Was it the umpteenth political statement of the legal conservatives or a serious opposition attempt to undermine the power of European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen? It was the question that Brussels and Strasbourg held on Monday, after a motion of no confidence was submitted against the figurehead of the committee for the first time in more than ten years.
On Monday evening, the plenary meeting of the European Parliament in Strasbourg was opened with a debate on the precarious political issue, Thursday the von der Leyen will vote in its second term.
The motion was submitted by the Romanian MEP Gheorghe Piperea, member of the European Conservatives and Reformers (ECR) group, where national and legal conservative parties belong-including the Italian Government Party Fratelli d’Italia, the Polish PIS party, and the SGP. The reason for the breach of trust – as endorsed by 72 parliamentarians, about 10 percent of parliament – was, among other things, the little transparent working method of von der Leyen at the time of the Corona Pandemie.
Text messages
VDL – As the Commission President in the Brussels corridors are called – was central to “Pfizergate”. A European scandal around non-freely freely SMS from Von der Leyen and the CEO of the American pharmaceutical giant Pfizer at a controversial billion-dollar deal about Coronavaccins. The European Court ruled in May that chairman Von der Leyen had not acted correctly and had to give access to the messages.
In addition to ‘violated principles such as the lack of transparency and respect for the judiciary’, there is more to it, Piperea argued at the opening of the debate on Monday evening. “Under the leadership of Von der Leyen, the Commission has improperly taken powers of the Member States and ignored the European Parliament with its most important decisions.”
Criticism of the self -willed actions of Von der Leyen has been in Brussels for some time. She is accused of administrative dominance, by giving European commissioners little room and sometimes making deals without having the democratic majority behind them. Despite these comments, there is widely supported recognition for its decisiveness and unambiguous leadership in geopolitics turbulent times.
MEP Piperea decided his argument, in the almost full room in Strasbourg, with venom: “As Churchill said: this is the beginning of an end.”
This comes directly from the handbook of extremists, with the aim of polarizing society
‘Handbook of extremists’
Von der Leyen – who was sitting in the hall with her entire lecture, bite back unique. She described her critics as “conspiracy thinkers”, “antivaxers” and “Putin apologists.” Fierce, but controlled, she stated: “This comes directly from the handbook of extremists, with the aim of polarizing society and rewriting the history of how Europe has overcome the Pandemie together”. Shouting and clapping sounded.
Acclaim followed. Manfred Weber, party member and group leader of the center -right group EVP (the largest in parliament), said he would vote against the motion. According to him, the ‘unlikely fall’ of the committee endangers the complex trade negotiations with Trump.
Bas Eickhout, co -fraction chairman of the Greens, was unstoppable: “This is a major political show of extreme right to undermine our democracy. This motion would be about alleged corruption, but most corruption cases take place within their ranks. That is precisely where the initiatives we have taken in this house.”
‘Political Theater’
If the motion is assumed, for which a two -thirds majority is required, the entire committee must leave. That has never happened before. This time too, it is expected that it will not come to that. Von der Leyen can count on a large majority within parliament.
But even if the motion is rejected and Von der Leyen can stay on, the issue must have consequences for her, it sounded.
For example, MEP Reinier van Lanschot said that Volt von der Leyen will continue to support. “This is not a moment for political theater. But Von der Leyen has to realize that our demand for stable leadership does not mean that she can sit still. We expect her to correct her course.”