BRUSSELS — When cocoa farmer Leticia Yankey came to Brussels last October, she had a simple message for the EU: Think about the mess your simplification agenda is creating for companies and communities. It was just weeks after the European Commission said it might delay the EU’s anti-deforestation law, which requires companies to prove the goods they import into the region are not produced on deforested land, for the second time. But in Yankey’s Ghana, cocoa farmers were ready for the rules, known as the EU Deforestation Regulation or EUDR, to kick in. “How are we going to be taken serious the next time we move to our communities, our farmers, and even the [Licensed Buying Companies] to tell them that EUDR is … coming back?” Yankey asked.  Since then, the Commission has kept making changes to the plan. First by floating the delay, then backtracking but proposing tweaks to the law — only for EU governments and lawmakers to reinstate the postponement, pile on additional carve-outs and then leave open the door for further changes in the spring. All within three months. It’s not just smaller companies and remote communities that are rankled by the EU’s will-they-won’t-they approach to lawmaking. Bart Vandewaetere, a VP for government relations and ESG engagement at Nestlé, says that when he reports on European legislative developments to the company board, they “[look] a little bit at me like: ‘Okay, what’s next? Will you come next week with something else, or do we need to implement it this way, or we wait?’” Since the start of Ursula von der Leyen’s second term as European Commission President, the EU has been rolling back dozens of rules in a bid to make it easier for businesses to make money and create jobs.   Encouraged by EU leaders to hack back regulations quickly and without fuss, the Commission presented 10 simplification packages last year — on top of its plan to loosen the anti-deforestation law — to water down rules in the agricultural, environment, tech, defense and automotive sectors as well as on access to EU funding. COMPLICATION AGENDA Brussels says it is answering the wishes of business for less paperwork and fewer legislative constraints, which companies claim prevent them from competing with their U.S. and Chinese rivals. It also promises billions in savings as a result. “We will accelerate the work, as a matter of utmost priority, on all proposals with a simplification and competitiveness dimension,” the EU institutions wrote this month in a joint declaration of priorities for the year ahead. The ones who got ready to implement the laws already even go as far as to say the EU is losing one of its key appeals: being a regulatory powerhouse with policies that encourage companies to transition towards more sustainable business models. | Nicolas Economou/NurPhoto via Getty Images But for many businesses, the frequent introduction, pausing and rewriting of EU rules is, just making life more complicated. “What we constantly hear from clients is that regulatory uncertainty makes it difficult to plan ahead,” said Thomas Delille, a partner at global law firm Squire Patton Boggs, even though they generally support the simplification agenda. The ones who got ready to implement the laws already even go as far as to say the EU is losing one of its key appeals: being a regulatory powerhouse with policies that encourage companies to transition towards more sustainable business models. “The European Union unfortunately has lost some trust in the boardrooms by making simplifications that are maybe undermining predictability,” said Nestlé’s Vandewaetere. The risk is that the EU will shoot itself in the foot by making it harder for companies to invest in the region, which is essential for competitiveness.  “This approach rewards the laggards,” said Tsvetelina Kuzmanova, senior project manager as the Cambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership, adding that it “lowers expectations at the very moment when companies need clarity and policy stability to invest.” INEVITABLE TURBULENCE Many of Europe’s decision-makers are convinced that undoing business rules is a necessary step in boosting economic growth.  The simplification measures “were needed and they are needed,” said Danish Environment Minister Magnus Heunicke, confirming that he believes the EU regulatory environment is clearer now for businesses than it was a year ago. Denmark, which held the rotating presidency of the Council of the EU for the last six months, had led much of the negotiations on the simplification packages, or “omnibuses” in Brussels parlance. Brussels is also receiving as many calls from businesses to speed up its deregulation drive as those urging caution. For example, European agriculture and food chain lobbies like Copa-Cogeca and FoodDrink Europe said in a joint appeal that the EU should “address the regulatory, administrative, legal, practical and reporting burdens that agri-food operators are facing.” These, they added, are major obstacles to investing in sustainability and productivity. Successive omnibus packages should, meanwhile, be “proposed whenever necessary.” But undoing laws requires as much work and time as drafting them. Over the past year, lawmakers and EU governments have been enthralled in deeply political negotiations over these packages. Entire teams of diplomats, elected officials, assistants, translators and legal experts have been mobilized to argue over technical detail that many were engaged in drafting just a couple of years earlier.   Of the 10 omnibus proposals, three have already been finalized. The EU has also paused the implementation of the rules it’s currently reviewing so that companies don’t have to comply while the process is ongoing. “If you look at this from an industry perspective, there will be some turbulence before there is simplification, it’s inevitable,” said Gerard McElwee, another partner at Squire Patton Boggs.  Ironically, the EU has also faced criticism for making cuts too quickly — particularly to rules on environmental protection — and without properly studying the effect they would have on Europe’s economy and communities. Yankey, the cocoa farmer, said she understands the Commission’s quandary. “They just want to listen to both sides,” she said. “Somebody is ready, somebody is not ready.” But her community will need more EU support to help understand and adapt to legislative tweaks that impact them. The constant changes do not “help us to build confidence in the rules or the game that we are playing,” she said.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen is “buying into [Donald] Trump’s agenda” by slashing regulations on businesses, according to the head of the Socialists & Democrats group in the European Parliament. Iratxe García slammed the “absolute deregulation zeal” being shown by the Commission as it pushes through omnibus simplification packages — revising laws spanning green, agriculture, digital and defense rules — saying it was straight out of the Trump playbook. García argued that von der Leyen and her European People’s Party are pushing for a major backtracking on EU laws, disguised as simplification. “Until now, there has been a dynamic of presenting [an] omnibus every 15 days … suddenly they appear on the table, like mushrooms.” Many top Socialist lawmakers asked García during an S&D retreat in Antwerp on Monday to demand that the Commission stop putting forward any more omnibuses, according to two people present, granted anonymity to speak freely. But the group is not united on the issue — some factions want simplification to keep rolling on. Instead, the retreat’s draft conclusions, seen by POLITICO, ask the Commission to consult with political groups before proposing further omnibus packages, and to conduct impact assessments for every omnibus, past and future. The EU Ombudsman said two weeks ago the Commission’s handling of omnibuses has had “procedural shortcomings” amounting to “maladministration,” opening the door for a court case. Asked about such a possibility, García said that “if the Commission does not respond as we expect, then we will have to take measures, but right now I want to give them the benefit of the doubt and see if the Commission understands the message we are sending them.” PRECOOKING DEALS García added that the basics of any future omnibuses, and other legislative files, should be “shared and worked on” in advance with von der Leyen’s centrist majority — EPP, S&D, and Renew — which could stop the EPP allying with the far-right, as happened with the first omnibus on slashing green rules. “This group has been the one that has guaranteed political and institutional stability in Europe in recent months, but what we are not prepared to do is to be the ones who guarantee stability while policies are negotiated with others,” she said. “Today’s message to the European Commission is clear: if you want the Group of Socialists and Democrats to continue to guarantee Europe’s political and institutional stability, you must involve us from the outset of the process,” said García.  On the looming battle over Parliament President Roberta Metsola’s potential third term, García reiterated that there is a written agreement covering the distribution of top posts, but declined to show the document or discuss its exact terms. “There is an agreement at the beginning of the legislative term on the distribution of responsibilities at the beginning [of the term] and at the mid-term,” repeated García. Asked if she will step down as S&D leader and hand the leadership to an Italian or German lawmaker for the second half of the mandate, as some lawmakers claim she promised to do, García refused to comment. Socialist MEPs expect her to push to remain in the job. “Obviously, there were discussions at the beginning of the legislative session, but I also want to emphasize that whatever is decided in this group will be a discussion shared with the entire group.”

BRUSSELS — More than 80 percent of Europe’s companies will be freed from environmental-reporting obligations after EU institutions reached a deal on a proposal to cut green rules on Monday.   The deal is a major legislative victory for European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in her push cut red tape for business, one of the defining missions of her second term in office. However, that victory came at a political cost: The file pushed the coalition that got her re-elected to the brink of collapse and led her own political family, the center-right European People’s Party (EPP), to team up with the far right to get the deal over the line. The new law, the first of many so-called omnibus simplification bills, will massively reduce the scope of corporate sustainability disclosure rules introduced in the last political term. The aim of the red tape cuts is to boost the competitiveness of European businesses and drive economic growth. The deal concludes a year of intense negotiations between EU decision-makers, investors, businesses and civil society, who argued over how much to reduce reporting obligations for companies on the environmental impacts of their business and supply chains — all while the effects of climate change in Europe were getting worse. “This is an important step towards our common goal to create a more favourable business environment to help our companies grow and innovate,” said Marie Bjerre, Danish minister for European affairs. Denmark, which holds the presidency of the Council of the EU until the end of the year, led the negotiations on behalf of EU governments. Marie Bjerre, Den|mark’s Minister for European affairs, who said the agreement was an important step for a more favourable business environment. | Philipp von Ditfurth/picture alliance via Getty Images Proposed by the Commission last February, the omnibus is designed to address businesses’ concerns that the paperwork needed to comply with EU laws is costly and unfair. Many companies have been blaming Europe’s overzealous green lawmaking and the restrictions it places on doing business in the region for low economic growth and job losses, preventing them from competing with U.S. and Chinese rivals.   But Green and civil society groups — and some businesses too — argued this backtracking would put environmental and human health at risk. That disagreement reverberated through Brussels, disturbing the balance of power in Parliament as the EPP broke the so-called cordon sanitaire — an unwritten rule that forbids mainstream parties from collaborating with the far right — to pass major cuts to green rules. It set a precedent for future lawmaking in Europe as the bloc grapples with the at-times conflicting priorities of boosting economic growth and advancing on its green transition. The word “omnibus” has since become a mainstay of the Brussels bubble vernacular with the Commission putting forward at least 10 more simplification bills on topics like data protection, finance, chemical use, agriculture and defense. LESS PAPERWORK   The deal struck by negotiators from the European Parliament, EU Council and the Commission includes changes to two key pieces of legislation in the EU’s arsenal of green rules: The Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD).  The rules originally required businesses large and small to collect and publish data on their greenhouse gas emissions, how much water they use, the impact of rising temperatures on working conditions, chemical leakages and whether their suppliers — which are often spread across the globe — respect human rights and labor laws.    Now the reporting rules will only apply to companies with more than 1,000 employees and €450 million in net turnover, while only the largest companies — with 5,000 employees and at least €1.5 billion in net turnover — are covered by supply chain due diligence obligations. They also don’t have to adopt transition plans, with details on how they intend to adapt their business model to reach targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.   Importantly the decision-makers got rid of an EU-level legal framework that allowed civilians to hold businesses accountable for the impact of their supply chains on human rights or local ecosystems. MEPs have another say on whether the deal goes through or not, with a final vote on the file slated for Dec. 16. It means that lawmakers have a chance to reject what the co-legislators have agreed to if they consider it to be too far from their original position.

BRUSSELS — The European Union’s drive to cut red tape is creating uncertainty for business and chaos in the EU’s institutions, Executive Vice President Teresa Ribera said on Thursday, in comments that put her squarely at odds with her boss Ursula von der Leyen. “In too many occasions we have this sense that it is not simplification but [a] messy combination of things that end in uncertainty,” Ribera said in Brussels. The Commission’s dealings with EU member countries and lawmakers have degenerated into “a terrible political spectacle,” she added. The remarks by the Spanish socialist represent the most serious pushback by a top EU official since von der Leyen launched a massive effort to simplify the bloc’s regulatory rulebook after being confirmed for a second term a year ago. This has taken the form of a series of “omnibus” packages — on issues ranging from business supply chains to agriculture funding and migration — that have emerged from the EU’s policy machinery with little or no consultation. The EU ombudsman has slammed the Commission for procedural shortcomings in proposing the measures, saying they amounted to “maladministration.” Ribera, who ranks second at the EU executive behind its German president, acknowledged in a keynote speech that it was important to avoid duplication, align procedures, move faster and provide greater clarity to businesses. But this should not go too far. “Deregulation eliminates safeguards, it puts costs onto citizens and taxpayers, creates uncertainty, discourages investment,” she said at an event hosted by think tank Bruegel. “It’s a kind of Trumpist approach against being stable, reliable and predictable. It weakens our standards. It lowers the credibility of the single market, it enlarges inequalities and distortions.” Von der Leyen made the case for deregulation in a speech last month in Copenhagen. “When we look at simplification, we all agree we need simplification, we need deregulation,” she said. But Ribera cautioned against that on Thursday. “Simplifying rules is not the same as weakening protections or giving up on regulation,” she said. Lawmakers in the European Parliament earlier this month agreed to exempt more companies from green reporting rules after the center-right, right-wing and far-right groups allied to pass the EU’s first omnibus simplification package. Louise Guillot contributed reporting.

Heidi Kingstone is a journalist and author covering human rights issues, conflict and politics. Her most recent book is “Genocide: Personal Stories, Big Questions.” Slavery is alive and thriving, and it’s wrapped inside shiny chocolate bars that promise to be “fair trade,” “child-labor free” and “sustainable.” In West Africa, which produces more than 60 percent of the world’s cocoa, over 1.5 million children still work under hazardous conditions. Kids, some as young as five, use machetes to crack pods open in their hands, carry loads that weigh more than they do and spray toxic pesticides without protection. Meanwhile, of the roughly 2 million metric tons of cocoa the Ivory Coast produces each year, between 20 percent and 30 percent is grown illegally in protected forests. And satellite data from Global Forest Watch shows an increase in deforestation across key cocoa-growing regions as farmers, desperate for income, push deeper into forest reserves. The bitter truth is that despite decades of pledges, certification schemes and packaging glowing with virtue — of forests saved, farmers empowered and consciences soothed — most chocolate companies have failed to eradicate exploitation from their supply chains. Today, many cocoa farmers in the Ivory Coast and Ghana still earn less than a dollar a day, well below the poverty line. According to a 2024 report by the International Cocoa Initiative, the average farmer earns only 40 percent of a living wage. Put starkly, as the global chocolate market swells close to a $150 billion a year in 2025, the average farmer now receives less than 6 percent of the value of a single chocolate bar, whereas in the 1970s they received more than 50 percent. Then there’s the use of child labor, which is essentially woven into the fabric of this economy, where we have been sold the illusion of progress. From the 2001 Harkin-Engel Protocol — a voluntary agreement to end child labor by the world’s chocolate giants — to today’s glossy environmental, social and governance (ESG) reports, every initiative has promised progress and delivered delay. In 2007, the industry quietly redefined “public certification,” shifting it from a commitment to consumer labeling to a vague pledge to compile statistics on labor conditions. It missed the original 2010 deadline to eliminate child labor, as well as a new target to reduce it by 70 percent by 2020. And that year, a study by the University of Chicago’s National Opinion Research Center found that hazardous child labor in cocoa production increased from 2008 to 2019. “We covered a story about a ship carrying trafficked children,” recalled journalist Humphrey Hawksley, who first exposed the issue in the BBC documentary called Slavery: A Global Investigation. “The chocolate companies refused to comment and spoke as one industry. That was their rule. Even now, none of them is slave-free,” he added. As it stands, many of the more than 1.5 million West African children working in cocoa production are trafficked from neighboring Burkina Faso and Mali. Traffickers lure them with false promises or outright abduction, offering children as young as 10 either bicycles or small sums to travel to the Ivory Coast. There, they are sold to farmers for as little as $34 each. And once on these farms, they are trapped. They work up to 14 hours a day, sleep in windowless sheds with no clean water or toilets, and most never see the inside of a classroom. Last but not least, we come to deforestation: Since its independence, more than 90 percent of the Ivory Coast’s forests have disappeared due to cocoa farming. In 2024, deforestation accelerated despite corporate commitments to halt it by 2025, as declining soil fertility and stagnant prices pushed farmers farther into the forest to plant new cocoa trees. But as Reuters Correspondent for West and Central Africa Ange Aboa described them, such labels are “the biggest scam of the century!” | Lena Klimkeit/Picture Alliance via Getty Images Certification labels like “Rainforest Alliance” and “Fairtrade” are supposed to prevent this. But as Reuters Correspondent for West and Central Africa Ange Aboa described them, such labels are “the biggest scam of the century!” Complicit in all of this are the financiers and investors who profit. For example, Norway’s sovereign wealth fund is the world’s largest investor, and Norges Bank Investment Management (NBIM) is a shareholder in 9,000 corporations, including Nestlé, Mondelez, Hershey, Barry Callebaut and Lindt — all part of the direct chocolate cluster. NBIM also has shares in McDonald’s, Starbucks, Unilever, the Dunkin’ parent company and Tim Hortons — the indirect high-volume buyer cluster. “The richest families in cocoa — the Marses, the Ferreros, the Cargills, the Jacobs — are billionaires thanks to the exploitation of the poorest children on earth,” said journalist and human rights campaigner Fernando Morales-de la Cruz, the founder of Cacao for Change. “And countries like Norway, which claim to be ethical, profit from slavery and child labor.” The problem is, few are asking who picks the cocoa. And though the EU’s Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive, which was adopted last year, requires large companies to address human rights and environmental abuses in their supply chains, critics say the directive’s weaknesses, loopholes, and delayed enforcement will blunt its impact. However, all of this could still be fixed. Currently, a metric ton of cocoa sells for about $5,000 on world markets, but Morales-de la Cruz estimates that a fair farm-gate price would be around $7,500 per metric ton. To that end, he advocates for binding international trade standards that enforce living incomes and transparent pricing, modeled on the World Trade Organization’s compliance mechanisms. “Human rights should be as binding in trade as tariffs,” he insisted. The solution isn’t to buy more “ethical” bars but to demand accountability and support legislation that makes exploitation unprofitable. “We can’t shop our way to justice,” he said. So, as the trees in the Ivory Coast’s forests fall, the profits in Europe and North America continue to soar. And two decades after the industry vowed to end child labor, the cocoa supply chain remains one of the world’s most exploitative and least accountable. Moreover, the European Parliament’s vote on the Omnibus simplification package last month laid bare the corporate control and moral blindness still present in EU policymaking, all behind talk of “cutting red tape.” “Yet Europe’s media and EU-funded NGOs stay silent, talking of competitiveness and green transitions, while ignoring the children who harvest its cocoa, coffee and cotton,” said Morales-de la Cruz. “Europe cannot claim to defend human rights while profiting from exploitation.” However, until the industry pays a fair price and governments enforce real accountability, every bar of chocolate remains an unpaid moral debt.

BRUSSELS — Europe’s dominant center-right group will move ahead with a proposal to cut green rules that they are confident will get the support of right-wing and far-right groups in a crucial Parliament vote next week. If successful, it will mean EU green reporting rules will be significantly relaxed and apply to fewer companies. The European People’s Party has submitted changes to the first omnibus simplification bill similar to those previously negotiated with right-wing groups in Parliament, including the European Conservatives and Reformists, the Patriots for Europe and the Europe of Sovereign Nations, according to 3 Parliament officials familiar with the file. “The EPP will now move forward and table only EPP amendments. These are reasonable amendments, and I expect that we can secure a majority with this so that we can start the negotiations with [EU countries] swiftly,” said the EPP’ Jörgen Warborn, lead negotiator on the file. The European Commission put forward its first omnibus simplification bill last February to reduce reporting obligations for companies under the bloc’s corporate sustainability disclosure and supply chain transparency rules. Following a first failed attempt to agree on a common position with other centrist groups, the EPP is now proposing a version of the file that resembles an earlier compromise that it had negotiated with far-right groups. The EPP used that earlier version to try to force the S&D and the centrist Renew group to accept further cuts to the rules, but was unsuccessful. “Our position didn’t change at all, if EPP has tabled the package one amendments that is good for us because we would be able to support it,” Pascale Piera, an MEP from the far-right Patriots for Europe group, told POLITICO. Piera leads negotiations for the Patriots on this file. During an EPP leaders meeting on Tuesday, Weber said the group would aim at finding a right-wing majority on this sensitive green file given the Socialists had failed to support the first compromise, according to three officials with knowledge of the discussions. Groups have until next Thursday to decide how to vote.

BRUSSELS — Romania wants Europe’s rearmament push to benefit all EU nations, not just the largest ones. The massive increase in defense spending and weapons orders that is foreseen in the coming years should translate into new factories and jobs in his country, Romania’s Defense Minister Liviu-Ionuț Moșteanu told POLITICO. “If we spend people’s money on defense, it’s important for them to see that part of it is coming back to their country, for example via factories. It’s not just about buying rockets abroad,” he said in an interview at NATO headquarters. “We aim to have a part of the production in the country. We want to be part of the production chain,” he added. “Every country wants to have a big share, but so far only a few do.” Western nations such as France, Germany, Italy and Sweden have the bloc’s best-developed arms industries and are grabbing the majority of lucrative arms contracts. Former eastern bloc countries like Romania tend to have smaller defense companies without the technological know-how to produce the full array of weapons needed to rearm, meaning they are more dependent on external suppliers. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has opened the money taps for defense. NATO countries agreed this summer to boost their defense spending target from 2 percent of gross domestic product to 5 percent by 2035. According to the European Commission, reaching the new target will require an additional €288 billion spent on defense each year. Romania is spending 2.3 percent of its GDP on the military this year and plans to raise that to 3.5 percent by 2030. One of its main challenges is to modernize its armed forces, which have operated for decades largely with obsolete Soviet-era military kit. The country, which borders Ukraine, Moldova and the Black Sea as well as EU countries, is key to regional security in southeastern Europe and hosts a NATO battlegroup led by France that also includes American troops. LOANS FOR WEAPONS Bucharest is set to be the second-largest user of the EU’s €150 billion SAFE scheme, and is asking for €16.7 billion in low interest loans for defense. Moșteanu said two-thirds of that money will be spent on military equipment and the remaining third on infrastructure; it also includes military aid to Ukraine and Moldova. The condition for any procurement under SAFE — which is open mostly to European companies — would be industrial returns in Romania, the minister told POLITICO. The condition for any procurement under SAFE — which is open mostly to European companies — would be industrial returns in Romania, the minister told POLITICO. | Thierry Monasse/Getty Images In one example of the country’s push to ensure some defense cash stays at home, an ongoing €6.5 billion tender for more than 200 tanks sets a condition that final assembly happen in the country. “It’s very important for the years to come that when we talk about spending money, we spread [the industrial return] evenly throughout the continent,” the minister said, referring also to countries further from the frontlines such as Portugal. “It’s a negotiation with the producers,” he said, adding that if European manufacturers don’t accept domestic production requirements, Bucharest will take its money to companies outside the EU that are willing to do so. “If some programs don’t look good under SAFE, we’ll move them under the national budget,” he stressed. The Romanian government is already a big customer of foreign weapons manufacturers, especially from the U.S., Israel and South Korea. It recently purchased American-made Patriot air defense systems and F-35 warplanes, as well as K9 self-propelled howitzers from South Korea’s Hanwha Aerospace. Last year, Hanwha Aerospace executives told POLITICO that Romania could become a weapons production hub for Europe, the Middle East and Africa. WHAT ROMANIA BRINGS TO THE TABLE Romania, which is one of Europe’s most industrialized countries, has assets to offer arms-makers, Moșteanu argued. Romania, which is one of Europe’s most industrialized countries, has assets to offer arms-makers, Moșteanu argued. | Andreea Campeanu/Getty Images It’s already luring in some of Europe’s largest defense companies: Bucharest and German giant Rheinmetall signed an agreement earlier this year to build an ammunition powder plant that will be partly funded by EU money under the Act in Support of Ammunition Production scheme. In the near future, manufacturers will need to open new factories to meet demand, and Romania could easily host some of them, Moșteanu said: “We have defense production facilities with all the necessary approvals. They’re not up-to-date but it’s a good starting point.” Another strength of the country is its robust automotive sector, which could help weapons manufacturers swiftly ramp up manufacturing. Defense companies across the bloc are teaming up with carmakers to benefit from their mass production expertise. “We have a very strong automotive industry in Romania that can switch to the defense industry,” the minister said, adding that the machinery, production lines, expertise and supply chains are already in place. Romania is also looking to cut red tape. “We’re looking to change the legislation to speed investments in the defense industry. I know there is the defense omnibus in Brussels,” Moșteanu said, referring to the European Commission’s simplification package, “but I don’t know when it’ll come, I prefer to have something quick.”

BRUSSELS — Europe’s center right has two weeks to decide on the strategy that will define its next four years in the European Parliament: Dilute its ambition and stick with traditional mainstream allies — or work with the far right to get the job done.   While governments in EU capitals grapple with the rise of populists, and centrist parties struggle to hold their ground, pan-European groups in the Parliament are confronting similar challenges. Last week’s failure to pass a landmark law aimed at cutting red tape underlined how little room for maneuver the center still has. The center-right European People’s Party “still has the choice between working with the far right that wants to demolish Europe, or a stable pro-European coalition,” Bas Eickhout, co-chair of the Greens, considered one of the EPP’s centrist allies, told POLITICO. After the EPP’s failed attempt last week to pass a bill cutting green reporting obligations for companies ― because some center-left MEPs rebelled against their party line ― the far-right Patriots for Europe group called on the EPP to abandon its old allies from the center-left Socialists and Democrats (S&D), the liberal Renew Europe group and the Greens. The Patriots want the EPP to make a deal with them instead, in order to pass the bill when lawmakers vote again on Nov. 12. “I think that a number of EPP members realized that they had made a mistake in allying themselves with the architects of the Green Deal,” said Pascale Piera, the Patriots lawmaker leading work on this file. EU leaders are pressuring the Parliament to move the file forward within the next month so Brussels can prove it’s capable of cutting red tape for businesses and boost its ailing economy.   The debate over the law is forcing a reckoning for the EPP, which must decide whether to uphold the so-called cordon sanitaire — the unwritten rule dictating that groups in the center don’t work with the far right — or declare the centrist coalition is failing and throw in their lot with the other side of the aisle. That could cause a seismic rupture in the way politics has always been done in Brussels. RACE FOR LEGITIMACY  Political groups in the Parliament are extremely divided over how to implement the new Brussels simplification agenda. While groups to the right of the hemicycle call for a major rollback of EU rules — particularly environmental laws, which they see as the culprit for stagnating growth — those on the left are fighting to preserve the rules they helped craft in the previous mandate. The European Commission put forward its omnibus simplification bill because it wants to reduce reporting obligations for companies under the bloc’s corporate sustainability disclosure and supply chain transparency rules, core parts of the European Green Deal.  It’s the first in a series of proposals aimed at cutting red tape to boost European competitiveness in the second term of Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, a leading member of the EPP. For weeks leading up to the failed vote in Strasbourg, the EPP had flirted with right-wing and far-right groups. “I think that a number of EPP members realized that they had made a mistake in allying themselves with the architects of the Green Deal,” said Pascale Piera. | Julien De Rosa/Getty Images It negotiated with the Patriots, the far-right Europe of Sovereign Nations (ESN) and the right-wing European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) groups to get them to back the legislation, only to then use that agreement to persuade the liberals and Socialists to scale back their demands and agree to major cuts to the laws. Although the latter groups agreed, some of the Socialists refused to vote in favor, causing the proposal to be rejected. Lead EPP negotiator Jörgen Warborn called the result “disappointing” and said it was up to the Socialists to clarify their position. ‘RELIABLE MAJORITY’ Even though the centrist coalition failed to pass the bill, the liberals and Social Democrats hope the EPP will keep faith with the center by making enough concessions to get Socialist lawmakers to vote in favor.   “There has to be a text put to a vote that can have a majority in the plenary, and the more reliable majority is EPP with S&D, Renew and the Greens,” Socialists negotiator René Repasi told POLITICO.  “That’s what the final text has to reflect.” But that’s not the direction the right-wing groups hope things will go. For the Patriots’ Piera, the law in its initial form, negotiated with the far right, has enough backing to pass. She said she was “surprised” the EPP abandoned that version. “The EPP will not be able to move further to the left than it has done so far, as the discussions will be public and their core electorate are people who are very attentive to the health of the economic sector,” she said. A Parliament official from the ESN also told POLITICO that the group “will strive for a solution that resembles [the first proposal].” Yet critics fear the precedent that this would set. Lara Wolters, the former Socialist negotiator who quit because of the deal, blamed the “EPP’s refusal to make a fundamental political choice on whether to cooperate as a matter of principle with the groups to the EPP’s right, or those to EPP’s left.” SETTING A PRECEDENT Leaning on the far right to get the bill through “would show a strategic direction for the EPP,” Andreas Rasche, professor of business in society at the Copenhagen Business School told POLITICO, adding this would set a “dangerous precedent” for legislative work going forward. While the right-wing bloc may be able to strike a deal in the Parliament, the S&D’s Repasi warned that the text could change following negotiations with EU countries. Last time the EPP tried to gut an anti-deforestation bill to cut red tape with the support of the far right, EU countries rebuffed the maximalist proposal and the Parliament had to backtrack.   “The rapporteur should keep in mind he still needs a majority for the trilogue results as well,” Repasi said, referring to the final vote to take place in the Parliament following final negotiations with the Commission and EU governments. 

BRUSSELS ― The EU’s watchdog has opened an inquiry into whether the European Commission acted secretively in its dealings with industry before launching a series of business-friendly initiatives, according to a letter seen by POLITICO. The European Ombudsman was acting on a complaint by the Corporate Europe Observatory, which scrutinizes lobbying. The NGO had accused the Commission of being “evasive” about meetings its officials held with BusinessEurope and the European Round Table for Industry (ERT). The discussions, which took place earlier this year, concerned the Commission’s so-called omnibus simplification agenda ― a series of proposals that cut the amount of regulations that companies must follow. It’s not unusual for the Ombudsman to open inquiries into the Commission, but this one targets a particularly contentious issue and comes against the backdrop of criticism from lawmakers, officials and transparency campaigners that President Ursula von der Leyen is running a more opaque operation than did her predecessors. The Corporate Europe Observatory asked the Commission for information about its talks with the business representatives, saying public notes on the discussion contained little detail. The complaint referred to minutes from a meeting in May between the cabinet of Economy Commissioner Valdis Dombrovskis and the European Round Table for Industry, which read: “ERT inquired about the proposals regarding the first omnibus proposal. Head of Cabinet gave an overview of the state of play.” LOTS OF LOBBYING The Ombudsman wrote in its response to the NGO that the Commission’s “implicit refusal” to provide any follow-up documents on the meeting after it requested them justified an inquiry, which it opened earlier this month. The NGO argued that it was particularly important to access the information given the “enormous” amount of lobbying that has gone into the simplification plan — the Commission’s move to cut red tape. It said more than 600 one-on-one meetings between the Commission and lobbyists have been held on the plan, which businesses have largely welcomed because it aims to scrap piles of proposed laws. At the same time the initiative has concerned civil society, which sees it as a euphemism for deregulation. The complaint referred to minutes from a meeting in May between the cabinet of Economy Commissioner Valdis Dombrovskis and the European Round Table for Industry. | Oliver Contreras/Getty Images The complaint also impugns the Commission’s new approach to openness around meetings. Last year, in one of the first moves of von der Leyen’s second term, the EU executive expanded the amount of meetings that must be made public. Those obligations now apply to more than 1,500 officials, not just the most senior members of the Commission. It also required the Commission to provide detailed notes of what happened in the meetings. But in reality those minutes are often short and vague, frustrating the same groups that initially considered the change a win for accountability.  The Commission did not respond to a request for comment. The Ombudsman could issue recommendations to the Commission if it finds against it, although it is not obliged to do so.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez are helping each other navigate EU politics to deliver their government’s promises following a meeting in Madrid just over a month ago. On Friday, the Spanish government announced that Germany had agreed to reconsider its opposition to making Catalan, Basque, and Galician official EU languages. “Our two governments have agreed today to open a dialogue with the aim of finding a response to Spain’s request,” a statement read. The two countries have opened bilateral talks with the objective of proposing an agreed text to all EU countries in an upcoming indefinite meeting. Making Catalan an official EU language is one of the key promises Sánchez gave to nationalist leader Carles Puigdemont, whose party, Junts, and their seven seats in the Spanish parliament hold the key to Sánchez’s mandate stability, as he needs their votes to reach a majority. Germany was the largest country to oppose the move when EU countries voted on it in May. It’s the latest example of cooperation after a September meeting in Madrid between Merz and Sánchez, who represent Europe’s two biggest political families — the Conservatives and the Social Democrats. At that rare German-Spanish lovefest, they vowed to work closely together at the EU level to deliver on their promises, helping each other strengthen their grip on power in Berlin and Madrid. “Germany and Spain will continue to strengthen their ties and commit to more Europe,” Sánchez said back then. “That message of unity is the most powerful one we can convey to our fellow citizens right now.” Similarly, Merz argued that, since the European Socialists in Brussels are led by a Spaniard (Iratxe García), and the European center-right by a German (Manfred Weber), both leaders “agreed to talk to each other and try to overcome the differences so that the two groups can then truly work together effectively in the European Parliament.” In the weeks that ensued, practical examples this freshly forged alliance are coming to the fore and having a real impact at the European level.   The announcement on linguistic recognition comes just two weeks after Sánchez intervened with the Socialists group in the European Parliament to force them to rubber-stamp a controversial simplification package, slashing green reporting rules for businesses, put forward by the center-right European People’s Party — Merz’s party. The proposal, known in Brussels as Omnibus 1, is a brainchild of Merz and was at the center of his campaign for the chancellery in the spring.