In the opinion of a seasoned diplomat, if one compares the positive vote of the European Parliament in November 2024 (401 votes) approving the ‘von der Leyen II’ Commission (see EUROPE 13456/1) and the negative vote in July 2025 (360 votes against) rejecting the motion of censure against the same College (see EUROPE 13678/1), the European Commission did not lose too many feathers in this second test of legitimacy, just six months into its mandate.
Apart from the fact that a two-thirds majority of the votes cast is required to bring down the Commission, the outcome of Parliament’s vote left little room for doubt. The pro-European political groups had announced their rejection of Romanian conservative Gheorghe Piperea’s initiative.
However, the debate on the motion of censure in Strasbourg at the beginning of July highlighted the animosity that reigns between the political families that have approved the Commission, united under the banner of ‘pro-EU, pro-Rule of Law, pro-Ukraine’. The Social Democrats (S&D), the centre-right (Renew Europe) and the ecologists (Greens/EFA) criticised the attitude of the Christian Democrats (EPP), Ms von der Leyen’s political family.
“You are feeding the Beast, and at a certain moment, the Beast will devour you”, Dutch MEP Bas Eickhout told the EPP group Chair, German MEP Manfred Weber, about his alliances - whether of conviction or opportunism - with extremist and Europhobic groups.
For the Chair of the Renew Europe group, France’s Valérie Hayer, the “dangerous” alliances of the Christian Democrats with the far right “endanger the institutional balance and risk paralysing the EU’s ability” to respond to existential issues such as aid to Ukraine or the defence of democratic standards.
How is blocking the creation of the European Ethics Body (see EUROPE 13640/25), with the support of the conservative ECR and far-right PfE and ESN groups, part of a pro-EU and pro-Rule of Law approach?
The Christian Democrats, who now have a strong hold on the House, are using this power to serve their own interests, even if it means turning their backs on the ‘von der Leyen’ majority. Adopted at the end of 2024 to restore order to this majority after the revealing episode of the confirmation hearings of the European Commissioners (see EUROPE 13531/1), the guidelines supposed to guide the work of the ‘von der Leyen’ majority in the European Parliament seem to have had little effect on Mr Weber.
The Bavarian is in charge of the alliance with the Belgian, Italian and Czech delegations of the ECR group. He is not offended by the support given to the Christian Democrats by Eurosceptic sovereigntists and far-right groups (PfE and ESN) to tighten the EU’s migration policy, call into question the European Green Deal or limit funding for environmental NGOs. But he rejects the argument that this undermines the credibility of the ‘von der Leyen’ majority. He points to statistics compiled by his teams, according to which the S&D and Renew Europe groups have won more nominal votes with the far right than his own group (see EUROPE 13672/21).
Accusations of betrayal of commitments come mainly from the President of the centre-right group, who cannot accept that Renew Europe is no longer the kingmaker of the hemicycle. Is the Bavarian taking revenge on the French President, Emmanuel Macron, who deemed him unfit to preside over the Commission in 2019, preferring Ms von der Leyen instead?
Faced with the discontent of the Christian Democrats’ traditional allies, Manfred Weber asserts that the EPP is the party of the European Green Deal. But, in his view, to rally the business community around the goal of climate neutrality by 2050, a pragmatic approach is needed which takes account of the imperatives of an open economy. Hence the attempts to freeze, or prune, key pieces of legislation from the previous mandate, such as the proposal on green claims.
Mr Weber’s argument is also the following: by announcing dogmatic climate targets, the EU is providing arguments for the Europhobes, who are waving the scarecrow of punitive ecology in the run-up to forthcoming national elections. The Czech delegation is said to have asked the European Parliament not to take a position on the 2040 climate target before the legislative elections at the beginning of October. This would explain why, without the support of the EPP group, the request by the pro-European groups for Parliament to take up this issue as a matter of urgency was rejected (see EUROPE 13677/3).
It should also be pointed out that, when it holds firm, the ‘von der Leyen’ majority declines to implement the Commission’s legislative programme. The regulatory simplification exercise is proceeding apace. On the strengthened framework for banking crisis management, MEPs remained united, as this was the only way they could hold their own against the Member States in the interinstitutional negotiations. To be continued...
(Original version in French by Mathieu Bion)