The recent ruling from the Federal Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe has posed a significant challenge to Berlin’s traffic light coalition. This decision has notably reduced the credit authorizations for the Climate and Transformation Fund (KTF) by €60 billion, a development that impacts not only the federal budget but also the multi-year financial planning. This shift marks a critical juncture in Germany’s fiscal policy.
The implications of this judgment extend beyond Germany, potentially affecting the European Union’s fiscal framework. At its core, the situation is clear: diminished financial resources curtail Germany’s ability to contribute to broader EU initiatives. Chancellor Olaf Scholz and Minister for Financial Affairs Christian Lindner are now likely to be more cautious in meeting the financial demands from EU leaders such as Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Foreign Affairs Commissioner Josep Borrell. Von der Leyen’s push to increase the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) with additional billions by 2027, and Borrell’s proposal for a €20 billion enhancement to the joint military aid fund for Ukraine, now face new hurdles.
Chancellor Scholz, who at the EU summit in October expressed an intention to prioritize financial aid for Ukraine over other requests from Brussels, will likely find his position strengthened in the MFF negotiations following the Karlsruhe ruling.
The internal stability of the Berlin coalition, in the wake of this verdict, is less predictable. Minister for Economic Affairs Robert Habeck, a key figure from the Green Party, faces a significant reduction in funding for vital climate initiatives. While Minister Habeck seemed to approach this setback with composure, it could stir more vigorous debates within his party about the coalition’s priorities, particularly the juxtaposition of fiscal discipline against climate action. This internal discord poses a challenge to the federal government’s ability to function effectively.
In summary, the Karlsruhe court’s decision reshapes Germany’s fiscal strategy and has extensive implications for its role within the EU and the internal dynamics of its government. The forthcoming months will be pivotal in determining how Germany navigates these multifaceted challenges, both domestically and in the European arena.
The EU Commission presented its Skills and Talent Mobility Package on Wednesday. The proposals contained therein are intended to create new legal pathways for foreigners to work in the EU. At the same time, the Commission hopes to alleviate the shortage of skilled workers in the EU.
A central component of the package is a kind of official EU LinkedIn for job searches: the EU Talent Pool. On this platform, people from other EU countries will be able to upload their CVs and be brought together with companies looking for new employees. In the best-case scenario, there is a “match” – and a company finds the specialist they are looking for using the uploaded data.
However, the search is limited to shortage occupations. The Commission wants to draw up a list of professions in which there is a shortage of workers across the entire EU. “Examples include care for the elderly and sick, construction, the transport sector, or workers who are driving the green transition”, explained EU Commissioner for Home Affairs, Ylva Johansson.
The Commissioner responsible for the new migration pact, Margaritis Schinas, praised the package effusively, saying that the EU would contribute to a safer world with these measures. “This package is also a strong, if not the strongest, deterrent to irregular migration“, said Schinas. The initiative is necessary to combat the shortage of workers in the EU. “We will not be able to fill the gaps with workers from the EU alone”, said Schinas. With the package, the EU is signaling that Europe is not a fortress, but open for business.
Although the Commission is launching the EU Talent Pool as part of a legislative proposal, participation in the EU Talent Pool is to be voluntary for the member states. In addition, the Commission proposal gives countries the final say on which professions they want to see listed in the EU Talent Pool. The countries can remove professions from the list of shortage occupations or add others. What happens in the event of a match also remains a matter for the member states. They must then issue the relevant visa and residence permits – and also check the qualifications of the applicants.
However, the Commission believes that qualifications should be checked more quickly in the future. Another component of the package is a recommendation to the member states on how they can improve the recognition of qualifications. Commissioner Johansson spoke, for example, of increasing the number of staff at the relevant national contact points, reducing the costs of the sometimes very expensive application procedures, and simplifying translations.
The employers’ association Business Europe called the planned measures potential “game changers”. The association had long spoken out in favor of such a talent pool. It is an important approach to match and bring together the most urgent shortage occupations with qualified applicants from third countries, the association explained in a press release.
But how much impact can these voluntary measures and recommendations actually have? This is precisely what the liberal Swedish MEP Abir Al-Sahlani sees as one of the main problems with the proposals. In view of the increasingly strident anti-migration rhetoric, the package is an important signal. However, she is critical of the fact that states should be able to withdraw from the talent pool: “Companies that could actually find skilled workers via the platform risk being thwarted by the states.” She wants to advocate for improvements in the legislative process.
The recommendations on qualifications also do not go far enough for the MEP. “The EU is already struggling here within Europe. There is an urgent need for harmonized rules.” There needs to be a more fundamental discussion on the topic. On the other hand, Al-Sahlani sees it as positive that the EU Talent Pool is not only aimed at skilled workers, but is open to all qualification levels.
The EU Commission is also unable to provide an estimate of how many unfilled vacancies in the EU can be filled by the new proposals due to the many adjustments. In a pilot project for refugees from Ukraine, however, demand for the instrument was restrained. Only eight countries took part (Spain, Cyprus, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia, Croatia, the Czech Republic and Finland).
The proposals are part of the EU’s new migration and asylum package. On the one hand, this provides for stricter measures against irregular immigration. On the other hand, it is intended to make it easier for third-country nationals to apply for jobs in the EU.
In addition to the Talent Mobility Package, the Commission is also revising the Single Permit Directive at the same time. This is currently being negotiated in trilogue; the next deadline is November 21. The single permit is a combined permit that allows applicants to obtain a work permit at the same time as a residence permit. The EU wants to better protect employees from exploitation in the future. The directive on permanent residence permits is also currently being revised.
German S&D MEP Birgit Sippel hopes that all these measures in combination “can make an important contribution to facilitating labor migration to the EU and making our labor market more attractive for foreign workers”, she told Table.Media. “If this also reduces the number of job seekers who mistakenly want to come to Europe via the asylum system, this would be a double win for everyone involved.”
At 3:30 a.m. on Wednesday morning, the Council and Parliament agreed on a legal text in the trilogue on the methane regulation in the energy sector. It is noteworthy that the negotiators also included the entire supply chain of fossil fuel imports in the regulation. In terms of the global impact of methane on the climate, this is the most important part of the methane regulation, said Green MEP Jutta Paulus, co-rapporteur in the Industry Committee (ITRE).
Over a period of 100 years, methane has a 28 times greater impact on global warming than carbon dioxide and is 84 times more effective over 20 years. “The inclusion of imports in the regulation is already an unmistakable signal in principle”, said Paulus. Producers worldwide would have to be prepared for the fact that the world’s largest market could be closed to them if they do not curb their methane emissions. “I expect that this announcement alone will lead to corresponding measures.”
At the beginning of the negotiations in September, the Commission and the Council were still opposed to extending the methane regulation to imports. However, the Parliament had insisted on this. Background: 80 percent of calculated methane emissions in the energy sector come from imports from producers outside the EU.
However, Parliament had to make concessions to the member states in order to achieve this. The most important points of the compromise are: Penalties for imports that exceed import standards will only be levied from 2030. The regulation also does not lay down uniform penalties. This means that further scrutiny is needed to ensure that Member States impose effective sanctions.
Among other things, the schedule provides for the following:
“For us as a parliament and as Greens, the timetable is not satisfactory”, explained Jutta Paulus. “However, we had to accept that the Commission is unable to define a reliable methodology as long as there is no reliable data.” Up to now, it has mainly been the industry that has collected and calculated methane emissions. In the future, there will be independent monitoring bodies. This is important because the data forms a basis for judicial decisions.
Environmental organizations welcomed the agreement, even if they would have liked a faster timetable for reducing emissions before 2030. The regulation will nevertheless make a major contribution to reducing global methane emissions. “Considering that the prospect of an import standard was nothing more than a dream a year ago, this result is a big step forward”, said Brandon Locke, an expert at the NGO Clean Air Task Force.
The regulation to reduce methane emissions is also an important political signal internationally. Countries such as Norway and Nigeria already have corresponding legislation. The United States will levy a tax on methane emissions from 2025, as set out in the Inflation Reduction Act. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is currently working on standards. Reducing methane emissions is also part of an agreement reached yesterday, Wednesday, between the United States and China ahead of the COP28 talks in Dubai.
The reduction of methane emissions is also on the agenda at COP28 itself. With the compromise now reached in Brussels, the EU can announce that it has met the targets of the Global Methane Pledge – and thus gain credibility. This is all the more true as the compromise also provides for a ban on the venting and flaring of methane. These are two methods of methane production that lead to high emissions.
The regulation also stipulates that emissions must be calculated according to the measure, report, verify (MRV) principle. It also obliges producers to detect, report, and close leaks. These measures are intended to bring more transparency to the calculation of actual emissions.
When a new law to secure Europe’s supply of raw materials is passed in Brussels these days, this will also have consequences for other continents. Although the EU wants to boost domestic mining, it still has to import the majority of raw materials. More than two-thirds of the world’s reserves of lithium, the coveted raw material for batteries, are stored in Latin America.
Civil society there is concerned about the “new raw materials policy” in the old guise. “It’s different raw materials now, but it’s still the same system”, says Yeny Rodríguez Junco. She is calling for measures to repair the damage to the environment and the population, stricter licensing, and the protection of affected ecosystems.
The 36-year-old is a lawyer and works for the non-governmental organization AIDA in the Colombian capital Bogotá. The acronym stands for the Inter-American Association for Environmental Protection, which is represented throughout Latin America from Mexico to Argentina.
AIDA’s teams of lawyers and scientists are committed to protecting the environment and the often indigenous communities suffering from environmental damage. They represent these interests with governments in the region and international institutions such as the EU, provide legal assistance, and help people to help themselves.
The focus of her work is on high-need, high-impact cases that can serve as precedents – such as the campaign against fracking in Colombia, which Rodríguez also worked on. Successful: for four years, the highest administrative court upheld a moratorium that prevented the use of fracking technology in the country. AIDA also wants to achieve this in Argentina and Mexico.
It was not Rodríguez’s plan to work in environmental protection. After studying law in Bogotá, she initially worked at the Colombian Constitutional Court and in the public prosecutor’s office. A later experience changed everything: as a consultant for the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), she accompanied land restitution processes to Afro-American communities on Colombia’s Pacific coast. Among other things, they were affected by the consequences of illegal gold mining, which was controlled by armed groups.
“After reading so much about the effects of illegal mining, it was shocking to see the situation with my own eyes“, she says. The river, which is of great importance to the local population, was heavily contaminated by mining. But people continued to bathe in it, women washed their clothes and children played in the white, mercury-tainted water.
Rodríguez then decided to specialize in environmental issues. She moved to The Hague to do a Master’s degree in Development Studies at the renowned Institute of Social Studies. Back in Colombia, she then found her “dream job” at AIDA, as she explains. “We bring justice to places where it would otherwise not – or only with difficulty – reach.” She likes the variety of tasks: Writing statements for the court, coordinating work with partners, and talking to the affected population on site.
Rodríguez shows a world map from the US Geological Survey, on which the global lithium reserves are located. Various deposits are also listed in Europe. “There is a lot of lithium in Europe. But the message from legislators there is: we need lithium from third countries!“, she criticizes. Of course, South American lithium is cheaper. But the external costs have not been factored in: The water-intensive mining method in Latin America, where most of the lithium is stored in salt lagoons, has fatal consequences for the environment and the population.
This week, Rodríguez is attending Raw Materials Week in Brussels, organized by the EU Commission, and is meeting with fellow European campaigners who have joined forces in a civil society alliance. Together, they criticize the Critical Raw Materials Act (CRMA) for demonstrating one thing above all: Europe has not learned from the mistakes of its previous raw materials policy. In many parts of the world, the mining sector has benefited from corruption and weak environmental and social regulations. The voices of affected communities in the mining regions are not being heard. “This particularly affects indigenous communities: 50 percent of the raw material reserves are located under their land“, says Rodríguez. It is still unclear whether their rights will be enshrined in EU raw materials legislation. Leonie Düngefeld
The recent ruling from the Federal Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe has posed a significant challenge to Berlin’s traffic light coalition. This decision has notably reduced the credit authorizations for the Climate and Transformation Fund (KTF) by €60 billion, a development that impacts not only the federal budget but also the multi-year financial planning. This shift marks a critical juncture in Germany’s fiscal policy.
The implications of this judgment extend beyond Germany, potentially affecting the European Union’s fiscal framework. At its core, the situation is clear: diminished financial resources curtail Germany’s ability to contribute to broader EU initiatives. Chancellor Olaf Scholz and Minister for Financial Affairs Christian Lindner are now likely to be more cautious in meeting the financial demands from EU leaders such as Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Foreign Affairs Commissioner Josep Borrell. Von der Leyen’s push to increase the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) with additional billions by 2027, and Borrell’s proposal for a €20 billion enhancement to the joint military aid fund for Ukraine, now face new hurdles.
Chancellor Scholz, who at the EU summit in October expressed an intention to prioritize financial aid for Ukraine over other requests from Brussels, will likely find his position strengthened in the MFF negotiations following the Karlsruhe ruling.
The internal stability of the Berlin coalition, in the wake of this verdict, is less predictable. Minister for Economic Affairs Robert Habeck, a key figure from the Green Party, faces a significant reduction in funding for vital climate initiatives. While Minister Habeck seemed to approach this setback with composure, it could stir more vigorous debates within his party about the coalition’s priorities, particularly the juxtaposition of fiscal discipline against climate action. This internal discord poses a challenge to the federal government’s ability to function effectively.
In summary, the Karlsruhe court’s decision reshapes Germany’s fiscal strategy and has extensive implications for its role within the EU and the internal dynamics of its government. The forthcoming months will be pivotal in determining how Germany navigates these multifaceted challenges, both domestically and in the European arena.
The EU Commission presented its Skills and Talent Mobility Package on Wednesday. The proposals contained therein are intended to create new legal pathways for foreigners to work in the EU. At the same time, the Commission hopes to alleviate the shortage of skilled workers in the EU.
A central component of the package is a kind of official EU LinkedIn for job searches: the EU Talent Pool. On this platform, people from other EU countries will be able to upload their CVs and be brought together with companies looking for new employees. In the best-case scenario, there is a “match” – and a company finds the specialist they are looking for using the uploaded data.
However, the search is limited to shortage occupations. The Commission wants to draw up a list of professions in which there is a shortage of workers across the entire EU. “Examples include care for the elderly and sick, construction, the transport sector, or workers who are driving the green transition”, explained EU Commissioner for Home Affairs, Ylva Johansson.
The Commissioner responsible for the new migration pact, Margaritis Schinas, praised the package effusively, saying that the EU would contribute to a safer world with these measures. “This package is also a strong, if not the strongest, deterrent to irregular migration“, said Schinas. The initiative is necessary to combat the shortage of workers in the EU. “We will not be able to fill the gaps with workers from the EU alone”, said Schinas. With the package, the EU is signaling that Europe is not a fortress, but open for business.
Although the Commission is launching the EU Talent Pool as part of a legislative proposal, participation in the EU Talent Pool is to be voluntary for the member states. In addition, the Commission proposal gives countries the final say on which professions they want to see listed in the EU Talent Pool. The countries can remove professions from the list of shortage occupations or add others. What happens in the event of a match also remains a matter for the member states. They must then issue the relevant visa and residence permits – and also check the qualifications of the applicants.
However, the Commission believes that qualifications should be checked more quickly in the future. Another component of the package is a recommendation to the member states on how they can improve the recognition of qualifications. Commissioner Johansson spoke, for example, of increasing the number of staff at the relevant national contact points, reducing the costs of the sometimes very expensive application procedures, and simplifying translations.
The employers’ association Business Europe called the planned measures potential “game changers”. The association had long spoken out in favor of such a talent pool. It is an important approach to match and bring together the most urgent shortage occupations with qualified applicants from third countries, the association explained in a press release.
But how much impact can these voluntary measures and recommendations actually have? This is precisely what the liberal Swedish MEP Abir Al-Sahlani sees as one of the main problems with the proposals. In view of the increasingly strident anti-migration rhetoric, the package is an important signal. However, she is critical of the fact that states should be able to withdraw from the talent pool: “Companies that could actually find skilled workers via the platform risk being thwarted by the states.” She wants to advocate for improvements in the legislative process.
The recommendations on qualifications also do not go far enough for the MEP. “The EU is already struggling here within Europe. There is an urgent need for harmonized rules.” There needs to be a more fundamental discussion on the topic. On the other hand, Al-Sahlani sees it as positive that the EU Talent Pool is not only aimed at skilled workers, but is open to all qualification levels.
The EU Commission is also unable to provide an estimate of how many unfilled vacancies in the EU can be filled by the new proposals due to the many adjustments. In a pilot project for refugees from Ukraine, however, demand for the instrument was restrained. Only eight countries took part (Spain, Cyprus, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia, Croatia, the Czech Republic and Finland).
The proposals are part of the EU’s new migration and asylum package. On the one hand, this provides for stricter measures against irregular immigration. On the other hand, it is intended to make it easier for third-country nationals to apply for jobs in the EU.
In addition to the Talent Mobility Package, the Commission is also revising the Single Permit Directive at the same time. This is currently being negotiated in trilogue; the next deadline is November 21. The single permit is a combined permit that allows applicants to obtain a work permit at the same time as a residence permit. The EU wants to better protect employees from exploitation in the future. The directive on permanent residence permits is also currently being revised.
German S&D MEP Birgit Sippel hopes that all these measures in combination “can make an important contribution to facilitating labor migration to the EU and making our labor market more attractive for foreign workers”, she told Table.Media. “If this also reduces the number of job seekers who mistakenly want to come to Europe via the asylum system, this would be a double win for everyone involved.”
At 3:30 a.m. on Wednesday morning, the Council and Parliament agreed on a legal text in the trilogue on the methane regulation in the energy sector. It is noteworthy that the negotiators also included the entire supply chain of fossil fuel imports in the regulation. In terms of the global impact of methane on the climate, this is the most important part of the methane regulation, said Green MEP Jutta Paulus, co-rapporteur in the Industry Committee (ITRE).
Over a period of 100 years, methane has a 28 times greater impact on global warming than carbon dioxide and is 84 times more effective over 20 years. “The inclusion of imports in the regulation is already an unmistakable signal in principle”, said Paulus. Producers worldwide would have to be prepared for the fact that the world’s largest market could be closed to them if they do not curb their methane emissions. “I expect that this announcement alone will lead to corresponding measures.”
At the beginning of the negotiations in September, the Commission and the Council were still opposed to extending the methane regulation to imports. However, the Parliament had insisted on this. Background: 80 percent of calculated methane emissions in the energy sector come from imports from producers outside the EU.
However, Parliament had to make concessions to the member states in order to achieve this. The most important points of the compromise are: Penalties for imports that exceed import standards will only be levied from 2030. The regulation also does not lay down uniform penalties. This means that further scrutiny is needed to ensure that Member States impose effective sanctions.
Among other things, the schedule provides for the following:
“For us as a parliament and as Greens, the timetable is not satisfactory”, explained Jutta Paulus. “However, we had to accept that the Commission is unable to define a reliable methodology as long as there is no reliable data.” Up to now, it has mainly been the industry that has collected and calculated methane emissions. In the future, there will be independent monitoring bodies. This is important because the data forms a basis for judicial decisions.
Environmental organizations welcomed the agreement, even if they would have liked a faster timetable for reducing emissions before 2030. The regulation will nevertheless make a major contribution to reducing global methane emissions. “Considering that the prospect of an import standard was nothing more than a dream a year ago, this result is a big step forward”, said Brandon Locke, an expert at the NGO Clean Air Task Force.
The regulation to reduce methane emissions is also an important political signal internationally. Countries such as Norway and Nigeria already have corresponding legislation. The United States will levy a tax on methane emissions from 2025, as set out in the Inflation Reduction Act. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is currently working on standards. Reducing methane emissions is also part of an agreement reached yesterday, Wednesday, between the United States and China ahead of the COP28 talks in Dubai.
The reduction of methane emissions is also on the agenda at COP28 itself. With the compromise now reached in Brussels, the EU can announce that it has met the targets of the Global Methane Pledge – and thus gain credibility. This is all the more true as the compromise also provides for a ban on the venting and flaring of methane. These are two methods of methane production that lead to high emissions.
The regulation also stipulates that emissions must be calculated according to the measure, report, verify (MRV) principle. It also obliges producers to detect, report, and close leaks. These measures are intended to bring more transparency to the calculation of actual emissions.
When a new law to secure Europe’s supply of raw materials is passed in Brussels these days, this will also have consequences for other continents. Although the EU wants to boost domestic mining, it still has to import the majority of raw materials. More than two-thirds of the world’s reserves of lithium, the coveted raw material for batteries, are stored in Latin America.
Civil society there is concerned about the “new raw materials policy” in the old guise. “It’s different raw materials now, but it’s still the same system”, says Yeny Rodríguez Junco. She is calling for measures to repair the damage to the environment and the population, stricter licensing, and the protection of affected ecosystems.
The 36-year-old is a lawyer and works for the non-governmental organization AIDA in the Colombian capital Bogotá. The acronym stands for the Inter-American Association for Environmental Protection, which is represented throughout Latin America from Mexico to Argentina.
AIDA’s teams of lawyers and scientists are committed to protecting the environment and the often indigenous communities suffering from environmental damage. They represent these interests with governments in the region and international institutions such as the EU, provide legal assistance, and help people to help themselves.
The focus of her work is on high-need, high-impact cases that can serve as precedents – such as the campaign against fracking in Colombia, which Rodríguez also worked on. Successful: for four years, the highest administrative court upheld a moratorium that prevented the use of fracking technology in the country. AIDA also wants to achieve this in Argentina and Mexico.
It was not Rodríguez’s plan to work in environmental protection. After studying law in Bogotá, she initially worked at the Colombian Constitutional Court and in the public prosecutor’s office. A later experience changed everything: as a consultant for the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), she accompanied land restitution processes to Afro-American communities on Colombia’s Pacific coast. Among other things, they were affected by the consequences of illegal gold mining, which was controlled by armed groups.
“After reading so much about the effects of illegal mining, it was shocking to see the situation with my own eyes“, she says. The river, which is of great importance to the local population, was heavily contaminated by mining. But people continued to bathe in it, women washed their clothes and children played in the white, mercury-tainted water.
Rodríguez then decided to specialize in environmental issues. She moved to The Hague to do a Master’s degree in Development Studies at the renowned Institute of Social Studies. Back in Colombia, she then found her “dream job” at AIDA, as she explains. “We bring justice to places where it would otherwise not – or only with difficulty – reach.” She likes the variety of tasks: Writing statements for the court, coordinating work with partners, and talking to the affected population on site.
Rodríguez shows a world map from the US Geological Survey, on which the global lithium reserves are located. Various deposits are also listed in Europe. “There is a lot of lithium in Europe. But the message from legislators there is: we need lithium from third countries!“, she criticizes. Of course, South American lithium is cheaper. But the external costs have not been factored in: The water-intensive mining method in Latin America, where most of the lithium is stored in salt lagoons, has fatal consequences for the environment and the population.
This week, Rodríguez is attending Raw Materials Week in Brussels, organized by the EU Commission, and is meeting with fellow European campaigners who have joined forces in a civil society alliance. Together, they criticize the Critical Raw Materials Act (CRMA) for demonstrating one thing above all: Europe has not learned from the mistakes of its previous raw materials policy. In many parts of the world, the mining sector has benefited from corruption and weak environmental and social regulations. The voices of affected communities in the mining regions are not being heard. “This particularly affects indigenous communities: 50 percent of the raw material reserves are located under their land“, says Rodríguez. It is still unclear whether their rights will be enshrined in EU raw materials legislation. Leonie Düngefeld
