A much-anticipated vote of no-confidence against European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen triggered by the controversial deal she made with Pfizer has failed to garner enough support.
The low turnout on July 10, though, indicated von der Leyen was not out of the woods and still had work ahead to convince MEPs of her political standing.
Only 175 MEPs voted in favour of the no confidence motion, while 360 voted against and 18 MEPs chose to abstain.
Out of 720 MEPs, just 553 came out to vote.
Romanian MEP Gheorghe Piperea, who gathered the necessary signatures to table the motion for the vote, said ahead of the ballot that large abstentions would weaken her legitimacy.
Speaking to Brussels Signal, Piperea said the reuslt was “a sad victory” for von der Leyen.
“This is an interesting victory for von der Leyen, particularly when you look at the numbers,” he said following the vote.
“Only 553 MEPs out of 720 were present for the vote and more than 160 of them missed it on purpose. They were not unable to come – they were in the building but chose not to participate.
“Notably, many Italian colleagues from the ECR [European Conservatives and Reformists] group, members of FdI [Fratelli d’Italia, part of the ECR], were among those who abstained.”
Piperea stressed that von der Leyen only managed to secure 360 votes in her favour, which amounted to just half of all MEPs.
“This is significantly less than the support she received in November when she secured her second mandate as President of the Commission,” he pointed out.
The Romanian MEP said he found the reaction within the EP following the ballot was “very surprising”.
“After the rejection of the motion, one might have expected applause and acclaim, but there was very little of that — only a few and rather muted reactions. This was a big surprise for me. It was a sad victory for her, indeed.
“To secure the votes of the Socialist group [Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats, S&D], von der Leyen had to renegotiate a substantial amount of allocations from the €400 billion worth European Structure Fund, partially reallocated for rearmament,” Piperea said.
“This was a shift from her original promise to groups like the EPP [European People’s Party Group] and Renew just two months prior.”
He said in the coming days, part of this fund was supposed to go to military investments but now it had to remain untouched.
Piperea called it a victory for S&D, adding he was happy to share it, as he also did not want money for poor people to go to military projects.
He said it was uncertain whether von der Leyen would keep her promise, though.
“The EPP and Renew are much more powerful than the Socialists and are sponsored by the military industry. They may be more entitled to keep her original promise,” he said.
“S&D members have warned that if she breaks this promise again, it will be her last mistake, and they will become her worst opposition.
“This is indeed a sad victory for her — one where she might lose her position as a result. I have the intuition that it feels like the beginning of the end for her tenure,” Piperea said, pointing out that the next State of the Union, in September, could be pivotal.
He said that, through the motion of censure, he was able to consolidate the idea of democracy in the European Parliament because “in all these years under von der Leyen, parliamentary democracy was sidelined, she avoided parliament, wanting to concentrate power”.
As the motion was initiated by a part of the ECR and supported by the Patriots for Europe and Europe of Sovereign Nations Groups, all from the Right, left-wing MEPs did not seem to want anything to do with it, something they had indicated ahead of the vote.
Progressives opposing von der Leyen thus opted to stay home or abstain as supporting her may have seemed too great a concession.
As a result, 167 MEPs did not join the vote. Combining this with the 18 abstentions, it meant that 185 members explicitly refused back her while it was clear that of those voting in favour of the EC chief, many did it with obvious reluctance.
During the debates in the run-up of the ballot, progressives attacked her for what they said was her lack of transparency, especially regarding “Pfizergate”, her “repeated decisions to bypass this institution through emergency legislation” and her “clear strategy of consolidating power within the EU Executive”.
Pfizergate involved von der Leyen and the US pharmaceutical company Pfizer in the procurement of COVID-19 vaccines. The controversy centred on a lack of transparency in the negotiation processes for purchasing a large number of vaccine doses during the Covid-19 pandemic.
The EC President has also been taking flack from Socialists and Liberals due to her intention to pull back the proposed Green Claims Directive, banning so-called “greenwashing”.
Renew Europe’s President Valérie Hayer said her Liberal group opposed the no-confidence motion but added: “We are far from satisfied with the current trajectory of the von der Leyen Commission. The European institutions are now dangerously close to crisis. That must change.”
Hayer demanded “dialogue, co-operation and respect”.
“Our future support is not automatic. It will depend entirely on how the President responds to our priorities such as an ambitious Competitiveness Fund that mobilises EU savings, accompanies companies in their financing journey and helps them to scale up, tougher conditionality of the EU budget and a functional platform agreement to involve centrist groupings in the Parliament,” she said.
The S&D reminded the EC that the progressives “need clear signs of commitment to social justice and the green transition”.
Iratxe García, S&D leader, said on July 10 that “dismantling the Commission in the midst of geopolitical crisis would be completely irresponsible”.
“We will need clear signs of commitment – and not just any sign – we want a real commitment to our priorities, the same ones von der Leyen committed to a year ago: economy together, social growth, social justice and green transition.
“And we will need a true platform; co-operation and dialogue between pro-European and democratic forces.”
She said the next State of the European Union presentation by von der Leyen in September would be a “turning point”.
The Left group had said that it strongly opposed the current EC but not for the reasons of the motion pushed by Piperea, which they called “poorly written” and that “puts forward conspiracy theories about elections in Romania and Germany and serves only to advance the political ambitions of far-right MEPs”.
The Left proposed to censure the EC with other progressive groups in December, based on policies regarding “austerity, worker’s rights, regression on climate, migration, trade agreements like Mercosur, and the genocide in Gaza”.
Co-President of the Left, Martin Schirdewan, had said the vast majority of his group would not participate in the vote.
