On Tuesday 8 July, the Patriots for Europe (PfE) Group officially took up 1 of the key functions in the European Parliament – preparing a preliminary study on the CO2 simplification mark by 90% by 2040. This is the first time a group so far treated as a Eurosceptic outsider has entered the EU's main climate policy scene.
It's not just a symbolic gesture. The study prepared by the PfE typical will become the starting point for the full legislative process. Although another factions will be able to submit amendments or competitive proposals, it is the paper prepared by the Patriots that will set the direction and speech of the debate.
End of isolation, beginning of impact
The PfE faction, the 3rd force in the fresh Parliament, is an alliance of parties specified as the National Unity (Rassemblement National, France), the League (Italy), Fidesz (Hungary), FPÖ (Austria) or ANO (Czech Republic). Its leaders – Jordan Bardella, Matteo Salvini, Viktor Orbán and Herbert Kickl – have long criticised EU climate policy as being detached from social and economical reality.
Skepticism towards the Commission's Green Governance and Climate Priorities is 1 of their main programming points. However, it is not about negating the thought of climate protection itself – alternatively about opposing the pace and costs of transformation, which they think hit the mediate class, farmers and manufacture besides hard. The election of the PfE as rapporteur in this case means the actual breach of the existing "cordon sanitaire" – informal isolation of “outside” groups. It is simply a sign that, in the fresh strategy of forces in the EP, ignoring the votes of Euro MPs increasing in the power of the faction becomes impossible.
Rapid reactions of major fractions
The reaction of pro-European groups was immediate and emotional. Lena Schilling of the Greens called the situation "alarming", and Iratxe García Pérez, president of the Socialist S&D Group, called for "the defence of the Union's climate heritage". French MEP Pascal Canfin (Renew) spoke straight about the request for a broad pro-climate coalition to block possible attempts to weaken the simplification targets. In his opinion, the EU's credibility on the global phase is at stake and the preparation of its position before the November COP30 summit in Belém.
On the another hand, PfE representatives stress that they intend to propose a more "sustainable and realistic" approach. Their report, which will go to Parliament in the coming weeks, is intended to take account of the social and economical consequences of climate change, peculiarly in regions that have been victims of it, not beneficiaries.
New Influence Map
The Patriots for Europe have won the position of rapporteur not due to political agreements, but due to the existing point system, which rewards the factions on the basis of the number of Euro MPs and the legislative commitment to date. In the vote on the allocation of the study they surpassed even a larger EPP group. In practice, this means that from the opposition position of PfE critics they have now become co-responsible for shaping 1 of the most crucial papers of this term. It's a test of their competence, but besides a test of willingness to compromise.
Their proposals will be the subject of lengthy and intensive negotiations, as Parliament's final position must be adopted by a majority - including with the support of factions that present are reluctant to the PfE. The consequence is political tension: will PfE propose something that will besides be acceptable to more average forces, or will their plan be rejected and replaced by an alternate version prepared by the Alliance of Greens, S&D and Renew?
The next fewer months will be crucial. There is small time left for COP30 in November and the European Union wants to enter the global scene with a unified position. If Parliament fails to agree on the 2040 target, this means a weaker negotiating position towards the US, China and developing countries. In this arrangement, Patriots have the possible to play the function of balancing force – unless they reduce this function to a clean blockade. They seem to understand. In unofficial statements, their representatives talk about "the desire to heal the climate talk" and "the restoration of public assurance in the EU institutions".
