Welcome to Better Europe’s weekly update on EU Affairs.
OMNIBUS IS MALADMINISTRATION
Governing by omnibus is maladministration. You’ve heard it here before, but now the European Ombudswoman formally agrees in her damning conclusions on the Commission’s approach to deregulation. In her view, the first Omnibus package and two other laws were not just rushed; the Commission also crossed the line into maladministration, failing to meet the basic standards of law-making required under the Treaties. The Commission made a mistake by skipping impact assessments, limiting public consultation to industry mostly, and ignoring the climate consistency check required since 2021 under the EU’s own Climate Law. Does this stop Omnibus I? No, but it hurts the Commission’s image of a neutral evidence-based broker in the EU’s legislative process. It’s clear that Ursula von der Leyen wants her second Commission to become more political, but pushing it too far ultimately erodes the democratic legitimacy of the EU’s non-elected bureaucrats.
DEFORESTATION DEJA VU
Twelve months later, we’re hitting the pause button again. This week, the Parliament voted in favour of delaying the introduction of the EU’s anti-deforestation rules once more, this time because the Commission’s IT system would not be able to cope with the influx of reports by traders. And rather than first applying the rules, Parliament also wants a review before the rules kick in. The political arithmetic behind this is clear: the EPP has joined forces with the far right (yes, again) to secure a majority and reopen the file, pushing back implementation by at least another year, with a hidden agenda to stop the law altogether. The irony is that companies keep asking policymakers to maintain stable rules. Some have invested millions in compliance, and now risk facing uncertainty while those who have not bothered to comply are rewarded. All of this comes just days after COP30 concluded in Belém, where EU leaders pledged to take the lead on protecting forests worldwide. The timing could not be more contradictory – it’s like talking about reductions of emissions without mentioning fossil fuels, or about lung cancer prevention without talking about cigarettes, as one MEP put it.
STRABOURG: SUPPORT FOR UKRAINE
Amid the votes, procedural drama and last-minute amendments, one issue loomed large over Strasbourg all week: Ukraine. The Geneva negotiations exposed an uncomfortable truth: Europe is still reacting to Donald Trump’s mood swings rather than shaping its own strategy. Ursula von der Leyen insisted that the EU is ‘ready’ to deliver a €140 billion reconstruction loan using frozen Russian assets, even if it remains just an intention, as the Belgian government is blackmailed into letting go of the Euroclear-held assets in exchange for a stint at the helm of the Eurogroup for Finance Minister Vincent Van Peteghem. Several other capitals are nervous too; Hungary is quietly blocking, and Italy is politely undecided. Behind the optimistic messaging, diplomats say the real fear is simple: if the current talks collapse, Europe will be left improvising again while trying to reassure Kyiv that support isn’t fading.