The moment of truth for “Ursula 2.0 majority” has arrived

Yet another split occurred today in the European Parliament majority that supported Ursula von der Leyen’s second term as head of the European Commission. In a vote on the Law Against Deforestation, the European People’s Party tabled a series of amendments that were approved, some on the razor’s edge, with votes from the right and the far right and resulting in changes to the original text presented by the Commission, in favour of which the rest of the “majority” and a large part of the business community had come out in favour.

Beyond the contents of the bill (which will now have to be negotiated with the Council), the political question that has arisen today is definitive: the EPP has chosen to create a situation that has produced a majority different from the one that supported the elected president of the Commission. This is not the first time this has happened in this legislature. So the point of no return has arrived: Does the EPP recognize itself in a pro-European political majority, siding with Ukraine, as von der Leyen demanded when voting on its new presidency, or does it intend to disregard these values, be a maverick and ally itself with whomever it wants, preferably Orban’s right-wing Patriots?

It is the moment of truth, and the socialists, liberals and greens, the forces that supported the chairwoman’s second term in office, must demand clarity from the popular.

There is only one way to do this: withdraw support for the new commissioners, in block, to force the EPP to make a choice, either to confirm the “official” majority with Socialists, Liberals and that sort of “outside support” of the Greens, or to ally with the conservatives of ECR (of which Fratelli d’Italia is a member) and the Patriots, of which the Lega, Orban and Le Pen’s MEPs are members.

The majority in Parliament may differ from the current one (which does not exist). Still, it must be made clear that the parties must take responsibility before the voters and the institutions, which must be stable and reliable, whatever their political orientation.

It will be said that at this time of global unrest, with the Trump presidency just around the corner, the EU needs to show cohesion and strength, and therefore, to undermine the nascent Commission would be harmful. However, it would be far greater harm not to know which forces support the EU; it would be greater harm if the parliamentary majority were fluid, even on the most important issues. In the European Parliament, by its nature, majorities are often variable but always around a clear core of values and projects. Centre-left forces cannot find themselves in the position of supporting a Commission that is then contradicted by a parliamentary majority that is, in fact, different from the one that elected it.