Fratelli d’Italia (Brothers of Italy) currently has ten MEPs in the European Parliament and provides the second co-chair, Procaccini.
Procaccini believes “that there will be a shift to the right in the European Parliament after the European elections”. The opinion polls indicate that the forces to the right of the Christian Democratic EPP group will be strengthened. “Ideally, we will have a constellation in the European Parliament in which Christian Democrats together with the ECR and ID have a majority and can decide votes in their favor.” In addition, more and more member states are being governed by conservatives. “It is therefore becoming apparent that we will also have a Commission with a center-right political focus.”
Procaccini recalls that Fidesz and PIS MPs voted for Ursula von der Leyen in 2019. “However, they and many other ECR MPs are very dissatisfied with von der Leyen because the Green Deal has tended to represent center-left positions.”
There had been calls from the ranks of the PIS to include the MPs of Marine Le Pen’s far-right Rassemblement National (RS) in the ECR parliamentary group. Procaccini puts the brakes on expectations: “I don’t see the members of the Rassemblement being included in the ECR parliamentary group. There are no considerations in this regard.” At most, future cooperation would consist of occasionally voting together: “Why not?” Procaccini sets the ECR apart: “It is important for my group that we are clearly pro-Western. We are against Vladimir Putin and for Ukraine.”
Ursula von der Leyen recently set conditions for the EPP’s cooperation in Parliament with MEPs from other political groups when she was presented as the EPP’s lead candidate: “It is important to me to work with pro-European, pro-NATO, pro-Ukrainian groups that clearly support our democratic values.”
“The Fratelli MEPs did not elect Ursula von der Leyen in 2019,” says Procaccini. If von der Leyen runs for a second term of office in Strasbourg in July or September, “the national delegations will first weigh up whether we support her.” Ultimately, it depends on the Commission’s agenda for the next five years.
Procaccini formulates the priorities for the Italian delegation in the ECR Group: “We want illegal migration to be combated and the Commission must take action against human traffickers.” At the same time, there must be rules for legal immigration. “Every member state needs regular immigration.”
“On the other hand, the internal market must be better protected against dumping from non-EU countries.” The ECR believes that “EU sovereignty in energy matters is important.” The EU must never again become dependent on energy imports as it was in the past. “We respect the fact that the EU is committed to climate protection. However, we demand openness to technology.” The member states should be able to choose the instruments themselves to achieve the climate targets.
“We also want to protect employees and the self-employed, for whom nature is their livelihood.” Over the past five years, “farmers and fishermen have been treated with downright hostility by the Commission.” Yet they are the allies of the environment. “It is the crazy ideology of the left that the environment must be protected against people.” It is not a question of abolishing the green transformation, but rather of adapting the rules.
The CO2 fleet limits and the end of combustion engines in 2035 are not realistic. “Italy is working hard to ensure that cars with combustion engines can continue to run on biofuels after 2035.”
In the area of defense policy, he strongly advocates joint procurement by the member states. “Last but not least, NATO needs a more capable Europe.” Donald Trump is right that Europeans need to spend more money on their defense. “My party is also in favor of a common EU army.” The EKR party family is convinced: “The EU should limit itself in the next mandate. Do less, but do it all the better – that must be our motto for the next five years.”
Nicola Procaccini considers it inconceivable that the Fratelli will join the Christian Democratic EPP Group after the elections: “I definitely rule out the possibility of the Fratelli MEPs joining the EPP. We are convinced that our place is in the ECR. It is much more about strengthening the conservative force in the European Parliament.”
Mr. Dmytrasevych, the EU is deciding on extending free trade measures for Ukraine by another year. How significant is this economically for Ukraine?
Seventy percent of Ukraine’s exports and foreign currency revenues are agricultural exports. We use these funds for our military resistance to Russia. It is crucial to extend the trade liberalisation measures, which allow our farmers to continue their work.
The extension proposal includes emergency breaks for sugar, poultry, and eggs. Is this a good compromise?
We agreed to this. But to be honest, I am not happy about it. Look at the products in question: For sugar, Ukraine is not the biggest exporter to the EU.
According to the European Commission, Ukrainian sugar imports increased tenfold since the measures started.
They increased, but we are still not the biggest exporter – Brazil is. Our exports make up less than three percent of the EU’s internal sugar consumption. For poultry, it is less than two percent, for eggs, less than one. At this scale, the impact on the EU market cannot be that big.
If we look these products’ prices in the EU, they are continuously high. If our imports did impact the EU market, the prices should drop – they have not, they even rose in some cases.
Conversely, the agriculture committee calls to extend the safeguards to products like cereals and honey.
This is not acceptable. The Commission decided last autumn to end restrictions on grain exports to the frontline countries. They examined the market and concluded that the imports do not significantly impact it. This means there is no basis for safeguards on grain.
The agriculture committee also proposes to set a lower cutoff for these exports by tying them to the export volumes of 2021 to 2022, rather than 2022 to 2023. In 2021 trade quotas were in place, our trade was limited, we had Avian Influenza, all of Europe was under Covid restrictions. In 2022 Russia started its aggression, for the first few months of it we did not export properly.
What does the situation of Ukrainian farmers look like now?
25 percent of our arable land is occupied, mined, or otherwise contaminated. The Kyiv School of Economics estimates agricultural losses due to the war so far at 80 billion US dollars.
We have constant missile and drone attacks on our port and agriculture infrastructure. Our farmers are fighting at the frontline, so we are short on agricultural workers. We face high input prices for fuel, fertilisers, crop protection products.
These conditions really are very tough. So, while we do understand the situation of EU farmers, the situation of our farmers in Ukraine is much more complicated.
How long will it take to demine Ukraine’s arable land?
No one knows, unfortunately. In our forest, we still find unexploded shells from the Second World War. And Russia’s ridiculous war of aggression is the biggest war in Europe since then. Based on this, it can take decades.
Many EU producers argue Ukrainian products are cheaper because of lower standards. Do they have a point?
We frequently hear arguments about the alleged lower quality of our products, but this has nothing to do with reality. Ukraine signed an association agreement with the EU back in 2014. Since then, we have worked on implementing EU standards, as well as sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures. We cannot export our products to the EU if they do not meet all quality requirements.
It is true that EU farmers have to comply with more environmental rules. But let us put this into perspective: EU farmers are required, for example, to leave four percent of their land fallow. Meanwhile, Ukraine cannot farm one quarter of its land because of the war.
Moreover, in return for fulfilling Green Deal obligations, EU farmers get billions of euros in subsidies. Our farmers have no such support.
To join the EU, Ukraine will have to implement all EU laws. Will Ukrainian farmers accept Green Deal regulations?
In 2021, our farmers received 100 million dollars in state support. Meanwhile, farmers in EU countries get billions from the CAP and other EU funds. If our farmers have the chance to receive such sums in return for implementing the Green Deal, I do not see why they would say no to that.
But many fear that, after accession, Ukraine’s large agriculture sector and big farms would eat up most of the CAP budget. What solution do you propose?
With the next reform, the CAP should be designed in a way that makes the inclusion of Ukraine possible.
This could mean more redistribution from big to small farms. 80 percent of CAP funds go to 20 percent of farms. By balancing this out, we can make sure the money goes to farms that really need it. Very large farms are often self-sufficient. At the same time, this would make room to include Ukraine.
Many farmers in the EU oppose Ukraine’s accession. They fear they will be crowded out from the European market. How will you get them on board?
We had a very good meeting with EU farmers’ association Copa Cogeca this week. We tried to make clear these fears are unfounded. I am sure such myths are also fuelled by Russian propaganda.
Let us bear in mind that we traded agricultural products with the EU already before the full-scale invasion. Germany, for example, has traditionally been a destination for Ukrainian soybeans and rapeseed.
We understand that farmers – in the EU, Ukraine, or elsewhere – are conservative: When things change, fears appear. But we need to keep discussions based on facts and figures – that is the only way to counter myths.
Do you not think Ukraine’s accession will have a big impact on EU agricultural markets?
So far, a third of our agriculture exports go to China. When we join the EU, we will still have those markets in Asia, Africa – why would we lose them? There is no need to export everything to the EU. Instead, we can work together to export to third countries.
Within the EU, we can substitute imports from Russia or Belarus with Ukrainian ones. During the droughts in Southern Europe in the past two years, we helped balance markets with our grain. This shows that we should work as partners and fair competitors, not act like enemies or protectionists.
Political influence is not always conspicuous: According to the trade magazine “Politik & Kommunikation” (“politics and communication”), Pierre Gröning is one of the most influential Germans in Brussels. The 41-year-old is Managing Director of the Brussels European Office of the German Chemical Industry Association (VCI) and in this role represents the interests of around 1,900 German chemical and pharmaceutical companies, or more than 90 percent of the German chemical industry.
The past few months have not been easy for his sector; the chemical industry is in crisis. High energy prices, regulation and bureaucracy are putting a strain on companies. Gröning’s assessment of the recently adopted electricity price package therefore comes as no surprise: “It’s a step in the right direction – but only a start.” However, he does not yet know whether the planned changes can still be financed after the Karlsruhe ruling.
Born in Erlangen, he grew up with several European cultures: “As a German-Frenchman married to an Italian, I’ve never had a purely German view of the EU“, he says. Gröning calls this “having a European profile in my blood”. After school, Gröning opted for a Franco-German double degree with a European focus: he studied political science in Lille and Münster. After completing a Master’s degree in International Relations at the College of Europe in Bruges, he wrote a doctoral thesis on the political and economic relations between the European Union and India.
Gröning emphasizes that the continuous “gathering of information” is part of his everyday work. But for the lobbyist, it’s not just about what’s new in European legislative work, but also where and when. “Internal lobbying” also plays an important role: “Once we have found out what is happening, we have to find a common position within the association.” As soon as this position has been found, Gröning says, the motto for his team is “get into the political business”.
Gröning is skeptical about the EU’s long-term competitiveness. This also has to do with the great economic relevance of energy-intensive industries. There is currently “a major problem with energy prices and energy volumes“, says the lobbyist. The Green Deal does not make the situation any easier for Gröning: “An attempt is being made here to force a transformation through a detailed set of regulations.” What is he missing in this complex scenario? “I miss the belief in the innovations that could come from within companies.” Gabriele Voßkühler
European industry and economy ministers are convening today for the Competitiveness Council (COMPET) meeting in Brussels. The first item on the agenda is the regulation to combat late payment in commercial transactions. As an EU directive from 2011 did not have the desired effect, the EU Commission proposed a directly applicable regulation instead last September. It should make a maximum payment period of thirty days the standard in commercial transactions and introduce automatic penalty interest for late payment.
The proposal was part of the SME relief package, as it is primarily intended to support small companies whose cash flow is often affected by the slow payment behavior of large companies. However, many member state governments are not in favor of the proposal. They fear legal uncertainty due to the direct application of the regulation. In addition, it is unclear to many whether the regulation would help SMEs, as most of them are not only creditors but also debtors. The Council debate will be broadcast via livestream.
The ministerial exchange on the EU Commission’s Single Market and Competitiveness Report will not be broadcast. The Belgian Council Presidency is hoping for a discussion on the success indicators of an integrated internal market and on how the EU can pursue an industrial policy that does not lead to a subsidy race and fragmentation of the internal market. Ministers from small and medium-sized states in particular criticized the loosened EU state aid rules for their market-distorting effect.
Another item on the agenda will be a debate on the EU Supply Chain Act. The Belgian Council Presidency has not yet given up on the law: With a new compromise proposal, it is attempting to address objections from the member states to reach an agreement after all. Among other things, the proposal would significantly limit the scope of the law.
We hope you have a great day!
The Christian Democrat EPP party family wants a stricter approach to asylum legislation. Asylum procedures should take place in third countries. To this end, migration agreements are to be concluded with other non-EU countries. This should ensure that “asylum seekers receive protection in a civilized and safe manner”. This is stated in the manifesto with which the EPP is entering the European election campaign. It was adopted by a large majority at the EPP congress with 800 delegates in Bucharest.
The EPP stands by the Geneva Refugee Convention and the European Convention on Human Rights. However, neither convention stipulates that people seeking protection have the right to freely choose the country that grants them protection.
Once the system of third countries has been successfully implemented, the EPP wants to advocate a quota system. “We propose admitting a quota of people in need of protection into the EU as part of annual humanitarian quotas for vulnerable people.” The demand for fixed quotas for refugees admitted on humanitarian grounds is new.
Contrary to original plans, the manifesto makes concessions on the demand to abandon the unanimity principle for votes in the Council. Following criticism from Eastern European member states, there is now only talk of “abandoning the principle of unanimity for sanctions against totalitarian regimes and in defense of the internal market”.
The CDU and CSU’s demand to overturn the ban on combustion engines in 2035 is not included in the manifesto. Instead, the EPP only advocates technological neutrality. The aim is to “develop alternative fuels, hydrogen technologies and new propulsion systems for vehicles, aircraft and ships”. It was reported that the Swedish member party pushed through this change.
The Austrian delegation abstained from voting on the manifesto. The ÖVP provided 23 delegates. The party and Federal Chancellor Karl Nehammer do not want to support the demand to grant Romania and Bulgaria full admission to the Schengen area. The Austrian EPP member party is also calling for a move away from the ban on combustion engines.
Originally, the EPP congress was supposed to take place in Austria, according to reports. However, the ÖVP rejected the offer from Manfred Weber (CSU), EPP party and parliamentary group leader. As a result, the EPP took the party event to Romania, where presidential and parliamentary elections are taking place this year, to kick off the election campaign.
Ursula von der Leyen is to be elected as the EPP’s lead candidate at the two-day congress on Thursday. The socialist party family had only acclaimed its top candidate, Nicolas Schmit. Von der Leyen, on the other hand, must stand for election. At a congress in Helsinki in 2018, the EPP elected Manfred Weber as its lead candidate with just under 79% of delegates. Weber had an opposing candidate, Alexander Stubb, the current President of Finland. Ursula von der Leyen will not have an opposing candidate. She is therefore expected to achieve an approval rating of at least 80 percent.
The French delegation of the Républicains has announced a headwind. However, the party, which used to be the head of government in France, has lost a lot of strength. It now only has 23 delegates in Bucharest. The CDU and CSU together have 85 delegates. 13 out of 19 Slovenian delegates have also already made up their minds and will not vote for von der Leyen. How many of the delegates will ultimately vote for the candidate in a secret ballot will be known this Thursday around midday.
Behind the scenes at the congress, which was also attended by party leader Friedrich Merz (CDU), Jens Spahn and the General Secretary of the NRW CDU, Paul Ziemiak, the personnel line-up of the Christian Democrats after the election was also discussed. Four top jobs are up for grabs: The EPP is likely to become the strongest force in the European Parliament again and therefore has a good chance of pushing through Ursula von der Leyen as Commission President. The party family will also demand that Parliament President Roberta Metsola can continue for the first two and a half years of the parliamentary term.
The other two top jobs, Council President and Commissioner for Foreign Affairs/Commissioner for Defense, are likely to be claimed by the socialist PES party family and by the liberals if they support von der Leyen as Commission President.
However, the EPP could also lay claim to the presidency of the Council. One hears the argument that the EPP has gained influence in the Council: 15 out of 27 member states are already governed by EPP member parties. Romania’s President Klaus Iohannis is said to have ambitions.
What was heard on the sidelines of the congress fits in with this: Iohannis wants to hold this year’s presidential elections in his country earlier, in September. The decision would then be made in Romania when the successor to Council President Charles Michel takes office in December.
The co-leader of the ECR Group in the European Parliament, Nicola Procaccini, rejects the syringe candidate principle. In an interview with Table.Briefings, Nicola Procaccini (Fratelli d’Italia), who is considered a confidant of Giorgia Meloni, said: “It is not within the competence of the European Parliament to choose the Commission President. That is a matter for the Council.” It would be an “overstretching” of the European treaties if the Parliament were to claim this right for itself.
“The Parliament elects the Commission President, but does not choose him or her.” He could not say whether the European conservative party family EKR, which is led by Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, would nominate a top candidate for the election.
The ECR Group in the European Parliament currently has 68 MEPs. According to Manuel Müller’s seat projection, it could increase to 78 seats after the European elections. Fidesz, the previously non-attached Hungarian delegation, has announced its intention to join. In addition, Nicolas Bay, the only Reconquête MEP from France, has joined the ECR Group. Reconquête is led by the right-wing populists Éric Zemmour and Marion Maréchal.
With 25 MEPs, the Polish former governing party PIS has the largest number of MEPs in the ECR Group, as well as the Co-Chairman Ryszard Antoni Legutko. The Fratelli d’Italia (Brothers of Italy) currently has ten MEPs in the European Parliament and provides the second co-chair, Procaccini.
Procaccini believes “that there will be a shift to the right in the European Parliament after the European elections”. The opinion polls indicate that the forces to the right of the Christian Democratic EPP group will be strengthened. “Ideally, we will have a constellation in the European Parliament in which Christian Democrats together with the ECR and ID have a majority and can decide votes in their favor.” In addition, more and more member states are being governed by conservatives. “It is therefore becoming apparent that we will also have a Commission with a center-right political focus.”
Procaccini recalls that Fidesz and PIS MPs voted for Ursula von der Leyen in 2019. “However, they and many other ECR MPs are very dissatisfied with von der Leyen because the Green Deal has tended to represent center-left positions.”
There had been calls from the ranks of the PIS to include the MPs of Marine Le Pen’s far-right Rassemblement National (RS) in the ECR parliamentary group. Procaccini puts the brakes on expectations: “I don’t see the members of the Rassemblement being included in the ECR parliamentary group. There are no considerations in this regard.” At most, future cooperation would consist of occasionally voting together: “Why not?” Procaccini sets the ECR apart: “It is important for my group that we are clearly pro-Western. We are against Vladimir Putin and for Ukraine.”
Ursula von der Leyen recently set conditions for the EPP’s cooperation in Parliament with MEPs from other political groups when she was presented as the EPP’s lead candidate: “It is important to me to work with pro-European, pro-NATO, pro-Ukrainian groups that clearly support our democratic values.”
“The Fratelli MEPs did not elect Ursula von der Leyen in 2019,” says Procaccini. If von der Leyen runs for a second term of office in Strasbourg in July or September, “the national delegations will first weigh up whether we support her.” Ultimately, it depends on the Commission’s agenda for the next five years.
Procaccini formulates the priorities for the Italian delegation in the ECR Group: “We want illegal migration to be combated and the Commission must take action against human traffickers.” At the same time, there must be rules for legal immigration. “Every member state needs regular immigration.”
“On the other hand, the internal market must be better protected against dumping from non-EU countries.” The ECR believes that “EU sovereignty in energy matters is important.” The EU must never again become dependent on energy imports as it was in the past. “We respect the fact that the EU is committed to climate protection. However, we demand openness to technology.” The member states should be able to choose the instruments themselves to achieve the climate targets.
“We also want to protect employees and the self-employed, for whom nature is their livelihood.” Over the past five years, “farmers and fishermen have been treated with downright hostility by the Commission.” Yet they are the allies of the environment. “It is the crazy ideology of the left that the environment must be protected against people.” It is not a question of abolishing the green transformation, but rather of adapting the rules.
The CO2 fleet limits and the end of combustion engines in 2035 are not realistic. “Italy is working hard to ensure that cars with combustion engines can continue to run on biofuels after 2035.”
In the area of defense policy, he strongly advocates joint procurement by the member states. “Last but not least, NATO needs a more capable Europe.” Donald Trump is right that Europeans need to spend more money on their defense. “My party is also in favor of a common EU army.” The EKR party family is convinced: “The EU should limit itself in the next mandate. Do less, but do it all the better – that must be our motto for the next five years.”
Nicola Procaccini considers it inconceivable that the Fratelli will join the Christian Democratic EPP Group after the elections: “I definitely rule out the possibility of the Fratelli MEPs joining the EPP. We are convinced that our place is in the ECR. It is much more about strengthening the conservative force in the European Parliament.”
Mr. Dmytrasevych, the EU is deciding on extending free trade measures for Ukraine by another year. How significant is this economically for Ukraine?
Seventy percent of Ukraine’s exports and foreign currency revenues are agricultural exports. We use these funds for our military resistance to Russia. It is crucial to extend the trade liberalisation measures, which allow our farmers to continue their work.
The extension proposal includes emergency breaks for sugar, poultry, and eggs. Is this a good compromise?
We agreed to this. But to be honest, I am not happy about it. Look at the products in question: For sugar, Ukraine is not the biggest exporter to the EU.
According to the European Commission, Ukrainian sugar imports increased tenfold since the measures started.
They increased, but we are still not the biggest exporter – Brazil is. Our exports make up less than three percent of the EU’s internal sugar consumption. For poultry, it is less than two percent, for eggs, less than one. At this scale, the impact on the EU market cannot be that big.
If we look these products’ prices in the EU, they are continuously high. If our imports did impact the EU market, the prices should drop – they have not, they even rose in some cases.
Conversely, the agriculture committee calls to extend the safeguards to products like cereals and honey.
This is not acceptable. The Commission decided last autumn to end restrictions on grain exports to the frontline countries. They examined the market and concluded that the imports do not significantly impact it. This means there is no basis for safeguards on grain.
The agriculture committee also proposes to set a lower cutoff for these exports by tying them to the export volumes of 2021 to 2022, rather than 2022 to 2023. In 2021 trade quotas were in place, our trade was limited, we had Avian Influenza, all of Europe was under Covid restrictions. In 2022 Russia started its aggression, for the first few months of it we did not export properly.
What does the situation of Ukrainian farmers look like now?
25 percent of our arable land is occupied, mined, or otherwise contaminated. The Kyiv School of Economics estimates agricultural losses due to the war so far at 80 billion US dollars.
We have constant missile and drone attacks on our port and agriculture infrastructure. Our farmers are fighting at the frontline, so we are short on agricultural workers. We face high input prices for fuel, fertilisers, crop protection products.
These conditions really are very tough. So, while we do understand the situation of EU farmers, the situation of our farmers in Ukraine is much more complicated.
How long will it take to demine Ukraine’s arable land?
No one knows, unfortunately. In our forest, we still find unexploded shells from the Second World War. And Russia’s ridiculous war of aggression is the biggest war in Europe since then. Based on this, it can take decades.
Many EU producers argue Ukrainian products are cheaper because of lower standards. Do they have a point?
We frequently hear arguments about the alleged lower quality of our products, but this has nothing to do with reality. Ukraine signed an association agreement with the EU back in 2014. Since then, we have worked on implementing EU standards, as well as sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures. We cannot export our products to the EU if they do not meet all quality requirements.
It is true that EU farmers have to comply with more environmental rules. But let us put this into perspective: EU farmers are required, for example, to leave four percent of their land fallow. Meanwhile, Ukraine cannot farm one quarter of its land because of the war.
Moreover, in return for fulfilling Green Deal obligations, EU farmers get billions of euros in subsidies. Our farmers have no such support.
To join the EU, Ukraine will have to implement all EU laws. Will Ukrainian farmers accept Green Deal regulations?
In 2021, our farmers received 100 million dollars in state support. Meanwhile, farmers in EU countries get billions from the CAP and other EU funds. If our farmers have the chance to receive such sums in return for implementing the Green Deal, I do not see why they would say no to that.
But many fear that, after accession, Ukraine’s large agriculture sector and big farms would eat up most of the CAP budget. What solution do you propose?
With the next reform, the CAP should be designed in a way that makes the inclusion of Ukraine possible.
This could mean more redistribution from big to small farms. 80 percent of CAP funds go to 20 percent of farms. By balancing this out, we can make sure the money goes to farms that really need it. Very large farms are often self-sufficient. At the same time, this would make room to include Ukraine.
Many farmers in the EU oppose Ukraine’s accession. They fear they will be crowded out from the European market. How will you get them on board?
We had a very good meeting with EU farmers’ association Copa Cogeca this week. We tried to make clear these fears are unfounded. I am sure such myths are also fuelled by Russian propaganda.
Let us bear in mind that we traded agricultural products with the EU already before the full-scale invasion. Germany, for example, has traditionally been a destination for Ukrainian soybeans and rapeseed.
We understand that farmers – in the EU, Ukraine, or elsewhere – are conservative: When things change, fears appear. But we need to keep discussions based on facts and figures – that is the only way to counter myths.
Do you not think Ukraine’s accession will have a big impact on EU agricultural markets?
So far, a third of our agriculture exports go to China. When we join the EU, we will still have those markets in Asia, Africa – why would we lose them? There is no need to export everything to the EU. Instead, we can work together to export to third countries.
Within the EU, we can substitute imports from Russia or Belarus with Ukrainian ones. During the droughts in Southern Europe in the past two years, we helped balance markets with our grain. This shows that we should work as partners and fair competitors, not act like enemies or protectionists.
Political influence is not always conspicuous: According to the trade magazine “Politik & Kommunikation” (“politics and communication”), Pierre Gröning is one of the most influential Germans in Brussels. The 41-year-old is Managing Director of the Brussels European Office of the German Chemical Industry Association (VCI) and in this role represents the interests of around 1,900 German chemical and pharmaceutical companies, or more than 90 percent of the German chemical industry.
The past few months have not been easy for his sector; the chemical industry is in crisis. High energy prices, regulation and bureaucracy are putting a strain on companies. Gröning’s assessment of the recently adopted electricity price package therefore comes as no surprise: “It’s a step in the right direction – but only a start.” However, he does not yet know whether the planned changes can still be financed after the Karlsruhe ruling.
Born in Erlangen, he grew up with several European cultures: “As a German-Frenchman married to an Italian, I’ve never had a purely German view of the EU“, he says. Gröning calls this “having a European profile in my blood”. After school, Gröning opted for a Franco-German double degree with a European focus: he studied political science in Lille and Münster. After completing a Master’s degree in International Relations at the College of Europe in Bruges, he wrote a doctoral thesis on the political and economic relations between the European Union and India.
Gröning emphasizes that the continuous “gathering of information” is part of his everyday work. But for the lobbyist, it’s not just about what’s new in European legislative work, but also where and when. “Internal lobbying” also plays an important role: “Once we have found out what is happening, we have to find a common position within the association.” As soon as this position has been found, Gröning says, the motto for his team is “get into the political business”.
Gröning is skeptical about the EU’s long-term competitiveness. This also has to do with the great economic relevance of energy-intensive industries. There is currently “a major problem with energy prices and energy volumes“, says the lobbyist. The Green Deal does not make the situation any easier for Gröning: “An attempt is being made here to force a transformation through a detailed set of regulations.” What is he missing in this complex scenario? “I miss the belief in the innovations that could come from within companies.” Gabriele Voßkühler
