News

EU Parliament Gets Down to Business: Big Tech, Bullies, and Biodiversity

The European Parliament is having quite the Thursday, folks. And no, they’re not just arguing about who ate whose lunch from the communal fridge.

First up on the agenda: making sure Russia pays—literally. MEPs are voting on holding Russia accountable for its attacks on Ukrainian civilians, including joining an International Claims Commission. Because apparently, “sorry” doesn’t quite cut it when you’ve launched a brutal war of aggression.

In a move that’ll make Big Tech executives nervously adjust their turtlenecks, Parliament is doubling down on the Digital Markets Act. Despite some mysterious “external political pressure” (wonder where that’s coming from), MEPs are voting to ensure companies can’t weasel their way around the rules. Periodic penalties are on the table, and they’re not taking any excuses—no matter which side of the Atlantic you call home.

Speaking of the internet being a terrible place, cyberbullying is getting the legislative smackdown it deserves. MEPs want it criminalized under EU law and are tired of social media platforms playing the “not our problem” card when it comes to online harassment. About time someone held the digital playground monitors accountable.

But wait, there’s more! The day also includes discussions on livestock sustainability (because cows have feelings too), women entrepreneurs in rural areas (girl power meets farm power), and the delightfully named “Cali Fund” for biodiversity protection. Nothing says “Thursday” quite like debating genetic resources and ethnic suppression in China in the same afternoon.

Oh, and they’re tackling “finfluencers”—those TikTok financial gurus who may or may not be leading you toward financial ruin with their aggressive marketing. Minimum standards are coming, and your crypto-bro cousin is not going to be happy.

All of this kicks off at 9 AM and runs until 3 PM, because democracy waits for no one—not even lunch.

EU’s Fundamental Rights Report Card: Could Use Improvement (And That’s Putting It Mildly)

The European Parliament just dropped its annual “how are we doing on human rights?” report, and spoiler alert: we’re not getting a gold star.

In a Wednesday vote that split 328 for, 199 against, and 98 people presumably checking their phones, MEPs sounded the alarm on everything from women’s rights to media freedom. Think of it as Europe’s most serious group chat, except everyone’s concerned about the same thing.

The Laundry List of Worries

Where to begin? Women’s rights are under threat, LGBTIQ+ equality is backsliding, journalists are getting harassed, and civic space is shrinking faster than your jeans after the holidays. Parliament basically said: “Remember all those nice values we wrote down in Article 2? Yeah, about those…”

The report reads like a concerned parent’s letter, warning that democratic backsliding and political meddling in courts suggest “broader pressure on EU values.” Translation: Houston, we have multiple problems.

Borders, Bytes, and Basic Decency

MEPs are particularly worried about what’s happening at EU borders and online. They’re calling out ill-treatment of migrants, demanding better search-and-rescue operations, and reminding everyone that torture is still very much not okay (apparently this needed restating).

On the digital front, Parliament wants tougher enforcement against disinformation, election manipulation, and AI gone wild. Because nothing says “fundamental rights” like making sure your social media feed isn’t 90% foreign propaganda.

The Action Items

The wish list includes: stronger action against gender-based violence, recognizing feminicide as a distinct crime, protecting civil society organizations from being harassed, and actually enforcing those fancy equality laws gathering dust.

Oh, and they’d like to address corruption, prison conditions, poverty, housing exclusion, and environmental rights while they’re at it. No pressure, though.

Dutch MEP Anna Strolenberg summed it up: “Fundamental rights must remain non-negotiable.” The real question? Whether anyone’s actually listening.

The Bottom Line

Europe’s got 99 problems, and fundamental rights violations are… well, most of them. Now we wait to see if the Commission and member states have the “political will” to fix things—which is diplomatic speak for “let’s see if they actually do anything about this.”

EU Parliament Throws Down the Gauntlet on Rule of Law (Again)

The European Parliament just voted—387 to 191, with 46 abstentions for those sitting on the fence—to tell the European Commission what everyone’s been thinking: “We gave you recommendations. You’re not using them.”

In a resolution adopted Wednesday, MEPs essentially waved a giant red flag over the state of democracy across EU member states, pointing out that a whopping 93% of the Commission’s rule-of-law recommendations are just copy-pasted from previous years. It’s like getting the same New Year’s resolution reminder every January, except this time it’s about protecting democracy, not hitting the gym.

The Greatest Hits of Democratic Backsliding

The laundry list of concerns reads like a dystopian bingo card: judicial independence under threat, corruption running wild, journalists being harassed (or worse), spyware snooping on citizens, and civil society groups getting squeezed harder than a tube of toothpaste.

Courts are facing political meddling in appointments and case assignments—apparently some politicians missed the memo about the whole “separation of powers” thing. Meanwhile, corruption continues to thrive in what MEPs diplomatically call an environment of “weak enforcement” but what the rest of us might call “looking the other way.”

Media Freedom? More Like Media Pressure

Investigative journalists are facing everything from lawsuits to literal assassination, which Parliament notes is “a direct attack on the rule of law.” (Hot take, we know.) Add in spyware surveillance, politically controlled advertising budgets, and media ownership concentrated in fewer hands than a poker game, and you’ve got a recipe for some seriously chilled reporting.

Civil Society Gets the Cold Shoulder

NGOs and human rights defenders are drowning in red tape, funding cuts, and what the resolution calls “smear campaigns”—because nothing says “healthy democracy” like making it harder for people to, you know, defend democracy.

The Money Question

Perhaps most awkwardly, MEPs pointed out that EU funds might be bankrolling some of these rights violations. Their solution? Stop the payments where problems persist. It’s the political equivalent of “no allowance until you clean your room.”

Greek MEP Konstantinos Arvanitis, who shepherded the report through, called the broad support “a milestone” and expressed hope it would become “an important reference tool.” Translation: “Please, for the love of all that is democratic, actually use this one.”

The Parliament’s message is clear: Europe’s democratic foundations are cracking, the Commission’s recommendations are gathering dust, and it’s time to stop hitting snooze on the rule-of-law alarm clock.

EU Budget Gets a Thumbs Up (Sort Of): MEPs Play Watchdog While Council Ghosts Them Again

The European Parliament just gave the EU Commission a pat on the back for managing the 2024 budget—but it came with a side of stern finger-wagging and some serious “we need to talk” energy.

In a vote that split 389 to 255, MEPs approved the Commission’s financial housekeeping. But before anyone could pop the champagne, they dropped a 418-vote resolution that basically said: “Nice job on the numbers, but we’re watching you.”

The Rule of Law Reality Check

Here’s where things get spicy. Parliament isn’t buying that everything’s peachy just because the error rate dropped from 5.6% to 3.6%. MEPs are side-eyeing several member states where rule of law is backsliding faster than a politician’s campaign promises, and they want the Commission to stop being so polite about it. Their message? Use those fund-suspension powers you’ve got collecting dust.

The Mystery of the Missing Money Trail

The real drama centers on the Recovery and Resilience Facility—that massive COVID recovery fund. MEPs are demanding to know who’s actually getting the money, and they’re not accepting the Commission’s creative interpretation of “final recipient.” They want names, they want transparency, and they’re threatening legal action if they don’t get it by December 31st. No pressure.

Council Gets the Cold Shoulder (Again)

In what’s become an annual tradition more reliable than holiday fruitcake, Parliament postponed the Council’s budget discharge for the 18th consecutive year. Why? The Council keeps ghosting them like a bad Tinder date. Since 2009, the Council has refused to cooperate with Parliament’s oversight requests, so MEPs keep hitting the “postpone” button.

Rapporteur Daniel Freund didn’t mince words, calling out everything from transparency failures to questionable aviation deals with Qatar and raising eyebrows about Commissioner Varhelyi’s track record.

The takeaway? Europe’s budget watchdogs are wide awake, slightly grumpy, and not afraid to bark—loudly.

Brussels Throws €2 Million Lifeline to Belgian Steel Workers (Because Someone Has to)

The European Parliament has voted to send €2 million in emergency aid to 507 Belgian workers who found themselves suddenly unemployed after Liberty Steel Belgium went belly-up in April 2025. The vote passed with a resounding 586 MEPs in favor—proving that even politicians can agree on something when the situation is dire enough.

The cash comes from the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund for Displaced Workers, which sounds like a mouthful but essentially exists to help people who get caught in the crossfire of corporate chaos. And boy, was there chaos.

What Went Wrong?

Liberty Steel Belgium didn’t just stumble—it face-planted spectacularly. Years of financial troubles, supply chain nightmares, sky-high energy prices, and what MEPs diplomatically call “company-specific factors” (translation: questionable management decisions) all contributed to the disaster. The company’s previous owners, the GFG Alliance, apparently had big investment promises but delivered more disappointment than steel.

Where’s the Money Going?

The €2 million will cover 85% of a €2.4 million support package (the Walloon public employment services are chipping in the rest). Workers will get career counseling, vocational training—including those all-important IT skills—and support for anyone brave enough to start their own business after this experience.

Belgium already started helping workers back in June 2025, so this EU money is basically reimbursing them for being proactive. Better late than never, right?

Since 2007, the EGF has helped over 181,000 people across 20 EU countries, proving that while globalization might be tough on workers, at least there’s a fund to soften the blow.

EU Parliament Finally Figures Out That Babies Don’t Wait for Plenary Sessions

In a move that might make you wonder what century we’ve been living in, the European Parliament has just approved something revolutionary: letting pregnant MEPs vote without physically dragging themselves to the chamber. Shocking stuff, really.

The new rules, passed with an overwhelming 616 votes in favor (and 24 apparently against basic human biology), allow female MEPs to hand over their voting rights to a trusted colleague for up to three months before their due date and six months after giving birth. Because apparently, until now, the choice was between your democratic mandate and, you know, not going into labor on the parliament floor.

Better Late Than Never

Parliament President Roberta Metsola, who championed this reform, proudly declared it “a big milestone for a more modern and just Parliament.” Modern being the operative word here – considering proxy voting has been a thing in, well, most places that acknowledge women exist in professional spaces.

The reform kicked off in November 2025, got the Council’s blessing in March 2026, and now just needs ratification by all member states. So female MEPs might actually benefit from this sometime before their kids start kindergarten.

The Fine Print

Don’t worry, there are safeguards. The Council insisted on adding provisions for “transparency, accountability, traceability and vote integrity” – because nothing says trust like assuming new mothers might somehow abuse the system by… checks notes… having babies.

Rapporteur Juan Fernando López Aguilar emphasized this is about ensuring “motherhood does not mean elected representatives should ever have to choose between their vote and their child.” A truly groundbreaking concept that working mothers everywhere have been screaming about for decades.

What’s Next?

Now comes the fun part: getting all member states to ratify it according to their constitutional requirements. So grab some popcorn – this could take a while.

In the meantime, the EU can pat itself on the back for finally recognizing that pregnancy and democracy can, in fact, coexist. Only took a few decades of having women in parliament to figure that one out.

European Parliament’s Busy Wednesday: Democracy, Cyberbullying, and Maternity Leave on the Menu

The European Parliament kicked off Wednesday morning at 9:00 AM with what might be the political equivalent of a triple espresso: a debate on the Middle East crisis, complete with sky-high energy prices and fertilizer costs that would make any farmer weep. Cyprus’s Deputy Minister Marilena Raouna and Commission President Ursula von der Leyen tag-teamed the discussion, followed by an afternoon session on southern Lebanon’s humanitarian crisis.

But wait, there’s more! In a move that proves even European politics can occasionally enter the 21st century, MEPs voted at noon to let new and expectant mothers delegate their votes while taking up to three months before and six months after childbirth. Revolutionary? Maybe. Overdue? Absolutely.

Around 2:00 PM, the Parliament turned its attention to something we’ve all experienced or witnessed: cyberbullying. Commissioner Glen Micallef faced the music as MEPs grilled him on the Commission’s action plan. A resolution demanding criminal provisions and platform accountability is expected Thursday—because apparently, we still need to remind tech companies that being terrible to people online is, in fact, bad.

The afternoon got heavier with a 3:00 PM discussion on combating antisemitism, prompted by recent attacks in the Netherlands and Belgium. MEPs also squeezed in debates about not normalizing relations with Russia (featuring sports and cultural events), Sudan’s catastrophic humanitarian crisis, and urgent human rights violations in Haiti, China, and Venezuela.

In a delightfully meta moment, the Patriots for Europe group requested a “topical debate” at 1:00 PM about “Commission interference in democratic process and elections.” Nothing says democracy like debating whether you’re doing democracy right.

The noon voting marathon covered everything from budget discharge approvals to €2 million in support for Belgian workers laid off after Liberty Steel’s closure. MEPs also tackled emissions trading systems, dodgy non-EU e-commerce flooding the market with substandard products, and fundamental rights reports.

Just another Wednesday in Strasbourg, where saving democracy, protecting mothers, and fighting cyberbullies all happen before lunch.

EU Gives Developing Countries a Trade Hug (With Some Strings Attached)

The European Parliament just voted to keep the doors open for developing nations—at least when it comes to tariffs. With a solid 459-127 vote (and 70 MEPs apparently too confused to pick a side), they’ve renewed the Generalized System of Preferences for another decade.

What’s the Deal?

Think of it as the EU’s version of “shop here, pay less!” for 60-plus developing countries representing 2 billion people. These nations can now export goods to Europe with reduced or zero tariffs, because nothing says “we care” quite like waiving import duties.

The Fine Print (Because There’s Always Fine Print)

Want those sweet trade preferences? Better sign up for some human rights and environmental conventions. The Paris Agreement? Check. Convention on the Rights of the Child? You bet. It’s like a membership club, except instead of a gym you never use, you get access to European markets.

The Controversial Bits

Here’s where things get spicy. The EU wanted to link trade benefits to countries cooperating on taking back irregular migrants. Parliament basically said “hold on there, partner” and added enough bureaucratic hurdles to make this harder than assembling IKEA furniture blindfolded. Countries now get a 12-month engagement period before anything happens, and the least developed nations get a two-year grace period. Translation: this conditionality will be “very hard to trigger.”

Rice, Rice Baby

European rice producers were sweating bullets, so Parliament threw them a lifeline. If rice imports surge by 45% over a 10-year average, automatic safeguards kick in. It’s protectionism, but make it sound technical.

The Bottom Line

The EU gets to look magnanimous while protecting its own interests. Developing countries get market access with some homework assignments. And European rice farmers can sleep at night. Democracy in action, folks—messy, complicated, and somehow functional.

The rules kick in once the Council rubber-stamps everything, lasting until 2035. Mark your calendars.

EU Parliament Says “Yes Means Yes” – And It’s About Time

In a move that’s somehow both groundbreaking and “wait, this wasn’t already a thing?”, the European Parliament just voted overwhelmingly (447-160, with 43 abstentions) to demand that all EU countries define rape based on the absence of consent. Yes, you read that right – in 2026, we’re still having this conversation.

The Tuesday vote calls on the European Commission to propose legislation establishing that rape is, quite simply, sex without freely given, informed, and revocable consent. Revolutionary concept, right? Apparently so, since several EU countries still rely on force- or violence-based definitions that sound like they were written during the Middle Ages.

What Does This Actually Mean?

Parliament is making it crystal clear: silence isn’t consent. Not fighting back isn’t consent. Not saying “no” isn’t consent. Having said “yes” last Tuesday isn’t automatic consent for this Tuesday. And – brace yourself for this shocking revelation – being in a relationship with someone doesn’t equal permanent consent either.

The report also tackles the uncomfortable reality of trauma responses. You know, those pesky biological reactions like freezing or fawning that inconveniently don’t fit into outdated legal frameworks. MEPs want these reflected in both legislation and judicial practice, because apparently science should inform law. Wild idea.

The “Only Yes Means Yes” Movement Gains Steam

Swedish MEP Evin Incir didn’t mince words: “It is both morally and legally unacceptable that women are not protected by ‘only yes means yes’ legislation across the EU.” Since 2023, France, Finland, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands have joined the consent-based club. The momentum is building, though one might wonder what took so long.

Polish MEP Joanna Scheuring-Wielgus pointed out the grim statistics: one in three women in the EU has experienced gender-based violence, and one in twenty has been raped. Thanks to brave survivors like Gisèle Pelicot speaking out, the pressure for change is mounting.

Beyond Definitions: Actual Support

The Parliament isn’t just playing word games. They’re demanding a victim-centered approach including immediate medical care, trauma support, legal assistance, and 24-hour crisis centers. They also want mandatory training for everyone who might encounter rape victims – police, judges, prosecutors, healthcare workers – because apparently “understanding consent” shouldn’t be optional for professionals in these fields.

There’s even a call for EU-wide education on consent, relationships, and bodily autonomy, plus campaigns against “rape myths” and incel propaganda online. Because in 2026, we’re still fighting medieval attitudes with medieval persistence.

The Bottom Line

One in three women experiencing gender-based violence should be enough to make this a no-brainer. The fact that it took this long – and that 160 MEPs still voted against it – tells you everything you need to know about why this legislation is desperately needed.

The message is simple: consent isn’t complicated. It’s just that some people have been making it complicated for far too long.

EU’s 2027 Budget: More Money for Everything (Except Boring Stuff)

The European Parliament just voted on what they want in the 2027 budget, and spoiler alert: they want a lot. With 389 MEPs saying “yes please” and 191 saying “maybe not,” Parliament has laid out a shopping list that would make Santa nervous.

The Big Three: Jobs, Security, and Not Falling Apart

The budget priorities read like a greatest hits album of things people actually care about. Social cohesion? Check. Competitiveness? You bet. Security? Obviously – have you seen the neighborhood lately?

MEPs are pushing for cash to flow into critical infrastructure, housing (because apparently Europeans would like roofs over their heads), and healthcare systems that don’t collapse when someone sneezes. Revolutionary stuff.

Money, Money, Money (But Where’s It Coming From?)

Here’s where it gets spicy: Parliament wants to tackle labor shortages, fund startups, support farmers, protect borders, fight climate change, AND loan Ukraine €90 billion. Oh, and they’re worried about rising borrowing costs from that NextGenerationEU recovery fund eating into existing programs.

Their solution? “We need new revenue sources!” Translation: “We need more money to get all this money we’re spending.”

Democracy, Media, and Fighting the Trolls

In a refreshingly specific move, MEPs want funding for independent journalism and fighting disinformation. Because apparently, keeping democracy alive and stopping your uncle from sharing conspiracy theories both require EU budget lines.

They’re also big on the rule of law, insisting it applies to all EU funds. Imagine that – wanting rules to actually apply to everyone.

Eastern Borders Get Some Love

Budget rapporteur Nils Ušakovs made sure to highlight support for eastern border regions, noting they face “growing security and economic pressures.” That’s diplomatic speak for “things are tense over there.”

What Happens Next?

The Commission will present its actual budget proposal in June, probably after recovering from reading Parliament’s wish list. Then comes the fun part: negotiations with the Council, where member states will inevitably say “sounds great, but how about less?”

The final budget needs approval by year’s end, giving everyone plenty of time to argue about who gets what and why their priority is more important than everyone else’s.

In short: Parliament wants to fund everything good while avoiding anything bad, all without spending too much money they don’t have. Politics!