Although the plenary session was shortened, the European Parliament, whose chamber was almost empty, still devoted almost 3 hours of debate on Tuesday 10 March to the issue of coronavirus, believing that Europe should do more to respond to this totally unprecedented crisis.
However, MEPs did not have the opportunity to close their debates with a resolution, as originally planned. They are due to vote at the next plenary session, which the Conference of Presidents has chosen to turn into a two-day mini-plenary on 1 and 2 April only (see other news).
During the plenary debate, each Member therefore raised their own concerns. However, they all called for greater solidarity with the most affected regions, especially as all Member States now have at least one case of coronavirus on their territory.
The financial impact is particularly feared
The debate highlighted real concerns about the economic impact of the coronavirus, which Crisis Management Commissioner Janez Lenarčič described as “significant”. “We are aware that exceptional events require exceptional measures”, he said, pointing first to the existence of “automatic stabilisers that can mitigate many of the shocks” and the possibility of “providing liquidity to small and medium-sized enterprises” while “the Stability and Growth Pact provides flexibility for responding to unusual events”.
Among the MEPs, the Chair of the Parliament’s Environment and Public Health Committee (ENVI), Pascal Canfin (Renew Europe, France), highlighted two issues: in the short term, liquidity is needed for businesses and, in the long term, a fiscal stimulus package that must link up with the Green Deal, he said.
On budgetary measures, EPP group leader Manfred Weber (Germany) said he is opposed to changing the Stability and Growth Pact, preferring that it be “applied flexibly”. S&D group chair Iratxe García Pérez (Spain) called for measures to boost economic activity and deal with the consequences of the coronavirus, referring to “additional fiscal and budgetary tools”.
Many MEPs called on the European Investment Bank (EIB) to intervene. This included MEPs from the EPP, ECR, Non-attached and S&D groups. MEP Joanna Kopcińska (ECR, Poland), for her part, called for the Solidarity Fund to be mobilised.
More coordination on the health component
Several MEPs have criticised the European response since the beginning of the crisis. “I am ashamed of Europe, which is having difficulty reacting to what looks like a war, ashamed of this ineffective and absent Europe”, said Silvia Sardone (ID, Italy). Other, less vocal MEPs, however, said they were startled by the lack of coordination at the European level, expressing surprise that Member States were setting different thresholds for banning mass gatherings. “Has there been a shift from information exchange to a common position?” asked Pascal Canfin. “Why don’t we have a single protocol?” asked Piernicola Pedicini (Non-attached, Italy).
Health Commissioner Stella Kyriakides assured that the European Union is doing everything in its power to respond to the crisis. “No, we aren’t getting the news from the media--it’s the Health Security Committee that’s keeping us informed”, she said, adding that she is in constant contact with the other commissioners, that she holds a video conference three times a week with the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA), and that the Health Security Committee has already held ten meetings. She also indicated that this morning she had received all the replies to the public procurement contract for the joint purchase of personal protective equipment, and that she is examining “the possibility of taking the same step for medical equipment (respirators and testing kits)”.
Fear of shortages and dependence on non-Member States
As the ENVI Committee had already done in early March, Parliament expressed concern about Europe’s dependence on China and India for the production of medicines (see EUROPE 12440/6), which Ms Kyriakides fully acknowledged. “This is one of the tasks given to me by the President of the European Commission”, she said, promising that the pharmaceutical strategy planned for the end of the year will address this issue.
MEPs also pointed out that this dependency could eventually lead to shortages of equipment and even medicines. Earlier in the day, the European Medicines Agency acknowledged that, although no problems have been reported so far, such problems cannot be ruled out as the epidemic progresses.
For many MEPs, the COVID-19 crisis is raising questions about the organisation of health systems. Manon Aubry (GUE/NGL, France) reported that some hospitals are already paralysed. For Tilly Metz (Greens/EFA, Luxembourg), this calls into question our fragile health systems and exposes the need for a social Europe.
The limited format of the plenary in question
While the idea of limiting the plenary to just one day in Brussels was not to everyone’s liking, as Roman Haider (ID, Austria) pointed out, several MEPs, including Michèle Rivasi (Greens/EFA, France), called on the President of Parliament to go even further and close the building completely for two weeks. “We MEPs are super-propagators”, she said.
For his part, the President of Parliament, David Sassoli, took the decision to quarantine himself after visiting Italy (Rome) last weekend. (Original version in French by Sophie Petitjean)