The right-wing movement in Europe will have consequences for the political agenda. The increase in the power of conservative forces in governments has a direct impact on the composition of the European Commission, which is formed on the basis of proposals from the capitals, and the Council of the EU, where they are directly represented. And until now there was a kind of firewall: the European Parliament.
The institution is one of the EU’s co-legislators and, with exceptions such as the controversial Nature Restoration Act, has historically defended more ambitious and progressive positions than the European Commission and the Council of the EU. Moreover, in the previous term, in its day-to-day functioning, it had a majority that was able to overcome the most conservative positions of the European People’s Party.
Socialists, liberals, greens and left had 343 MEPs in the previous term, so if there was a shortage of MEPs or leaks from other groups – including the unregistered, which had 63 MEPs in the previous term, with large delegations such as the M5S for example, they could promote and implement some initiatives outside the right. It was the liberals who held the key and who acted as a central party: Renew Europe could tip the balance towards the progressive forces or towards the right – with which it usually voted.
The 'center' moves to the right
That “central” position has now shifted to the right and it is the European People's Party that will be able to vary the balance of power mathematically. The majority that forms the stable coalition (popular, socialists and liberals) amounts to a total of 401 votes, expandable to 454 if the Greens, as they have deliberately shown, join, as happened in the vote for the re-election of Ursula von der Leyen. This situation would mean that the Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) group that makes up parties such as that of the far-right Giorgia Meloni, may not have the relevance that this legislature initially thought it had, because of the temptation to popular to replicate at European level the alliances it has with these forces at state, regional and local levels.
However, the 188 popular MEPs can put together an alternative with the three far-right forces, with which they represent 375 of the 720 seats in the European Parliament, which will certainly form a majority to block progressive initiatives – such as holding a debate – on the Gaza massacre, which was rejected by the right and far right on Wednesday.
Although the European People's Party maintained the cordon sanitaire for two of the ultra groups (Patriots for Europe and Europe of Sovereign Nations), it even voted with these forces on some occasions in the previous parliamentary term, even to overturn initiatives emanating from the government led by Ursula von der Leyen, such as the ban on the sale of diesel and petrol cars from 2035 or the aforementioned nature restoration law.
What is most likely to visualise this possibility of the EPP tipping the balance to the left or the right will be found in the resolutions proposed in the European Parliament. They are political texts, without legal or regulatory status, which set out the European Parliament’s position on any issue, often on foreign policy. An alliance of the EPP with the far right – and the support of a handful of liberal, socialist and green MEPs – limited the call for a ceasefire in Gaza earlier this year by making it contingent on the release of Israeli hostages and the dismantling of Hamas.
The EPP can also vary the majorities at its discretion in the functioning of the committees. During the last mandate, the role of Renew Europe – in this case determined by Ciudadanos – was crucial in this sense in committees such as Petitions, chaired by the head of the Spanish delegation of the PP, Dolors Montserrat, and which It became a showcase for the right to attack the government of Pedro SánchezThe liberals could of course tip the balance so that certain issues would gain momentum at any time, depending on their interests.
Some of the manoeuvres in that commission had to do, for example, with the mission to Catalonia to evaluate linguistic immersion that the progressive forces had planned or with the so-called 'Celáa law'. Montserrat even went so far as to distort the data of the European Commission and to shelve a petition on pollution in Madrid, a case that was even prosecuted and for which Spain was convicted.
The situation led the progressive forces to ask for protection from the Presidency of the European Parliament, but this had no effect. Among the triggers that brought them to action were decisions such as postponing a mission to the Mar Menor in order to send another to Euskadi to investigate the crimes of ETA, or the blocking by PP, Vox and Ciudadanos of a debate on violations of the rule of law in Hungary, while hosting complaints about the management of the pandemic crisis in Spain, filed by a former PP deputy.