Today, German gas customers will find out what additional costs they will have to pay when the amount of the state gas levy is announced. The Ministry of Economic Affairs most recently estimated a range of 1.5 to 5 cents per kilowatt hour. The levy is intended to benefit gas suppliers who have to buy substitute gas from Russia at high prices. To minimize the burden, German Finance Minister Christian Lindner is trying to prevent a value-added tax on the gas levy and has written to EU Economic Commissioner Paolo Gentiloni, asking him to use his right of initiative to change EU law to achieve this. Read more in the News.
“Fortunately, it is for the most part neatly tucked away behind surrounding high-rises,” wrote the German newspaper “Süddeutsche Zeitung” about the Paul Henri Spaak building a few years ago. The oval-shaped main building of the EU Parliament in Brussels is not only visually unusual, it is also dilapidated. It has long been in need of renovation, and the architectural competition for its redesign has now been completed. In Strasbourg, spatial changes are also on the agenda, with the purchase of a building directly adjacent to the plenary hall. The Parliament’s real estate plans touch on the rivalry between Brussels and Strasbourg – and could affect the MEPs’ meeting schedule, as Markus Grabitz has learned.
Since the start of the Russian war of aggression on Ukraine, debates in Europe have increasingly revolved around sanctions against fossil energy imports from Russia and dangerous dependencies. But this conveniently ignores the fact that Europe continues to import large quantities of metals such as nickel, copper, and aluminum from Russia, as Michael Reckordt criticizes. In today’s Opinion, the raw materials policy officer at the NGO PowerShift demands that the EU put an end to these imports. Additionally, the European Commission and the German government should revise their raw materials strategies – the expansion of the circular economy must have top priority.
I wish you a great start to the week.
Every parliament needs the right premises for its work: EU Parliament President Roberta Metsola and her 14 deputies are currently trying to put together a package of important decisions on the Parliament’s real estate. It’s about properties in Strasbourg and Brussels, and the rail line from Brussels to Luxembourg is also affected.
The oval-shaped main building in Brussels, named after Paul-Henri Spaak, is still quite young at just over 25 years old and yet already dilapidated. It no longer meets safety requirements and has long been due for renovation. In the meantime, it has been decided who won the international architectural competition for the redesign. In the last week of the meeting in July, the international independent jury of the competition informed Metsola which architects’ designs had made it into the first five places and were thus shortlisted.
The jury’s decision is still secret. According to information available to Europe.Table, a design with significant participation from French architectural firms landed first place. According to reports in Brussels, the design envisages dividing the adjacent Altiero Spinelli building in half in order to open up the Spaak building, which also houses the plenary hall, towards the center of Brussels. It is further learned, however, that there are reservations among decision-makers about the first-place design: “There is no automatism that the first-place design will be realized.”
About another design that is among the five ranked, it says, “It looks good, but it’s not buildable.” Now the General Secretariat is still to present analyses of construction costs. When the financial dimension is clear, the parliamentary presidium could decide. Time is pressing. Construction should start in 2025 so that the building is fully usable again by 2029 at the latest.
The European Parliament has properties in Brussels (second office), Strasbourg (headquarters), and Luxembourg, where about half of the officials from the Parliament’s administration are based. Belgium, Luxembourg, and above all France keep a wary eye on their headquarters to make sure they do not lose their importance. For example, Belgium is allegedly deliberately not expanding the Brussels-Luxembourg rail link: The long travel times act as a deterrent. The aim is to avoid a slippery slope effect.
France, too, is playing hardball: President François Mitterrand, for example, is said to have made his approval of reunification conditional on Helmut Kohl’s support for the plan to build its own building on the banks of the Rhine in Strasbourg for the European Parliament. Before that, the deputies met in the Council of Europe. Thus, the representation of the EU sovereign got its own building in Strasbourg. And since 1992, it has been stipulated that the Parliament comes to Alsace for twelve regular weeks of sessions a year.
The second part of the building package concerns Strasbourg, the official seat of the Parliament. Specifically, it concerns the so-called Osmose building, which is currently being completed in the immediate vicinity of the parliament. France is offering to buy the property from the Parliament. In return, the parliament could sell the Madariaga building, which is one of the EU properties beyond the pedestrian overpass over the river. So far, it houses offices of the ombudsman as well as commissioners.
There is talk that an investor could convert the Madariaga building into a hotel. Hotel rooms are extremely rare and expensive in Strasbourg during session weeks. Conference use is also being discussed. From the taxpayer’s point of view, the deal would be interesting, they say, Madariaga is quite dilapidated and in poor energy condition. Given the increased energy costs, a move would quickly pay for itself.
France and Belgium could have increased interest in the real estate package. The Strasbourg site could even be upgraded in the course of the renovation of the Spaak building in Brussels. The calculation: The renovation of the Brussels property will go all the faster if the activities of the EU Parliament in Brussels are outsourced for the construction period.
The Parliament has so far met four times a year in the Brussels plenary hall. The format is called a mini plenary because the plenary sessions are concentrated into a few hours over two days. The plenary session could be outsourced to Strasbourg for the construction period. It would be conceivable to have the parliament meet again on Fridays in Alsace during session weeks. Fridays were removed from the session calendar in the noughties.
Who knows, according to the bait-and-switch offer to France: Perhaps the MEPs will like the longer session week in Strasbourg so much that no one will want to go back to Brussels for the mini plenary at the end of the construction period?
The real estate package is to be negotiated by the party families in the presidium of the EU Parliament in parallel with a second package. This involves top jobs in the administration: A successor must be found for Secretary General Klaus Welle, who is leaving after 13 years at the helm of the parliamentary administration. At the same time, there is to be a castling among the secretaries general, in which the party families of the left (GUE) and conservatives (ECR) will also have their say.
The debate on sanctions against fossil energy imports has revealed how great the dependence of the EU and Germany on Russia was, and in some cases still is. Wrong political decisions (Nord Stream 2), the wrong framework (slowing down the expansion of renewable energies) and economic interests are currently resulting in price increases and supply uncertainties.
The debate is almost exclusively about the energy raw materials gas, oil, and coal. The fact that Germany also imported metallic raw materials worth almost €2 billion from Russia in 2020 has so far been ignored. In the case of important industrial metals such as palladium, refined copper, iron ore, and aluminum, Germany obtains around 20 percent from Russia. For nickel, the dependency is even higher at 44 percent.
Something has to change about this because the mining of raw materials in Russia is heavily influenced by oligarchs. Important players are, for example, Roman Abramovich, who invested in the aluminum industry, Oleg Deripaska, who holds shares in various energy and raw materials companies, including the second largest aluminum company Rusal, and Vladimir Potanin, head of the Russian mining company Nornickel and dubbed the “nickel king” by the British newspaper “The Guardian”.
Because all three are said to be close to Putin, they are on the British sanctions list. While Great Britain was still cracking down on the metal oligarchs under Boris Johnson, there are no comparable sanctions on the European side. There are not even any debates about them.
The reason is clear: For a decade and a half, Germany has relied on cheap imports instead of recycling raw materials. The dependence on Russian imports is so high that sanctions are hardly possible. In the context of a turning point, the raw materials policy of the last 15 years has failed.
Both the European raw materials initiative in 2008 and the German government’s raw materials strategies in 2010 and 2020 focused one-sidedly on the security of supply of metals to industry. Dependencies on Russia and China have hardly decreased during this period. And the strategies overlooked an important adjusting screw: reducing dependence by reducing the consumption of primary raw materials.
There are two main reasons for this: For a long time, the industry profited from widely ramified supply chains and a lack of standards in mining. This led to environmental destruction and human rights violations but kept prices low. The second reason is also dramatic: We import large quantities of metals but pay little attention to keeping them in use as long as possible and processing them for recycling. For years, the recycling values for bulk metals such as copper, iron, or aluminum have been stagnating, while demand has been rising sharply. One driver for this is cars that are getting bigger and heavier.
The EU and the German government have also neglected to create stronger incentives and political framework conditions for recycling over the past 15 years. In the last revision of the German raw materials strategy, only two of 17 measures focused on circular economy. One of these was an industry dialogue, the other a mandate to initiate research projects. In 15 years, many tons of metallic raw materials have thus been wasted. They are no longer recoverable and are considered dissipated and lost. So we have to import new primary raw materials, from Russia and China, among others.
The Russian war of aggression has ruthlessly exposed this dependency. As PowerShift, we demand an import stop of metallic raw materials from Russia in view of the war and Putin’s power system. At the same time, the European Commission and the German government must revise their raw material strategies and significantly reduce imports of primary metals. This requires measurable reduction targets for individual sectors.
Human rights, ecological and climate policy necessities do not permit any further expansion of metallic mining. In the future, we will not be able to do without primary raw materials. But we must stop wasting them by keeping metals in use and then in the cycle for much longer . The expansion of the circular economy must be given top priority in raw materials policy. This is the only way to have a sustainable policy in a time of geopolitical crises and climate catastrophe.
Today, German gas customers will find out what additional costs they will have to pay when the amount of the state gas levy is announced. The Ministry of Economic Affairs most recently estimated a range of 1.5 to 5 cents per kilowatt hour. The levy is intended to benefit gas suppliers who have to buy substitute gas from Russia at high prices. To minimize the burden, German Finance Minister Christian Lindner is trying to prevent a value-added tax on the gas levy and has written to EU Economic Commissioner Paolo Gentiloni, asking him to use his right of initiative to change EU law to achieve this. Read more in the News.
“Fortunately, it is for the most part neatly tucked away behind surrounding high-rises,” wrote the German newspaper “Süddeutsche Zeitung” about the Paul Henri Spaak building a few years ago. The oval-shaped main building of the EU Parliament in Brussels is not only visually unusual, it is also dilapidated. It has long been in need of renovation, and the architectural competition for its redesign has now been completed. In Strasbourg, spatial changes are also on the agenda, with the purchase of a building directly adjacent to the plenary hall. The Parliament’s real estate plans touch on the rivalry between Brussels and Strasbourg – and could affect the MEPs’ meeting schedule, as Markus Grabitz has learned.
Since the start of the Russian war of aggression on Ukraine, debates in Europe have increasingly revolved around sanctions against fossil energy imports from Russia and dangerous dependencies. But this conveniently ignores the fact that Europe continues to import large quantities of metals such as nickel, copper, and aluminum from Russia, as Michael Reckordt criticizes. In today’s Opinion, the raw materials policy officer at the NGO PowerShift demands that the EU put an end to these imports. Additionally, the European Commission and the German government should revise their raw materials strategies – the expansion of the circular economy must have top priority.
I wish you a great start to the week.
Every parliament needs the right premises for its work: EU Parliament President Roberta Metsola and her 14 deputies are currently trying to put together a package of important decisions on the Parliament’s real estate. It’s about properties in Strasbourg and Brussels, and the rail line from Brussels to Luxembourg is also affected.
The oval-shaped main building in Brussels, named after Paul-Henri Spaak, is still quite young at just over 25 years old and yet already dilapidated. It no longer meets safety requirements and has long been due for renovation. In the meantime, it has been decided who won the international architectural competition for the redesign. In the last week of the meeting in July, the international independent jury of the competition informed Metsola which architects’ designs had made it into the first five places and were thus shortlisted.
The jury’s decision is still secret. According to information available to Europe.Table, a design with significant participation from French architectural firms landed first place. According to reports in Brussels, the design envisages dividing the adjacent Altiero Spinelli building in half in order to open up the Spaak building, which also houses the plenary hall, towards the center of Brussels. It is further learned, however, that there are reservations among decision-makers about the first-place design: “There is no automatism that the first-place design will be realized.”
About another design that is among the five ranked, it says, “It looks good, but it’s not buildable.” Now the General Secretariat is still to present analyses of construction costs. When the financial dimension is clear, the parliamentary presidium could decide. Time is pressing. Construction should start in 2025 so that the building is fully usable again by 2029 at the latest.
The European Parliament has properties in Brussels (second office), Strasbourg (headquarters), and Luxembourg, where about half of the officials from the Parliament’s administration are based. Belgium, Luxembourg, and above all France keep a wary eye on their headquarters to make sure they do not lose their importance. For example, Belgium is allegedly deliberately not expanding the Brussels-Luxembourg rail link: The long travel times act as a deterrent. The aim is to avoid a slippery slope effect.
France, too, is playing hardball: President François Mitterrand, for example, is said to have made his approval of reunification conditional on Helmut Kohl’s support for the plan to build its own building on the banks of the Rhine in Strasbourg for the European Parliament. Before that, the deputies met in the Council of Europe. Thus, the representation of the EU sovereign got its own building in Strasbourg. And since 1992, it has been stipulated that the Parliament comes to Alsace for twelve regular weeks of sessions a year.
The second part of the building package concerns Strasbourg, the official seat of the Parliament. Specifically, it concerns the so-called Osmose building, which is currently being completed in the immediate vicinity of the parliament. France is offering to buy the property from the Parliament. In return, the parliament could sell the Madariaga building, which is one of the EU properties beyond the pedestrian overpass over the river. So far, it houses offices of the ombudsman as well as commissioners.
There is talk that an investor could convert the Madariaga building into a hotel. Hotel rooms are extremely rare and expensive in Strasbourg during session weeks. Conference use is also being discussed. From the taxpayer’s point of view, the deal would be interesting, they say, Madariaga is quite dilapidated and in poor energy condition. Given the increased energy costs, a move would quickly pay for itself.
France and Belgium could have increased interest in the real estate package. The Strasbourg site could even be upgraded in the course of the renovation of the Spaak building in Brussels. The calculation: The renovation of the Brussels property will go all the faster if the activities of the EU Parliament in Brussels are outsourced for the construction period.
The Parliament has so far met four times a year in the Brussels plenary hall. The format is called a mini plenary because the plenary sessions are concentrated into a few hours over two days. The plenary session could be outsourced to Strasbourg for the construction period. It would be conceivable to have the parliament meet again on Fridays in Alsace during session weeks. Fridays were removed from the session calendar in the noughties.
Who knows, according to the bait-and-switch offer to France: Perhaps the MEPs will like the longer session week in Strasbourg so much that no one will want to go back to Brussels for the mini plenary at the end of the construction period?
The real estate package is to be negotiated by the party families in the presidium of the EU Parliament in parallel with a second package. This involves top jobs in the administration: A successor must be found for Secretary General Klaus Welle, who is leaving after 13 years at the helm of the parliamentary administration. At the same time, there is to be a castling among the secretaries general, in which the party families of the left (GUE) and conservatives (ECR) will also have their say.
The debate on sanctions against fossil energy imports has revealed how great the dependence of the EU and Germany on Russia was, and in some cases still is. Wrong political decisions (Nord Stream 2), the wrong framework (slowing down the expansion of renewable energies) and economic interests are currently resulting in price increases and supply uncertainties.
The debate is almost exclusively about the energy raw materials gas, oil, and coal. The fact that Germany also imported metallic raw materials worth almost €2 billion from Russia in 2020 has so far been ignored. In the case of important industrial metals such as palladium, refined copper, iron ore, and aluminum, Germany obtains around 20 percent from Russia. For nickel, the dependency is even higher at 44 percent.
Something has to change about this because the mining of raw materials in Russia is heavily influenced by oligarchs. Important players are, for example, Roman Abramovich, who invested in the aluminum industry, Oleg Deripaska, who holds shares in various energy and raw materials companies, including the second largest aluminum company Rusal, and Vladimir Potanin, head of the Russian mining company Nornickel and dubbed the “nickel king” by the British newspaper “The Guardian”.
Because all three are said to be close to Putin, they are on the British sanctions list. While Great Britain was still cracking down on the metal oligarchs under Boris Johnson, there are no comparable sanctions on the European side. There are not even any debates about them.
The reason is clear: For a decade and a half, Germany has relied on cheap imports instead of recycling raw materials. The dependence on Russian imports is so high that sanctions are hardly possible. In the context of a turning point, the raw materials policy of the last 15 years has failed.
Both the European raw materials initiative in 2008 and the German government’s raw materials strategies in 2010 and 2020 focused one-sidedly on the security of supply of metals to industry. Dependencies on Russia and China have hardly decreased during this period. And the strategies overlooked an important adjusting screw: reducing dependence by reducing the consumption of primary raw materials.
There are two main reasons for this: For a long time, the industry profited from widely ramified supply chains and a lack of standards in mining. This led to environmental destruction and human rights violations but kept prices low. The second reason is also dramatic: We import large quantities of metals but pay little attention to keeping them in use as long as possible and processing them for recycling. For years, the recycling values for bulk metals such as copper, iron, or aluminum have been stagnating, while demand has been rising sharply. One driver for this is cars that are getting bigger and heavier.
The EU and the German government have also neglected to create stronger incentives and political framework conditions for recycling over the past 15 years. In the last revision of the German raw materials strategy, only two of 17 measures focused on circular economy. One of these was an industry dialogue, the other a mandate to initiate research projects. In 15 years, many tons of metallic raw materials have thus been wasted. They are no longer recoverable and are considered dissipated and lost. So we have to import new primary raw materials, from Russia and China, among others.
The Russian war of aggression has ruthlessly exposed this dependency. As PowerShift, we demand an import stop of metallic raw materials from Russia in view of the war and Putin’s power system. At the same time, the European Commission and the German government must revise their raw material strategies and significantly reduce imports of primary metals. This requires measurable reduction targets for individual sectors.
Human rights, ecological and climate policy necessities do not permit any further expansion of metallic mining. In the future, we will not be able to do without primary raw materials. But we must stop wasting them by keeping metals in use and then in the cycle for much longer . The expansion of the circular economy must be given top priority in raw materials policy. This is the only way to have a sustainable policy in a time of geopolitical crises and climate catastrophe.
