The corruption scandal is having a massive impact on the European Parliament, says Martin Schirdewan, head of the Left Party. In an interview with Markus Grabitz, he talks about concrete demands for MEPs, the Commission’s social policy and Putin’s war of aggression against Ukraine.
The European Union is promoting the establishment of so-called Common European Data Spaces. This includes a new project for which consortia can apply. Corinna Visser knows more about the Manufacturing Data Space.
The European Union has a problem: there is more and more hazardous waste. That’s according to a paper from the European Court of Auditors. Data on how this is specifically dealt with in the EU is lacking. Moreover, implementing legal requirements is fraught with major hurdles, writes Charlotte Wirth.
If you like Europe.Table, please forward us. If you have been forwarded this mail: Here you can test our briefing for free.
Mr. Schirdewan, the Left Party has not yet been implicated in the corruption scandal. Have you asked internally whether any group members have had any contact with the NGOs involved?
The Left Group has had no contact with the scandal so far. The Socialist Group in particular is seriously affected, but the scandal also has a massive impact on the European Parliament as a whole. Since the scandal became public at the beginning of December, our demands for consistent implementation of transparency rules, whistleblower protection and the establishment of an independent ethics body have taken on even greater significance.
What consequences should the case have in the EP?
The existing rules in the European Parliament are good and in many respects more far-reaching than in other parliaments. However, they must also be implemented. The President of the Parliament has presented a catalog of further measures. We welcome many of these points. They must now be implemented. We have once again sharpened our list of demands.
Was influence exerted on the legislation?
The group has analyzed where there may have been anomalies in the legislative process. For example, at the interfaces where defendants were involved. My colleague Manon Aubry worked intensively on the Qatar resolution and was lobbied massively by the Qatari side. The Qatari ambassador also contacted me twice and asked for a meeting. I did not comply with this request.
What specific demands do you have?
The legislative footprint must be improved. Each and every Member of Parliament and their staff must consistently note meetings with lobbyists, whether from companies, countries or NGOs. The legislative footprint of Members of Parliament must be traceable. When members of parliament suddenly change their position on a massive scale, as we saw in the scandal, for example, it reeks of corruption.
What else is required?
In addition, we need an independent ethics committee to ensure that the rules are implemented. Those who break the rules must be sanctioned. The role of unofficial friendship groups in Parliament needs to be clarified. I am very skeptical of them because they were also a gateway for the secret services in the scandal.
Change of subject: In March, you and your colleague Özlem Demirel voted against the resolution in the European Parliament condemning Russia’s war of aggression on Ukraine and calling for Ukraine to be admitted to the EU. Would you do that again today?
In this resolution, I voted in favor of all the passages concerning Russia’s war of aggression on Ukraine, which is contrary to international law. I consider the war to be catastrophic and criminal, under which the civilian population in Ukraine, in particular, is suffering. I have always said so.
But?
The resolution also contains other elements such as the delivery of offensive weapons and tightened economic sanctions. I disagree with the resolution on the approaches to overcoming this despicable war. European policy is one-sidedly focused on the military solution. I think that is wrong. All diplomatic options should be used. It is fatal that the EU is not trying to persuade Moscow to engage in talks and peace negotiations in order to bring this wretched war to a swift end. In this respect, I would stick to my commitment from March.
The left is not counted among the pro-European forces in the European Parliament. In which policy areas does your group support the Commission’s course?
Categories such as pro-European or anti-European should not be based on the Commission’s policies. We are a pro-European group when it comes to fighting climate change, building peace or fighting poverty. When it comes to ending the exploitation of platform workers and enforcing a European minimum wage, we quickly agree. However, in social policy, the Commission only tinkers with the symptoms of the gulf between societies. It focuses too much on the internal market and does too little in the way of social policy.
What are your specific criticisms?
The debt brake is a mistake, as is the electricity market design. People are suffering from high energy prices. And the Commission President is shying away from reforming the energy market so that there is enough energy at reasonable prices for all Europeans beyond the market turmoil. But the market will not be able to regulate health, energy, food or the housing problem in cities.
What do you propose?
It is a fundamental system error that these areas of services of general interest have been handed over to the market, also through EU policy. This error must be corrected, and the above-mentioned areas must be withdrawn from the market.
Putin’s war, inflation and high energy costs are a heavy burden for the socially weak. Why doesn’t the Left in Germany succeed in benefiting from this politically?
In the first place, the Left helped the German government react with its “Hot Autumn” campaign: I’ll just mention the caps on electricity and gas prices, the reversal of the antisocial gas levy. We have driven the coalition and thus ensured that pensioners and small tradespeople will hopefully not be left in the dark and cold this winter. The new party leadership is working to overcome the self-inflicted mistakes of the past. We are also working on a partial programmatic renewal and clearer communication with the outside world.
Does the dual role as party leader in Germany and parliamentary group leader in Europe allow you to give the party the leadership it needs?
Yes, of course. Together with Janine Wissler, I received a strong vote from the party conference. I also see my dual role as an advantage: It enriches the Left’s politics with an European perspective. In this way, we are preparing together for the 2024 European elections. We also get broad support from within the party. Take the Leipzig Declaration and our meeting just before Christmas, where the leaders of the party and the parliamentary groups at the federal and state levels threw their weight behind our policies.
Sahra Wagenknecht could pursue a split. Do you expect that to happen in the European elections?
No, I don’t think so. At most, individuals could leave the party. Moreover, any new formation would have no chance of success.
With the European Data Strategy, the Commission set out in 2020 to establish a single market for data in the EU. Initiatives such as Data Governance and the Data Act are creating legal foundations. In parallel, however, the EU is also promoting the establishment of Common European Data Spaces in order to actually get the exchange of data off the ground. One of these data spaces is the Manufacturing Data Space. Consortia can still apply for funding for two specific projects until Jan. 24.
There is no universal definition for Data Spaces. They can be designed very differently – depending on how large the number of participants is, what data is exchanged and how. One possible explanation is provided by the International Data Spaces Association (funded by the Horizon 2020 project OPEN DEI): “A Data Space is defined as a decentralized infrastructure for the trusted sharing and exchange of data in data ecosystems based on commonly agreed principles.”
The word “Data Space” is somewhat misleading, because it is more about breaking down limitations, overcoming data silos and making data available to as many users as possible. The Commission has announced Data Spaces in twelve strategic areas, including health, energy, mobility and production.
It goes without saying that companies exchange data bilaterally with business partners, for example between manufacturers and suppliers. Industry-wide data spaces, on the other hand, are new. “The particular added value of data spaces for the manufacturing industry lies in the fact that they significantly facilitate the exchange of data across company boundaries. In this way, they create the conditions for new business models and more resilient and sustainable production,” explains Oliver Klein, Digitalization and Innovation Officer at BDI.
Bitkom expects that Manufacturing Data Spaces will bring more long-term competitiveness, efficiency and sustainability gains, and innovation to Europe. “Value chains today are digital and international. It is not enough for data availability to barely reach the company gate,” says David Schönwerth, Data Economy Policy Officer at Bitkom.
Klein sees politics in a supporting role rather than a shaping one. Technical implementation, on the other hand, is the core competence of the industry. This view is shared by the Commission. The projects that have now been put out to tender therefore involve start-up financing for projects from the industry. Consortia are being sought for two use cases:
“We fund the projects from DG Connect via the Digital Europe funding program – and not from the research budget,” explains technical officer Matthias Kuom, Seconded National Expert at DG Connect (CNECT.A.4). “Because this is not about research, but about implementation. The Data Spaces are set up to stay.” This is co-funding. The EU supplies €8 million per project for two years. The consortia must each invest the same amount in turn.
Three requirements must be met by interested consortia:
So it’s not about building something completely new. “We want to let existing ideas grow,” Kuom explains. “And in the process, also make sure that national projects become European.” The goal, he says, is interoperability with other European Data Spaces. “That’s how we create a single market for data.” Klein of the BDI is convinced that “Data Spaces must be thought of as European as well as international in the medium and long term. The more the projects scale, the greater the potential added value.”
German projects, such as the cross-sector initiative Manufacturing-X (Industrie 4.0 Data Space) or Catena-X (data ecosystem for the automotive industry), could also be considered as a nucleus for funding. Or the Dutch project Smart Connected Supplier Network SCSN (which emerged from the Factory of the Future innovation program).
Currently, it is too early to estimate how many and which consortia will apply for the funding, Kuom says. He expects that most of the applications will not be received until shortly before the deadline on Jan. 24. DG Connect will then make the selection by the end of March or early April. The plan, he says, is for projects to begin implementation by the end of 2023, nine months after submissions close. The EU also offers support through the Data Space Support Center.
Both BDI and Bitkom would like to see the broad impact of data rooms strengthened, especially for small and medium-sized enterprises, so that the potential would be fully exploited. “We need openly developed SME-ready approaches that map the lowest common denominator between European companies,” says Schönwerth from Bitkom and demands: “We must not get lost in over-engineering or regulatory mania when it comes to data models, protocols and other technology – what is good is what proves itself during actual application.”
Klein from BDI stresses that parallel processes should not be allowed to develop. “Companies have limited resources,” he explains. “Avoiding overlaps between projects at national and at EU level is therefore of central importance.” Compatible and complementary should be the order of the day, demands the Bitkom association.
Unfortunately, however, it is foreseeable that the Data Governance Act and Data Act will make the work of some Data Space initiatives more difficult, says Schönwerth. In order to prevent this from happening, “we need to pay more attention to the Data Act – especially in Berlin.”
In the tender, at any rate, the Commission is relying “on benefit-driven contractual agreements between the partners,” as Kuom emphasizes. In the negotiations on the Data Act, on the other hand, instead of contractual freedom, more and more obligations are being discussed. “Stakeholders should take a close look at how the industry organizes open and successful Data Spaces – and draw their conclusions.”
More and more toxic waste is being produced in the EU. This is the result of a report presented by the European Court of Auditors. According to the report, there has been a 23 percent increase, from around 81 million tons in 2004 to 102 million tons in 2018, with Germany just behind the EU average with an increase of 21 percent. In the Federal Republic, 292 kilos per capita of toxic waste are produced annually. By comparison, in Denmark the figure was 361 kilos per capita (up 512 percent).
With a review of European legislation on hazardous waste in the EU, the ACA wants to make its contribution to the current debates on the subject, a spokesman said. This year, the trilogue negotiations on waste shipment and ecodesign regulation, as well as a revision of the Waste Framework Directive, are pending at the EU level.
But the data on how the EU handles toxic waste is meager. There is a 21 percent gap between the amount of hazardous waste generated in the European Union and that which is treated or disposed of in the EU.
There is no knowledge of what happened to these roughly 20 million tons of hazardous waste in 2018. The ACA cites several reasons for this data gap:
Although EU legislation stipulates that toxic waste should preferably be further processed or recycled, this is hardly the case in practice. More than half of the hazardous waste ends up in landfills or is incinerated (partly without energy recovery).
Meanwhile, it is technically almost impossible to recycle toxic waste anyway, the ACA warns. Either the necessary technology is lacking, there is no sales market for the recycled materials, or the waste companies lack important information on the composition of the products to be recycled.
Meanwhile, the European Parliament is voting today on its mandate for the Waste Shipment Regulation, which also deals with the shipment of hazardous waste. The EU Commission had already presented its legislative proposal in November 2021. It aims to limit the shipment of waste within the EU and to third countries and to guarantee its environmentally compliant processing.
In 2020, the EU shipped over 37 tons of waste to non-EU countries. Among the most popular buyers are Turkey and India. To stop this increase, the Commission proposes the following:
Parliament wants to strengthen these requirements. “Our waste is everywhere. On beaches and dumps all over the world. There is no excuse for it and we must not simply blame our problem on others,” stressed rapporteur Pernille Weiss (EPP) during yesterday’s debate in the EU Parliament.
Their report proposes a blanket ban on the export of plastic waste to non-OECD countries. Green Party shadow rapporteur Sara Matthieu welcomed the move: “We are finally living up to our responsibility and not just dumping our waste in countries that can’t handle it,” she said yesterday. The ban is a stimulus to use less plastic and recycle more, she said.
From now on, waste must be valued as a resource in the spirit of the circular economy, said Cyrus Engerer (S&D). The report creates innovative business opportunities for waste recycling.
The Council does not yet have a negotiating mandate on waste shipments. The Swedish Presidency plans to have a general approach by the end of June.
Anna Cavazzini is passionate about climbing. Since she was elected to the European Parliament in 2019, she says her skill has deteriorated. She only makes it to the climbing gym two or three times a month. In the Parliament, however, the 40-year-old has climbed a long way: In 2020, she took over the chairmanship of the Internal Market Committee (IMCO), which is responsible for harmonized product standards, customs and consumer protection.
Cavazzini was born in Hesse in 1982, studied European Studies in Chemnitz and International Relations in Berlin. From 2009 to 2014, she already worked in the EU Parliament, then as a research assistant to Ska Keller. She then worked at the German Foreign Office, for the UN General Assembly, for the campaign platform Campact and for Bread for the World, always focusing on fair trade, human rights and sustainability.
On the 30th anniversary of the EU’s single market, Anna Cavazzini is now taking stock: “Basically, the single market has been a huge success and an engine of integration,” she says. It has led to the removal of many barriers and the creation of more and more uniform product standards, she says. However, the strong focus on removing these hurdles has made the discourse on the single market very one-sided, she explains. “We need to go a step further there,” Cavazzini claims. Harmonization should not come at the expense of local communities, she says, but must ensure human rights and environmental standards.
Moreover, the available tools of the single market would have to be used even more effectively, especially in a time of crises. Two examples: On the one hand, the Green Deal together with its product standards should help to achieve climate targets. On the other, large online groups are to be regulated by the major digital projects DSA and DMA. “Single market policy must also have an even stronger goal of countering these crises,” says Cavazzini.
The MEP is also concerned about the impact of the internal market beyond the EU. Firstly, imported products must also comply with European standards. And secondly, production standards are now also to be regulated more closely via the supply chains. Together with her group, Cavazzini has pushed this issue hard in recent years. As shadow rapporteur, she is currently negotiating the EU Supply Chain Act in the Trade Committee, which is to be voted on at the end of January.
In addition, the Parliament is working on laws for deforestation-free supply chains and a ban on the sale of products from forced labor. These plans are not just morally right, she says. “All of these are very important laws to make sure we have a fair playing field,” Cavazzini elaborates. “Many of the companies are doing business correctly – and then they’re competing with products made with slave labor. In the end, it also helps European companies if we regulate supply chains more.”
As vice president of the Parliament’s Brazil delegation, Cavazzini traveled to South America twice last year. She visited indigenous communities in the Amazon, who themselves described the ongoing destruction of their habitat as genocide. “I’m glad as heck that Bolsonaro is gone,” Cavazzini says. “The inauguration of Lula was the best start to the year I could have imagined.” Another four years of a Bolsonaro government would have raised fears of complete disaster.
Whether everything will be alright now is another question. After all, Bolsonarismo is still firmly entrenched in the country, society is strongly divided and Lula does not have a majority in Congress. She said the riots in Brasília at the beginning of the year didn’t surprise her: “We had already expected this in November, because Bolsonaro had been preparing it for months.”
In principle, Cavazzini is pinning her hopes on Lula’s commitment to the environment and forest protection. After all, she says, he is indebted to the indigenous communities that massively supported his election campaign. “There’s some movement there, but I think it’s going to take a lot of international pressure for something to really happen in the area of forest protection.” She does not believe the Mercosur agreement is a high priority for the Brazilian government. However, the resumption of negotiations, which were frozen under Bolsonaro, could only happen under certain conditions anyway: All laws and institutions that Bolsonaro eliminated or undermined would have to be rebuilt by the new government. The EU Commission would also have to propose tangible changes to the text of the agreement so that forest protection and sustainability standards are anchored in the agreement.
In her constituency in Saxony, Cavazzini sometimes combines climbing with political events, inviting people to a Europe talk while bouldering in Leipzig, for example, or drawing attention to the local forest dieback in Saxon Switzerland. When she talks to people, Brussels is still very far away, she says. “But the very concrete things are noticed and are very well received.” For example, the uniform charging cable or the right to repair, which she advocates.
In Saxony, the green-led Ministry of Europe has also created its own Interrail program so that young people can discover Europe. A cosmopolitan, pro-European attitude still needs to be strengthened here, and this requires a lot of good communication. But the Covid pandemic and the war in Ukraine have made many realize, she said, that “with Europe, we’re stronger and can respond better to crises together.” Leonie Düngefeld
The corruption scandal is having a massive impact on the European Parliament, says Martin Schirdewan, head of the Left Party. In an interview with Markus Grabitz, he talks about concrete demands for MEPs, the Commission’s social policy and Putin’s war of aggression against Ukraine.
The European Union is promoting the establishment of so-called Common European Data Spaces. This includes a new project for which consortia can apply. Corinna Visser knows more about the Manufacturing Data Space.
The European Union has a problem: there is more and more hazardous waste. That’s according to a paper from the European Court of Auditors. Data on how this is specifically dealt with in the EU is lacking. Moreover, implementing legal requirements is fraught with major hurdles, writes Charlotte Wirth.
If you like Europe.Table, please forward us. If you have been forwarded this mail: Here you can test our briefing for free.
Mr. Schirdewan, the Left Party has not yet been implicated in the corruption scandal. Have you asked internally whether any group members have had any contact with the NGOs involved?
The Left Group has had no contact with the scandal so far. The Socialist Group in particular is seriously affected, but the scandal also has a massive impact on the European Parliament as a whole. Since the scandal became public at the beginning of December, our demands for consistent implementation of transparency rules, whistleblower protection and the establishment of an independent ethics body have taken on even greater significance.
What consequences should the case have in the EP?
The existing rules in the European Parliament are good and in many respects more far-reaching than in other parliaments. However, they must also be implemented. The President of the Parliament has presented a catalog of further measures. We welcome many of these points. They must now be implemented. We have once again sharpened our list of demands.
Was influence exerted on the legislation?
The group has analyzed where there may have been anomalies in the legislative process. For example, at the interfaces where defendants were involved. My colleague Manon Aubry worked intensively on the Qatar resolution and was lobbied massively by the Qatari side. The Qatari ambassador also contacted me twice and asked for a meeting. I did not comply with this request.
What specific demands do you have?
The legislative footprint must be improved. Each and every Member of Parliament and their staff must consistently note meetings with lobbyists, whether from companies, countries or NGOs. The legislative footprint of Members of Parliament must be traceable. When members of parliament suddenly change their position on a massive scale, as we saw in the scandal, for example, it reeks of corruption.
What else is required?
In addition, we need an independent ethics committee to ensure that the rules are implemented. Those who break the rules must be sanctioned. The role of unofficial friendship groups in Parliament needs to be clarified. I am very skeptical of them because they were also a gateway for the secret services in the scandal.
Change of subject: In March, you and your colleague Özlem Demirel voted against the resolution in the European Parliament condemning Russia’s war of aggression on Ukraine and calling for Ukraine to be admitted to the EU. Would you do that again today?
In this resolution, I voted in favor of all the passages concerning Russia’s war of aggression on Ukraine, which is contrary to international law. I consider the war to be catastrophic and criminal, under which the civilian population in Ukraine, in particular, is suffering. I have always said so.
But?
The resolution also contains other elements such as the delivery of offensive weapons and tightened economic sanctions. I disagree with the resolution on the approaches to overcoming this despicable war. European policy is one-sidedly focused on the military solution. I think that is wrong. All diplomatic options should be used. It is fatal that the EU is not trying to persuade Moscow to engage in talks and peace negotiations in order to bring this wretched war to a swift end. In this respect, I would stick to my commitment from March.
The left is not counted among the pro-European forces in the European Parliament. In which policy areas does your group support the Commission’s course?
Categories such as pro-European or anti-European should not be based on the Commission’s policies. We are a pro-European group when it comes to fighting climate change, building peace or fighting poverty. When it comes to ending the exploitation of platform workers and enforcing a European minimum wage, we quickly agree. However, in social policy, the Commission only tinkers with the symptoms of the gulf between societies. It focuses too much on the internal market and does too little in the way of social policy.
What are your specific criticisms?
The debt brake is a mistake, as is the electricity market design. People are suffering from high energy prices. And the Commission President is shying away from reforming the energy market so that there is enough energy at reasonable prices for all Europeans beyond the market turmoil. But the market will not be able to regulate health, energy, food or the housing problem in cities.
What do you propose?
It is a fundamental system error that these areas of services of general interest have been handed over to the market, also through EU policy. This error must be corrected, and the above-mentioned areas must be withdrawn from the market.
Putin’s war, inflation and high energy costs are a heavy burden for the socially weak. Why doesn’t the Left in Germany succeed in benefiting from this politically?
In the first place, the Left helped the German government react with its “Hot Autumn” campaign: I’ll just mention the caps on electricity and gas prices, the reversal of the antisocial gas levy. We have driven the coalition and thus ensured that pensioners and small tradespeople will hopefully not be left in the dark and cold this winter. The new party leadership is working to overcome the self-inflicted mistakes of the past. We are also working on a partial programmatic renewal and clearer communication with the outside world.
Does the dual role as party leader in Germany and parliamentary group leader in Europe allow you to give the party the leadership it needs?
Yes, of course. Together with Janine Wissler, I received a strong vote from the party conference. I also see my dual role as an advantage: It enriches the Left’s politics with an European perspective. In this way, we are preparing together for the 2024 European elections. We also get broad support from within the party. Take the Leipzig Declaration and our meeting just before Christmas, where the leaders of the party and the parliamentary groups at the federal and state levels threw their weight behind our policies.
Sahra Wagenknecht could pursue a split. Do you expect that to happen in the European elections?
No, I don’t think so. At most, individuals could leave the party. Moreover, any new formation would have no chance of success.
With the European Data Strategy, the Commission set out in 2020 to establish a single market for data in the EU. Initiatives such as Data Governance and the Data Act are creating legal foundations. In parallel, however, the EU is also promoting the establishment of Common European Data Spaces in order to actually get the exchange of data off the ground. One of these data spaces is the Manufacturing Data Space. Consortia can still apply for funding for two specific projects until Jan. 24.
There is no universal definition for Data Spaces. They can be designed very differently – depending on how large the number of participants is, what data is exchanged and how. One possible explanation is provided by the International Data Spaces Association (funded by the Horizon 2020 project OPEN DEI): “A Data Space is defined as a decentralized infrastructure for the trusted sharing and exchange of data in data ecosystems based on commonly agreed principles.”
The word “Data Space” is somewhat misleading, because it is more about breaking down limitations, overcoming data silos and making data available to as many users as possible. The Commission has announced Data Spaces in twelve strategic areas, including health, energy, mobility and production.
It goes without saying that companies exchange data bilaterally with business partners, for example between manufacturers and suppliers. Industry-wide data spaces, on the other hand, are new. “The particular added value of data spaces for the manufacturing industry lies in the fact that they significantly facilitate the exchange of data across company boundaries. In this way, they create the conditions for new business models and more resilient and sustainable production,” explains Oliver Klein, Digitalization and Innovation Officer at BDI.
Bitkom expects that Manufacturing Data Spaces will bring more long-term competitiveness, efficiency and sustainability gains, and innovation to Europe. “Value chains today are digital and international. It is not enough for data availability to barely reach the company gate,” says David Schönwerth, Data Economy Policy Officer at Bitkom.
Klein sees politics in a supporting role rather than a shaping one. Technical implementation, on the other hand, is the core competence of the industry. This view is shared by the Commission. The projects that have now been put out to tender therefore involve start-up financing for projects from the industry. Consortia are being sought for two use cases:
“We fund the projects from DG Connect via the Digital Europe funding program – and not from the research budget,” explains technical officer Matthias Kuom, Seconded National Expert at DG Connect (CNECT.A.4). “Because this is not about research, but about implementation. The Data Spaces are set up to stay.” This is co-funding. The EU supplies €8 million per project for two years. The consortia must each invest the same amount in turn.
Three requirements must be met by interested consortia:
So it’s not about building something completely new. “We want to let existing ideas grow,” Kuom explains. “And in the process, also make sure that national projects become European.” The goal, he says, is interoperability with other European Data Spaces. “That’s how we create a single market for data.” Klein of the BDI is convinced that “Data Spaces must be thought of as European as well as international in the medium and long term. The more the projects scale, the greater the potential added value.”
German projects, such as the cross-sector initiative Manufacturing-X (Industrie 4.0 Data Space) or Catena-X (data ecosystem for the automotive industry), could also be considered as a nucleus for funding. Or the Dutch project Smart Connected Supplier Network SCSN (which emerged from the Factory of the Future innovation program).
Currently, it is too early to estimate how many and which consortia will apply for the funding, Kuom says. He expects that most of the applications will not be received until shortly before the deadline on Jan. 24. DG Connect will then make the selection by the end of March or early April. The plan, he says, is for projects to begin implementation by the end of 2023, nine months after submissions close. The EU also offers support through the Data Space Support Center.
Both BDI and Bitkom would like to see the broad impact of data rooms strengthened, especially for small and medium-sized enterprises, so that the potential would be fully exploited. “We need openly developed SME-ready approaches that map the lowest common denominator between European companies,” says Schönwerth from Bitkom and demands: “We must not get lost in over-engineering or regulatory mania when it comes to data models, protocols and other technology – what is good is what proves itself during actual application.”
Klein from BDI stresses that parallel processes should not be allowed to develop. “Companies have limited resources,” he explains. “Avoiding overlaps between projects at national and at EU level is therefore of central importance.” Compatible and complementary should be the order of the day, demands the Bitkom association.
Unfortunately, however, it is foreseeable that the Data Governance Act and Data Act will make the work of some Data Space initiatives more difficult, says Schönwerth. In order to prevent this from happening, “we need to pay more attention to the Data Act – especially in Berlin.”
In the tender, at any rate, the Commission is relying “on benefit-driven contractual agreements between the partners,” as Kuom emphasizes. In the negotiations on the Data Act, on the other hand, instead of contractual freedom, more and more obligations are being discussed. “Stakeholders should take a close look at how the industry organizes open and successful Data Spaces – and draw their conclusions.”
More and more toxic waste is being produced in the EU. This is the result of a report presented by the European Court of Auditors. According to the report, there has been a 23 percent increase, from around 81 million tons in 2004 to 102 million tons in 2018, with Germany just behind the EU average with an increase of 21 percent. In the Federal Republic, 292 kilos per capita of toxic waste are produced annually. By comparison, in Denmark the figure was 361 kilos per capita (up 512 percent).
With a review of European legislation on hazardous waste in the EU, the ACA wants to make its contribution to the current debates on the subject, a spokesman said. This year, the trilogue negotiations on waste shipment and ecodesign regulation, as well as a revision of the Waste Framework Directive, are pending at the EU level.
But the data on how the EU handles toxic waste is meager. There is a 21 percent gap between the amount of hazardous waste generated in the European Union and that which is treated or disposed of in the EU.
There is no knowledge of what happened to these roughly 20 million tons of hazardous waste in 2018. The ACA cites several reasons for this data gap:
Although EU legislation stipulates that toxic waste should preferably be further processed or recycled, this is hardly the case in practice. More than half of the hazardous waste ends up in landfills or is incinerated (partly without energy recovery).
Meanwhile, it is technically almost impossible to recycle toxic waste anyway, the ACA warns. Either the necessary technology is lacking, there is no sales market for the recycled materials, or the waste companies lack important information on the composition of the products to be recycled.
Meanwhile, the European Parliament is voting today on its mandate for the Waste Shipment Regulation, which also deals with the shipment of hazardous waste. The EU Commission had already presented its legislative proposal in November 2021. It aims to limit the shipment of waste within the EU and to third countries and to guarantee its environmentally compliant processing.
In 2020, the EU shipped over 37 tons of waste to non-EU countries. Among the most popular buyers are Turkey and India. To stop this increase, the Commission proposes the following:
Parliament wants to strengthen these requirements. “Our waste is everywhere. On beaches and dumps all over the world. There is no excuse for it and we must not simply blame our problem on others,” stressed rapporteur Pernille Weiss (EPP) during yesterday’s debate in the EU Parliament.
Their report proposes a blanket ban on the export of plastic waste to non-OECD countries. Green Party shadow rapporteur Sara Matthieu welcomed the move: “We are finally living up to our responsibility and not just dumping our waste in countries that can’t handle it,” she said yesterday. The ban is a stimulus to use less plastic and recycle more, she said.
From now on, waste must be valued as a resource in the spirit of the circular economy, said Cyrus Engerer (S&D). The report creates innovative business opportunities for waste recycling.
The Council does not yet have a negotiating mandate on waste shipments. The Swedish Presidency plans to have a general approach by the end of June.
Anna Cavazzini is passionate about climbing. Since she was elected to the European Parliament in 2019, she says her skill has deteriorated. She only makes it to the climbing gym two or three times a month. In the Parliament, however, the 40-year-old has climbed a long way: In 2020, she took over the chairmanship of the Internal Market Committee (IMCO), which is responsible for harmonized product standards, customs and consumer protection.
Cavazzini was born in Hesse in 1982, studied European Studies in Chemnitz and International Relations in Berlin. From 2009 to 2014, she already worked in the EU Parliament, then as a research assistant to Ska Keller. She then worked at the German Foreign Office, for the UN General Assembly, for the campaign platform Campact and for Bread for the World, always focusing on fair trade, human rights and sustainability.
On the 30th anniversary of the EU’s single market, Anna Cavazzini is now taking stock: “Basically, the single market has been a huge success and an engine of integration,” she says. It has led to the removal of many barriers and the creation of more and more uniform product standards, she says. However, the strong focus on removing these hurdles has made the discourse on the single market very one-sided, she explains. “We need to go a step further there,” Cavazzini claims. Harmonization should not come at the expense of local communities, she says, but must ensure human rights and environmental standards.
Moreover, the available tools of the single market would have to be used even more effectively, especially in a time of crises. Two examples: On the one hand, the Green Deal together with its product standards should help to achieve climate targets. On the other, large online groups are to be regulated by the major digital projects DSA and DMA. “Single market policy must also have an even stronger goal of countering these crises,” says Cavazzini.
The MEP is also concerned about the impact of the internal market beyond the EU. Firstly, imported products must also comply with European standards. And secondly, production standards are now also to be regulated more closely via the supply chains. Together with her group, Cavazzini has pushed this issue hard in recent years. As shadow rapporteur, she is currently negotiating the EU Supply Chain Act in the Trade Committee, which is to be voted on at the end of January.
In addition, the Parliament is working on laws for deforestation-free supply chains and a ban on the sale of products from forced labor. These plans are not just morally right, she says. “All of these are very important laws to make sure we have a fair playing field,” Cavazzini elaborates. “Many of the companies are doing business correctly – and then they’re competing with products made with slave labor. In the end, it also helps European companies if we regulate supply chains more.”
As vice president of the Parliament’s Brazil delegation, Cavazzini traveled to South America twice last year. She visited indigenous communities in the Amazon, who themselves described the ongoing destruction of their habitat as genocide. “I’m glad as heck that Bolsonaro is gone,” Cavazzini says. “The inauguration of Lula was the best start to the year I could have imagined.” Another four years of a Bolsonaro government would have raised fears of complete disaster.
Whether everything will be alright now is another question. After all, Bolsonarismo is still firmly entrenched in the country, society is strongly divided and Lula does not have a majority in Congress. She said the riots in Brasília at the beginning of the year didn’t surprise her: “We had already expected this in November, because Bolsonaro had been preparing it for months.”
In principle, Cavazzini is pinning her hopes on Lula’s commitment to the environment and forest protection. After all, she says, he is indebted to the indigenous communities that massively supported his election campaign. “There’s some movement there, but I think it’s going to take a lot of international pressure for something to really happen in the area of forest protection.” She does not believe the Mercosur agreement is a high priority for the Brazilian government. However, the resumption of negotiations, which were frozen under Bolsonaro, could only happen under certain conditions anyway: All laws and institutions that Bolsonaro eliminated or undermined would have to be rebuilt by the new government. The EU Commission would also have to propose tangible changes to the text of the agreement so that forest protection and sustainability standards are anchored in the agreement.
In her constituency in Saxony, Cavazzini sometimes combines climbing with political events, inviting people to a Europe talk while bouldering in Leipzig, for example, or drawing attention to the local forest dieback in Saxon Switzerland. When she talks to people, Brussels is still very far away, she says. “But the very concrete things are noticed and are very well received.” For example, the uniform charging cable or the right to repair, which she advocates.
In Saxony, the green-led Ministry of Europe has also created its own Interrail program so that young people can discover Europe. A cosmopolitan, pro-European attitude still needs to be strengthened here, and this requires a lot of good communication. But the Covid pandemic and the war in Ukraine have made many realize, she said, that “with Europe, we’re stronger and can respond better to crises together.” Leonie Düngefeld
