The European Commission is set to unveil the Biotech Act I, an EU cardiovascular health plan and a simplification of the bloc’s medical devices and in vitro diagnostics rules on Dec. 16, according to the latest Commission agenda published Monday. The first part of the Biotech Act will focus on the pharmaceutical industry and is being produced without a dedicated impact assessment. The second part — covering other biotech sectors — is expected in the third quarter of 2026. The upcoming cardiovascular health plan — inspired by the bloc’s Beating Cancer Plan — will cover prevention, early detection and screening, treatment and management, and rehabilitation. Meanwhile, simplification of the bloc’s medical devices and in vitro diagnostics rules comes after the regulations drove up assessment costs, caused certification delays, and led to product withdrawals from the market. Europe’s Health Commissioner Olivér Várhelyi has previously said the sector needs a “major overhaul.” Additionally, the Commission’s agenda includes a “drugs package” comprising new rules on drug precursors and an EU Drugs Strategy and European action plan against drug trafficking — both scheduled for Dec. 3.

LONDON — Keir Starmer plans to formally sign the U.K.-India trade deal with Narendra Modi on a visit to India this summer. Starmer has touted the deal as part of his success on the international stage since it was agreed in early May after three years of talks. At the G20 summit late last year, Britain’s leader accepted an invitation from Modi to visit India. Britain’s PM is planning to travel to New Delhi this summer to finalize the pact, two people close to the planning process told POLITICO. Starmer hailed a “new era for trade and the economy” as a result of the deal, while Modi said it would “catalyze trade, investment, growth, job creation, and innovation in both our economies.” Britain’s Business and Trade Secretary Jonathan Reynolds is meeting Indian Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal Tuesday to discuss implementing the pact and pushing forward with talks on the as-yet-unfinished investment treaty that goes with it. The two are meeting in Paris on the sidelines of the OECD trade ministers meeting. India’s parliament is “very fond” of the deal, said Indian MP Ravi Shankar Prasad. “It shows the depth of our relationship,” Prasad, who is leading a delegation of parliamentarians visiting the U.K. this week, told reporters at the Indian High Commission in London Tuesday. The pact is the most valuable trade deal the U.K. has struck since leaving the EU, and could increase the U.K.’s GDP by £4.8 billion by 2040, according to British estimates. The deal aims to cut through high tariffs on U.K. goods in India with 85 percent becoming tariff-free within a decade. The effect will be equivalent to slashing £1 billion in tariffs after 10 years.  Measures include immediately slashing India’s 150 percent tariff on Scotch whisky in half before it is cut to 40 percent after ten years. Duties on the auto sector will drop from 100 percent to 10 percent with quotas on both sides for the sensitive sector. Indian duties will also be lowered on cosmetics, aerospace, medical devices, electrical machinery and agriculture and food. Britain will lower tariffs on textiles, footwear, frozen prawns and other food products. While U.K. negotiators resisted granting more visas for Indian students studying in the U.K., the Indian side has talked up an ““unprecedented” win on its workers being exempt from employee tax contributions in Britain — triggering some pushback from U.K. opposition parties. The official text of the agreement has not yet been published and will only be delivered to parliaments in both countries once Starmer and Modi sign the pact. Indian officials have said the deal is currently undergoing legal scrubbing so that it can be signed within three months of its agreement, which took place on May 6. Downing Street declined to comment.

BRUSSELS — The European Commission Thursday upped the pressure in talks with U.S. President Donald Trump by putting forward retaliation worth nearly €100 billion of imports — including big-ticket items like aircraft — that could get tariffed. The catalog includes passenger cars, medical devices, chemicals and plastics, and a slew of agricultural products. Also back on the list are bourbon and other spirits, after wine-producing nations France and Italy pressured the Commission to remove them fearing Trump’s wrath.  These are part of a 200-page catalog of more than 4,800 goods compiled by EU trade officials. EU imports of these items exceeded €109 billion in 2024 according to Eurostat — aircraft are the biggest at more than €13 billion followed by autos at €7 billion. The EU is also considering restricting exports of scrap steel and chemical products worth €4.4 billion.  And, in a parallel measure, Brussels would launch a dispute at the World Trade Organization over Trump’s imposition of so-called reciprocal tariffs, as well as tariffs on cars and car parts. It is not clear yet when Brussels will officially start the case.  The real objective remains “negotiated outcomes with the US,” European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said in a statement. “At the same time, we continue preparing for all possibilities, and the consultation launched today will help guide us in this necessary work”. NO WAY BACK The European Commission is moving ahead with the new lists because it has realized there won’t be a return to the status quo in its relations with Washington.  It however expects the Trump administration to have more flexibility on lowering the 10 percent “reciprocal” tariffs, while the levies on cars, steel and aluminum are likely to stay as it pursues its “reindustrialization strategy goal,” a senior European Commission official said.  “If we don’t get down from 10 percent, there’s no negotiation, no deal,” they added.  The lineup is subject to change, as businesses and EU countries will have until June 10 to provide feedback and advocate for sensitive goods to be removed from the list to avoid being caught in Trump’s reprisals.  This happened when the Commission in April consulted with EU capitals for its retaliation against Trump’s earlier steel and aluminum tariffs, with bourbon whiskey being removed at the request of France, Italy and Ireland. In the end, these measures were announced, but not implemented, as Trump dialed back his tariffs in response to a stock market meltdown. “Boeing is very welcome to reply,” the senior official added, referring to the American plane maker that could be hit majorly if these tariffs are enacted. The total value of the listed products is much lower than the €379 billion of EU exports that is affected by U.S. tariffs. A second senior Commission official said there is some restraint on Brussels’ side, “to not shoot ourselves in the foot. We want to be prudent,” to avoid a spiralling tit-for-tat dynamic that would ultimately “hurt our industry.” The list adds to the bloc’s existing retaliation tactics, after several high-level meetings between Brussels and Washington failed to ease soaring trade tensions. Washington still imposes a 10 percent tariff on imports of most EU goods, as well as 25 percent levies on cars, steel and aluminum.  The Trump administration is also investigating sectors like pharmaceuticals, trucks, lumber and semiconductors along with semiconductor manufacturing equipment. But a higher “reciprocal” tariff of 20 percent, currently suspended, would kick back in from early July if no transatlantic deal is reached. This story has been updated.

LONDON — The fifteenth time’s a charm, it would seem. After a series of false starts, missed Diwali deadlines and changes of government, the U.K. and India have finally put their differences aside to strike a free trade agreement. But the final pact — with some details set out Tuesday — is far from what negotiators imagined when they launched the talks back in 2022, with compromises made on both sides. From tariffs to visas and services, we talk through the key concessions in the long-awaited agreement, and what they could mean for U.K. businesses, as well as the big unanswered questions. WHAT WE KNOW Tariffs will be cut across the board The agreement will cut Indian tariffs on 90 percent of product lines, with 85 percent of those becoming fully tariff-free within a decade, according to basic details published by the U.K.’s Department for Business and Trade (DBT) on Tuesday. British alcoholic drink exporters look set to be big winners. Whisky and gin tariffs, currently set at 150 percent, will be halved to 75 percent before falling to 40 percent after 10 years. Mark Kent, chief executive of the Scotch Whisky Association, said the change would be “transformational” and create 1,200 jobs across the U.K..  There also appears to be positive news for another key sector: car manufacturing. DBT says automotive tariffs will be cut from over 100 percent to 10 percent — but crucially, subject to a quota. Trade Secretary Jonathan Reynolds told reporters on Tuesday that the U.K. would get access to a quota to sell 22,000 higher-value electric vehicles to India at the lower 10 percent tariff rate. India would meanwhile get a quota to sell low- and mid-range electric vehicles to the U.K. The government says this quota will be phased in over time in discussion with industry in order to align with their production plans. Industry group the SMMT welcomed the deal but said the details “will likely feature compromises, and might not offer unfettered market access to all UK automotive goods.” Other Indian tariffs cut under the FTA include those on imported British cosmetics, aerospace, lamb, medical devices, salmon, electrical machinery, soft drinks, chocolate, and biscuits. The U.K. has in turn cut tariffs on clothes, footwear, and some food products — including, the government is keen to note, frozen prawns. On the flipside, tariffs remain in areas like dairy and milled rice where both sides wanted to protect domestic industries from competition. Together with the other changes in the agreement, the government expects a steep 59.4 percent increase in U.K. exports to India — worth £15.7 billion. This is matched by a smaller 25 percent increase in Indian exports to Britain, worth £9.8 billion.  This all adds up to a 38.8 percent increase in trade worth £25.5 billion — or 0.1 percent of GDP by 2040. The number is tiny when compared to the much larger expected 4 percent hit from leaving the EU single market, but looks a bit more impressive when compared to the 0.08 percent expected benefit from, for example, the FTA the last government signed with Australia.  India scores concessions on social security payments Visas have become the most headline-grabbing issue in the negotiations. After the Indian side talked up an “unprecedented” win on its workers being exempt from employee tax contributions in Britain, Starmer’s political opponents hit back at the deal. Conservative Leader Kemi Badenoch said she refused to sign a deal on similar terms back when she was trade secretary, arguing: “When Labour negotiates Britain loses.” In the end, it’s a mixed bag when it comes to mobility concessions. Jonathan Reynolds said on Tuesday that an existing visa route for some temporary workers that’s not currently available to India — and capped at 1,800 people — will now be open to Indian employees. That list of professions includes musicians, yoga teachers and chefs. Indian applicants will still need to meet the usual visa requirements on salary and skills and the cap won’t be lifted. The U.K.’s visa concession is a long way from New Delhi’s first requests, with India originally proposing larger quotas for professionals, particularly in sectors like IT and healthcare. But there are already political fireworks over one big Indian demand in the talks — an easing of social security payments for Indian workers in the U.K. The U.K. and India have agreed to a Double Contributions Convention, which means that neither Indian nor British workers will be required to pay national insurance contributions in both their home country and the one they are working in — they will only pay it in one for the first three years of a placement.  The deal also covers employers, who do not have to pay social security contributions in the U.K. for three years.  This concession means “Starmer has hiked National Insurance on Brits while giving an exemption to Indian migrants,” Shadow Justice Secretary Robert Jenrick wrote as Tory MPs criticised the move in parliament Tuesday afternoon. There will be greater access to Indian government contracts “For the very first time British businesses will have guaranteed access to India’s vast procurement market covering good services and construction,” Trade Policy Minister Douglas Alexander told parliament on Tuesday. More than a decade ago, Indian PM Narendra Modi launched the country’s Make in India program, which prevents foreign competitors from accessing the government’s procurement market. India has since been pouring government stimulus into large infrastructure projects throughout the country. But in a major win for the U.K., Delhi has agreed a carve out allowing British firms to access some areas of the country’s procurement market and compete for tenders. British firms will now “be able to bid for approximately 40,000 tenders worth at least £38 billion a year,” Alexander said.  WHAT WE DON’T KNOW How will the UK and India resolve their differences over carbon taxes? India has been vocal about its distaste for the U.K.’s proposed carbon border tax. Wrangling over CBAM has at times seemed likely to sink talks.  In the end, the solution was to dodge the question entirely. The FTA won’t address the question of CBAM directly. Draft U.K. legislation for its CBAM anticipates that the levy will apply to imported goods from 1 January 2027, covering carbon-intensive industries like steelmaking, cement, aluminum and fertilizer. Some Indian sectors are expected to be hit hard. Dialogue is expected to continue on the issue, but not at the expense of doing this FTA.  Will the two sides sign a bilateral investment treaty? A key win for the City of London would have been a bilateral investment treaty, which appeared alongside the FTA text. But both sides weren’t able to get this over the finish line.  The proposed pact, controversial in India, would have given firms the right to sue governments over policy changes they claim would harm their investments, through a mechanism known as the Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS).  In 2016, India scrapped a number of its older treaties with other countries, after facing a wave of arbitration claims, which now total at 29 cases against its domestic regulations and policy measures.  Although talks on the investment treaty continue, there’s still no clear timeline for when — or if — a deal will ever be agreed. How much will services firms really benefit? The British government insisted Tuesday that the pact includes India’s most ambitious services commitments to date, but details were hard to come by and some sectors are less than impressed. Trade Policy Minister Douglas Alexander said it will ensure U.K. banks and finance companies are placed on an equal footing with Indian suppliers. “It also encourages the recognition of professional qualifications, so that U.K. and Indian firms can access the right talent at the right time, whether they are in Mumbai or indeed in Manchester.” Yet a trade body for Britain’s legal services sector — the second largest in the world — called it a “failure” and a “a missed opportunity” that the deal doesn’t give them more market access. The sector is “disappointed to see that the U.K.-India FTA has been agreed without reference to legal services,” said Law Society president Richard Atkinson. Changes to India’s regulations that would allow foreign firms to practice without a domestic partner were unveiled by the Bar Council of India in March 2023, but they remain in limbo following pushback from local legal firms. The digital trade provisions in the deal also “don’t go as far as we’d have liked to see,” said Julian David, CEO of techUK which advocates for tech giants. David said business groups in both countries are looking forward to working with the U.K. and Indian governments “to turn this deal into real momentum for the sector.” How long will it take to ratify?  Opposition parties are already calling for parliament to be given a vote on the new free trade agreement.  Ed Davey, the leader of the Liberal Democrats, was quick out the gate on Tuesday warning that not consulting MPs would set a “dangerous precedent for future deals” — particularly one with the United States.  Under the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 (CRAG), parliament only has the power to delay ratification of a treaty and to force the government to formally explain its rationale. But even this can only happen if the government actively chooses to set aside time for a debate and vote on the agreement, which it is under no obligation to do. The last government was criticised by a parliamentary committee for not giving MPs time to debate its post-Brexit FTA with Australia.  The Labour government has only said in relation to the U.S. trade deal that it is committed to the CRAG process.  Douglas Alexander on Tuesday said the House would “need time to scrutinize this deal before the ratification process” but notably did not commit to a vote. “My department will follow the process set out in the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010,” he said, which requires the government to lay the treaty in parliament for 21 days. “The house will, of course, have the opportunity to scrutinize any legislation associated with its implementation.” Trade Secretary Jonathan Reynolds told reporters that the ratification process would take “broadly” around 12 months. That gives the government’s critics plenty of time to find more they don’t like.

LONDON — After three years of hard-fought negotiations, the U.K. and India finally have a trade deal they can agree on. Prime Ministers Keir Starmer and Narendra Modi agreed the deal in a call Tuesday after an intensive negotiating sprint by trade officials in London last week. Striking the deal became a top economic priority for both nations as U.S. President Donald Trump unleashed a series of major tariff actions on its biggest trading partners. “We are now in a new era for trade and the economy,” Starmer said as the deal was announced on Tuesday. “Today we have agreed a landmark deal with India — one of the fastest growing economies in the world, which will grow the economy and deliver for British people and business.” Modi said the landmark deal will “further deepen our Comprehensive Strategic Partnership, and catalyse trade, investment, growth, job creation, and innovation in both our economies. I look forward to welcoming PM Starmer to India soon.” The pact is the most valuable post-Brexit trade deal the U.K. has struck since leaving the European Union. An economic forecast by the British government suggests the deal will increase the U.K.’s GDP by £4.8 billion by 2040. Negotiators have been working around the clock on the deal since Britain’s Trade Secretary Jonathan Reynolds traveled to Delhi in February to relaunch the deal with Indian Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal following elections in both countries last year. Goyal and Reynolds were nearly able push the deal over the line when India’s trade chief returned to London Friday following visits to Oslo and Brussels. The two put the finishing touches to the pact over the weekend. Negotiators, however, were unable to secure a Bilateral Investment Treaty being sought in parallel with talks for the trade agreement. Negotiations to secure an investment treaty continue. SLASHING TARIFFS As it stands, the deal will cut through high tariffs on U.K. goods in India with 85 percent becoming tariff-free within a decade. The effect will be equivalent to slashing £1 billion in tariffs after 10 years.  Measures include lowering India’s 150 percent tariff on Scotch whisky by half immediately, before it is cut to 40 percent after ten years. Duties on the auto sector will drop from 100 percent to 10 percent with quotas on both sides for the sensitive sector. Indian duties will also be lowered on cosmetics, aerospace, medical devices, electrical machinery and agriculture and food. Britain will lower tariffs on textiles, footwear, frozen prawns and other food products. Talks stalled under the previous Conservative government over concerns about migration, better access for services firms and a host of other issues. Last month saw negotiators overcame a significant hurdle in the talks when they closed the mobility chapter, which governs inter-company transfers. India conceded Britain will only offer minor changes to its visa regime. Negotiators also resolved another sticking point in the talks with India securing a “Double Contribution Convention,” allowing firms to claw back payments to Britain’s state pension pot for those on short-stay visas. Britain’s nascent tax on high-carbon emissions imports is of significant concern for India. Yet this won’t be dealt with in the trade deal and is part of ongoing bilateral discussions. Modi is racing to transform India into a developed nation by 2047. Its economy overtook Japan’s as the world’s fourth largest globally this year and is projected to take the third spot by 2028. This developing story is being updated.

World Health Organization (WHO) members will reconvene on Tuesday to finalize a deal on sharing life-saving technology with developing countries as part of a new pandemic agreement, after all-night talks brought them within striking distance of an accord. The WHO members have reached an agreement “in principle” over how to tackle future pandemics after three years of discussions, the co-chair of the negotiating body told Agence France-Presse on Saturday. According to the latest draft of the proposed pact, obtained by POLITICO, most of the text is now agreed. Still to be signed off on is contentious language governing the sharing of technology for pandemic-related products such as drugs, vaccines and therapeutics. Developing countries have pushed for strong language that will ensure they are able to scale up production in their own regions, rather than waiting in line for critical technologies. But developed countries, including members of the European Union, have insisted throughout that any tech transfer from pharma companies must be on “voluntary and mutually agreed terms.” Under the latest proposed fix, still subject to final confirmation, the sharing of technology should be “willingly undertaken and on mutually agreed terms.” The deal is due to go to the WHO’s annual assembly for final approval next month.

Over the past couple of years there has been a growing focus on PFAS (per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances) — a group of more than 10,000 synthetic chemicals that are widely used in consumer and industrial products. Their chemical stability and resistance to oil and water has made them incredibly useful across many industries, including the pharmaceutical sector, where they are critical to medicines and medical devices, manufacturing and packaging. Following a joint REACH restriction proposal by five EU member states in 2023, this broad group of chemicals has been under the spotlight due to environment and health concerns, potentially concluding in a widespread ban on all PFAS by 2027. The research-based pharmaceutical industry supports regulating PFAS of concern, substituting them or minimizing their use while protecting patients’ access to medicines. > The research-based pharmaceutical industry supports regulating PFAS of > concern, substituting them or minimizing their use while protecting patients’ > access to medicines. There is also broad consensus within the pharmaceutical sector that environmental legislation is important in mitigating environmental impacts and climate change, and companies are working on numerous initiatives to achieve this. €50 million project launched Our industry is actively searching for alternatives. As part of the Innovative Health Initiative (IHI) — a public-private partnership initiative for health research and innovation between the EU and Europe’s life science industries — a call was launched for a project on PFAS exposure, emissions and end-of-life management in the health care sector.  The initiative will see at least €48 million — half of which are in-kind contributions from the industry and half EU funding for public partners — committed to explore which PFAS are currently used in the pharma and medtech sectors, identify opportunities to phase out PFAS of concern and find alternatives that maintain at least the same level of patient safety and product performance. From the industry side, the initiative is led by Belgian based pharma company, UCB, and involving 26 pharmaceutical and medtech companies. Further proposal considerations will look at the improved usage of PFAS materials and minimize environmental exposure, map the types and applications of PFAS throughout the supply chain, and develop a database of alternatives. The call is open until April, 23 for consortia to apply for the funding. Large companies that would like to contribute in-kind and join the existing industry consortium should contact EFPIA. via EFPIA The IHI call is important. Currently no evidence exists of technically suitable and readily available alternatives that can substitute PFAS active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs). No single ‘drop in’ replacement exists, given that each API is not only treating a certain medical condition, but also has individual properties like efficacy, side-effects, incompatibilities and drug interactions. Understanding PFAS and its uses in medicines PFAS is a broad non-specific term relating to thousands of molecules. Not all PFAS present the same risks to the environment or health. The industry relies on certain PFAS for safe manufacturing, distribution and use of medicinal products. Packaging, drug application devices and processing machinery, or items to extend a medicine’s shelf life or protect sterility, are just a few examples of what would fall under a blanket ban. For example, high-performance fluoropolymers — especially polychlorotrifluoroethylene and ethylene tetrafluoroethylene — are vital to the containment, storage and delivery of injectable medicinal products. They help to form protective barriers, ensuring quality and safety and preventing degradation and deterioration. They also facilitate sterilization according to required Good Manufacturing Practices standards of fully coated stoppers due to the smooth hard surface. The unique properties of fluoropolymers provide resistance to biological, chemical and physical degradation. The impact on medicines and vaccines development It is with this in mind that the industry is urging caution on a blanket ban on PFAS. Without a derogation for medicines, 98% of the market authorizations of new medicines would need to be amended, which in turn could see around 70% of critical medicines in EU member states at risk of short supply. An EFPIA survey of 40 pharmaceutical companies found that at least 93% of APIs manufacturing relies on PFAS. via EFPIA If the ban applies as proposed, a wide range of medicines will become in short supply or unavailable, with impact on patient health anticipated both within and outside of the European Economic Area (EEA). Manufacturing and product development will have to be relocated outside of the EEA, impacting the economy and strategic autonomy of Europe. Additionally, banning PFAS within the EU while importing PFAS-containing products from elsewhere would be inconsistent and undermine the policy’s credibility. via EFPIA Protecting patient care is a joint responsibility. While European lawmakers will need to make difficult decisions, changes to environmental legislation need to work for Europe and for all patients while being realistically deliverable over the long and short term. > If the ban applies as proposed, a wide range of medicines will become in short > supply or unavailable, with impact on patient health anticipated both within > and outside of the European Economic Area. The way forward Our industry wants to see legislation that is proportionate, effective and safe with a transitional period of time-limited or unlimited derogations for low risk PFAS while protecting patients’ access to medicines. There is currently no like-for-like replacement for PFAS, and making changes to medicines in this highly regulated sector requires new approvals. Any alternatives must be analyzed for their superior environmental performance and must not compromise patient safety. When a viable and scalable alternative is identified, implementation will require time and collaboration among partners in the value chain — including regulators, as any changes in manufacturing necessitate new regulatory approvals. To make a regulation fit for purpose, EFPIA is proposing three recommendations: 1. Time limited derogations until suitable alternative solutions are commonly agreed and qualified. 2. The development of partnerships throughout supply chains to better manage PFAS emissions. 3. Global health authorities expedite approvals of suitable fluorine-free alternatives. Pharmaceutical companies are among the most active in the world in developing policies to mitigate climate change and improve public health. They often aim higher than the compliance targets set within the various EU legislative requirements as part of the EU Green Deal initiatives, including under the zero pollution, circular economy and climate action plans. From the climate emergency to clean water, there are projects underway to minimize the environmental impacts of our supply chain, manufacturing and products. As the EU navigates the complexities of PFAS regulation, we must champion policies that simultaneously uphold environmental goals and ensure uninterrupted access to medicines.

The European Parliament approved Belgian and Swedish commissioner-hopefuls Hadja Lahbib and Jessika Roswall on Wednesday — but only after significant backroom horse-trading. The green light for Lahbib and Roswall was part of a deal between the European People’s Party, the Renew group and the Socialists & Democrats, four lawmakers and four staffers told POLITICO. It came after the EPP’s Roswall flunked her parliamentary hearing, putting in a disappointing performance as she attempted to convince MEPs that despite her lack of experience in environmental policymaking, she had the chops to become the bloc’s environment commissioner. Lahbib, from the liberal Renew group, performed well in her own hearing, but was on shaky ground going into it due to her controversial reputation in Belgium and a series of gaffes. With both the liberals and the EPP determined to protect their commissioner-hopefuls, they resorted to a strategy of mutually assured destruction: The EPP would only approve Renew’s Lahbib if the liberals cleared Roswall. “Obviously, the two negotiations for the two commissioners were connected, and it was not possible for us to agree on Roswall without having EPP agreeing on Lahbib and vice versa,” lead Renew MEP Pascal Canfin, who was involved in the negotiations, told reporters after the talks. But there was more to the deal than just the commissioner quid-pro-quo. In a meeting on Wednesday, S&D chief Iratxe García, Renew boss Valérie Hayer and EPP President Manfred Weber used the Lahbib-Roswall stalemate to agree on the competences of the health committee — which the Parliament wants to upgrade from a sub-committee to a fully fledged one, Canfin and others confirmed. Despite a political agreement in July to upgrade the committee’s status, implementation had stalled as political groups couldn’t agree on which responsibilities to keep within the environment committee’s remit, and which ones to pass on to health. Per Wednesday’s multi-layered deal, the health committee will assume responsibility for everything related to public health policies such as health systems, tobacco, pharmaceutical policy and medical devices, while environment will keep food safety, pesticides, environmental health and air quality, Canfin said. The agreement was a major win for the S&D, which had feared the health committee might encroach onto the territory of the environment committee — chaired by one of its own, according to an MEP who spoke on condition of anonymity. At first, lawmakers wanted to include as part of the package deal a decision on new amendments from the EPP on the EU’s deforestation regulation ahead of next week’s voting session in the European Parliament, several MEPs indicated. But ultimately, “it was agreed that it will be out of the scope of the discussion,” Canfin said.  EYE FOR AN EYE  Roswall’s hearing on Tuesday left many lawmakers disappointed with the Swede’s failure to provide detailed answers. Some groups initially wanted to send Roswall additional questions to answer. Eventually, Roswall’s evaluation meeting was postponed to Wednesday at 2:30 p.m. Despite Lahbib putting in a good performance during her own hearing on Wednesday, rumors started swirling that the EPP would hold the liberal nominee hostage to Roswall’s approval. An EPP spokesman explained the group wasn’t happy with Lahbib, as she “was looking for an ideological agenda rather than common EU interest.” As Lahbib’s evaluation meeting neared, political groups decided to postpone the meeting from 1:30 p.m. to 2:30 p.m. to match the timing of Roswall’s, effectively interlinking their outcomes. Additional reporting by Eddy Wax and Barbara Moens.