EU ethics body + Social Affairs Commissioner: ‘Taking a stand on exploitation’ + Green light for renewables program

Corruption case in European Parliament: new push for ethics body

By

Eric Bonse

Driven by the corruption scandal in the European Parliament and the threat of damage to the EU’s image, von der Leyen on Dec. 12, for the first time after a long break, publicly declared her support for the project. The scandal had shown that the EU needed “the highest standards,” von der Leyen said. “In my opinion, it would be right for us to set up an ethics body,” she said.

EU Commission Vice-President Vera Jourova has been tasked with holding talks with the Parliament and the EU states. The aim is to introduce strict rules for all institutions, according to the Brussels authority. Von der Leyen had already sent a letter to the most important EU bodies in March to sound out a common position. A meeting at the “technical level” followed in September – without resounding success.

Strict rules for all

In any case, high-level political talks are a long time coming. The reason: The bodies addressed – including the European Central Bank, the European Court of Justice and the EU Court of Auditors – are not on the same page. Some institutions insist on their independence; they do not want to get involved in interdepartmental rules. Others, on the other hand, are pressing for speed and calling for a smaller start if necessary.

However, the EU Commission rejects this. According to the Brussels authority, strict rules are needed for all institutions and no exceptions are to be tolerated. In fact, it would be problematic if the planned new ethics body were to target only the “hard core” of the Brussels institutions – the Commission, the Council and the Parliament – and exclude, of all things, the European financial institutions.

Failing at fight against impunity

From a practical point of view, however, time is of the essence. If the ethics body does not start work until the scandal is over, it will not be able to contribute much to coming to terms with it. The European Parliament has therefore called on the EU Commission to stop delaying its proposal for an ethics body. “Parliament urges the Commission to finally come forward with a proposal to set up the Independent Ethics Body that Parliament proposed in September 2021,” it said in a Dec. 15 resolution.

The EU Commission is not abiding by its own rules, criticizes Green MEP Daniel Freund. For example, the Commission’s internal ethics control failed in the case of the fight against impunity, the organization at the center of the corruption scandal. The ethics committee noticed that the NGO was not listed in the EU lobby register. However, it had trusted former EU Commissioner Dimitris Avramopoulos, who advocated for the fight against impunity.

Commission proposal still has to wait

“The EU Commission’s ethics body had the chance to uncover the suspected corruption network early on and negligently let it slip away,” Freund said. “The case must wake up Commission President von der Leyen. Von der Leyen must present a draft for an EU ethics body as soon as possible to repair the weaknesses of the current system.”

But first, the Brussels authority wants to hear its former commissioner Avramopoulos. The Greek will be asked in writing for information on the extent to which he has complied with the conditions, a Commission spokesman said on Wednesday. Brussels is seeking damage control, still. The proposal for the ethics body will, therefore, probably have to wait further.

Social Affairs Commissioner Schmit: ‘EU must take a stand on exploitation’

Mr. Schmit, high inflation and the energy crisis are causing many people to slip into poverty. The rate is around 20 percent. Your goal was to reduce the risk of poverty. How do you deal with that?

At the moment, we are not only observing that the risk of poverty is increasing. People who normally would not have been associated with it are also affected. When citizens have to spend an ever larger share of their income on energy and food, many who actually have a decent salary get into trouble. Member states are trying to counteract this. The EU has made various proposals, including a gas price cap. In any case, we need to push ahead with the energy transition. And we’re thinking about how we can help European households selectively, for example, with the unused funds from cohesion policy.

Does the definition of “middle class” need to be reconsidered?

Middle class is a nebulous term. The median salary is primarily used as a benchmark; the poverty line is reached when income is less than 60 percent of it. In the EU, many people have incomes around this benchmark.

In many member countries, the housing shortage is increasing…

The problem is becoming more and more widespread in Europe. The Commission has little competence here, we cannot interfere in housing. It is clear that much more needs to be invested in affordable and sustainable housing. The state should intervene and subsidize the refurbishment of homes and buildings in a targeted way, without causing rents to skyrocket. The EU should encourage member states to do this.

The risk of poverty is also growing in Germany. Is enough importance attached to this issue?

The higher the risk of poverty, the more the gap between rich and poor widens. Poor people can no longer keep up with the standard of living that society considers normal. As a result, we get a problem of exclusion, the division in society becomes greater, social cohesion crumbles. For example, we launched the child guarantee to help combat child poverty, which also exists in rich countries. But even in countries like Germany, some children cannot participate in normal life because of poverty and are discriminated against. Poverty, even in rich societies, is an issue.

There is a lack of skilled workers to drive the energy transition forward. 2023 is the EU Year of Skills. How do we get the skills to Europe?

There are around eight to nine million people in the EU who don’t have a job, aren’t in training, and aren’t going to school. We have to reach out to these people and make them an offer. The labor market is increasingly demanding higher qualifications. We have to take account of this development by tapping into the hidden reserve. To do this, we need social policy measures. We need to make them an offer to get them onto the labor market.

But there is also a lack of highly qualified people. Do we need more immigration?

If we want to better utilize our labor market, migration is a key. The Commission, for example, has launched a talent pool initiative that is currently focusing on Ukrainians who have fled the country, many of whom are highly qualified. Unfortunately, there are parties in many member states that focus primarily on the issue of migration and use the defense of migration to win votes. Immigration has not always been a success in the past, neither for the migrants nor for the societies. Social and cultural integration has been neglected. We have not invested enough in migration. We are now paying for that with rejection and political exploitation of the issue.

The Commission wants to regulate work at the platforms. Why is the legislation so tough?

The member states have not yet been able to agree on a compromise. The compromise that the member states last discussed was so weak that the directive would have had no effect at all in various countries. This cannot be the solution. We want platform workers to have the right to social protection and fair pay. If companies want flexibility, that cannot mean working with fictitious self-employed workers without any rights. This model must not be allowed to set a precedent for other industries.

Companies like Uber and co. have created facts with their business models. Is regulation coming too late?

New models are developing with technology. Without the Internet, there would be no Facebook. Regulation, by its very nature, always starts with a certain delay. It can often be seen that the social component falls by the wayside. People who do necessary work for the platforms via physical labor, for example, as bicycle couriers, are poorly paid, and basic security is denied. The EU must take a stand and clarify that new business models at the lowest social level are unacceptable.

Algorithms are increasingly determining our workflow. Is there a need for action?

After the platform work, the next major task is to regulate the problems of algorithms in the world of work. This will involve questions such as what an algorithm is allowed to control and how far it is allowed to intervene in work processes. The machine must not become the master of the working world. The next Commission should take up this issue.

The business community is currently trying to put the brakes on unpleasant EU laws, citing the crises. This also applies to the supply chain law…

We should look at our supply chains from a different perspective. Germany, a country with the best developed chemical industry, currently lacks paracetamol for children. The reason: Some of the molecules come from India. You can talk about details, such as requirements for smaller companies and to what extent the law should reach into supply chains. But one should not lose sight of the question of protecting human rights and working conditions. We now have the necessary sensitivity to climate issues. It is overdue that we become just as attentive when it comes to forced labor and child labor.

Member states want to exempt the financial industry from the Supply Chain Act. Doesn’t that create a loophole?

Anyone who invests in companies sets financial criteria for doing so. Does the investment pay off economically? EU policy tells companies that investments in fossil fuel companies are uneconomical in the long run, that they will not pay off because of the framework conditions. The same criteria should also apply to human rights violations. In the future, an investment should only be worthwhile if fundamental human rights and labor rights are respected.

Corruption case in European Parliament: new push for ethics body

By

Eric Bonse

Driven by the corruption scandal in the European Parliament and the threat of damage to the EU’s image, von der Leyen on Dec. 12, for the first time after a long break, publicly declared her support for the project. The scandal had shown that the EU needed “the highest standards,” von der Leyen said. “In my opinion, it would be right for us to set up an ethics body,” she said.

EU Commission Vice-President Vera Jourova has been tasked with holding talks with the Parliament and the EU states. The aim is to introduce strict rules for all institutions, according to the Brussels authority. Von der Leyen had already sent a letter to the most important EU bodies in March to sound out a common position. A meeting at the “technical level” followed in September – without resounding success.

Strict rules for all

In any case, high-level political talks are a long time coming. The reason: The bodies addressed – including the European Central Bank, the European Court of Justice and the EU Court of Auditors – are not on the same page. Some institutions insist on their independence; they do not want to get involved in interdepartmental rules. Others, on the other hand, are pressing for speed and calling for a smaller start if necessary.

However, the EU Commission rejects this. According to the Brussels authority, strict rules are needed for all institutions and no exceptions are to be tolerated. In fact, it would be problematic if the planned new ethics body were to target only the “hard core” of the Brussels institutions – the Commission, the Council and the Parliament – and exclude, of all things, the European financial institutions.

Failing at fight against impunity

From a practical point of view, however, time is of the essence. If the ethics body does not start work until the scandal is over, it will not be able to contribute much to coming to terms with it. The European Parliament has therefore called on the EU Commission to stop delaying its proposal for an ethics body. “Parliament urges the Commission to finally come forward with a proposal to set up the Independent Ethics Body that Parliament proposed in September 2021,” it said in a Dec. 15 resolution.

The EU Commission is not abiding by its own rules, criticizes Green MEP Daniel Freund. For example, the Commission’s internal ethics control failed in the case of the fight against impunity, the organization at the center of the corruption scandal. The ethics committee noticed that the NGO was not listed in the EU lobby register. However, it had trusted former EU Commissioner Dimitris Avramopoulos, who advocated for the fight against impunity.

Commission proposal still has to wait

“The EU Commission’s ethics body had the chance to uncover the suspected corruption network early on and negligently let it slip away,” Freund said. “The case must wake up Commission President von der Leyen. Von der Leyen must present a draft for an EU ethics body as soon as possible to repair the weaknesses of the current system.”

But first, the Brussels authority wants to hear its former commissioner Avramopoulos. The Greek will be asked in writing for information on the extent to which he has complied with the conditions, a Commission spokesman said on Wednesday. Brussels is seeking damage control, still. The proposal for the ethics body will, therefore, probably have to wait further.

Social Affairs Commissioner Schmit: ‘EU must take a stand on exploitation’

Mr. Schmit, high inflation and the energy crisis are causing many people to slip into poverty. The rate is around 20 percent. Your goal was to reduce the risk of poverty. How do you deal with that?

At the moment, we are not only observing that the risk of poverty is increasing. People who normally would not have been associated with it are also affected. When citizens have to spend an ever larger share of their income on energy and food, many who actually have a decent salary get into trouble. Member states are trying to counteract this. The EU has made various proposals, including a gas price cap. In any case, we need to push ahead with the energy transition. And we’re thinking about how we can help European households selectively, for example, with the unused funds from cohesion policy.

Does the definition of “middle class” need to be reconsidered?

Middle class is a nebulous term. The median salary is primarily used as a benchmark; the poverty line is reached when income is less than 60 percent of it. In the EU, many people have incomes around this benchmark.

In many member countries, the housing shortage is increasing…

The problem is becoming more and more widespread in Europe. The Commission has little competence here, we cannot interfere in housing. It is clear that much more needs to be invested in affordable and sustainable housing. The state should intervene and subsidize the refurbishment of homes and buildings in a targeted way, without causing rents to skyrocket. The EU should encourage member states to do this.

The risk of poverty is also growing in Germany. Is enough importance attached to this issue?

The higher the risk of poverty, the more the gap between rich and poor widens. Poor people can no longer keep up with the standard of living that society considers normal. As a result, we get a problem of exclusion, the division in society becomes greater, social cohesion crumbles. For example, we launched the child guarantee to help combat child poverty, which also exists in rich countries. But even in countries like Germany, some children cannot participate in normal life because of poverty and are discriminated against. Poverty, even in rich societies, is an issue.

There is a lack of skilled workers to drive the energy transition forward. 2023 is the EU Year of Skills. How do we get the skills to Europe?

There are around eight to nine million people in the EU who don’t have a job, aren’t in training, and aren’t going to school. We have to reach out to these people and make them an offer. The labor market is increasingly demanding higher qualifications. We have to take account of this development by tapping into the hidden reserve. To do this, we need social policy measures. We need to make them an offer to get them onto the labor market.

But there is also a lack of highly qualified people. Do we need more immigration?

If we want to better utilize our labor market, migration is a key. The Commission, for example, has launched a talent pool initiative that is currently focusing on Ukrainians who have fled the country, many of whom are highly qualified. Unfortunately, there are parties in many member states that focus primarily on the issue of migration and use the defense of migration to win votes. Immigration has not always been a success in the past, neither for the migrants nor for the societies. Social and cultural integration has been neglected. We have not invested enough in migration. We are now paying for that with rejection and political exploitation of the issue.

The Commission wants to regulate work at the platforms. Why is the legislation so tough?

The member states have not yet been able to agree on a compromise. The compromise that the member states last discussed was so weak that the directive would have had no effect at all in various countries. This cannot be the solution. We want platform workers to have the right to social protection and fair pay. If companies want flexibility, that cannot mean working with fictitious self-employed workers without any rights. This model must not be allowed to set a precedent for other industries.

Companies like Uber and co. have created facts with their business models. Is regulation coming too late?

New models are developing with technology. Without the Internet, there would be no Facebook. Regulation, by its very nature, always starts with a certain delay. It can often be seen that the social component falls by the wayside. People who do necessary work for the platforms via physical labor, for example, as bicycle couriers, are poorly paid, and basic security is denied. The EU must take a stand and clarify that new business models at the lowest social level are unacceptable.

Algorithms are increasingly determining our workflow. Is there a need for action?

After the platform work, the next major task is to regulate the problems of algorithms in the world of work. This will involve questions such as what an algorithm is allowed to control and how far it is allowed to intervene in work processes. The machine must not become the master of the working world. The next Commission should take up this issue.

The business community is currently trying to put the brakes on unpleasant EU laws, citing the crises. This also applies to the supply chain law…

We should look at our supply chains from a different perspective. Germany, a country with the best developed chemical industry, currently lacks paracetamol for children. The reason: Some of the molecules come from India. You can talk about details, such as requirements for smaller companies and to what extent the law should reach into supply chains. But one should not lose sight of the question of protecting human rights and working conditions. We now have the necessary sensitivity to climate issues. It is overdue that we become just as attentive when it comes to forced labor and child labor.

Member states want to exempt the financial industry from the Supply Chain Act. Doesn’t that create a loophole?

Anyone who invests in companies sets financial criteria for doing so. Does the investment pay off economically? EU policy tells companies that investments in fossil fuel companies are uneconomical in the long run, that they will not pay off because of the framework conditions. The same criteria should also apply to human rights violations. In the future, an investment should only be worthwhile if fundamental human rights and labor rights are respected.