The work programme that was just presented by the European Commission is a flop, according to Danish LEFT MEP, Per Clausen.

Unlike most Europeans, he was one of the people who had been waiting anxiously for the new EU document. Despite the boring title, the work programme is where you can get a better impression of how the European Commission will actually try to translate its nice words into concrete work – and with which focus.

This is why MEP Per Clausen had also already been reading and discussing the leaks that had been circulating for some time. Unfortunately, neither the early leaks nor the final document impressed him much, and Per Clausen believes the entire work programme can be summed up in a few words:

Too little, too bad and too much off course, that is how it is best described. There is too little of what should be there, much of what actually is there is simply too bad, and other things are deliberately taken too much of the needed course. It is disappointing and disturbing reading, but unfortunately not that surprising. It is sadly very much in line with the right-wing wave we have seen in European politics.

Too much off course

Per Clausen notices, among other things, how the focus of the work-programme has changed for large parts of the European legislation that had already been promised at years ago. It is clear, he says, how the right-wing wave in European politics have clearly changed both promises and focus.

It is unfortunately very telling for the work program that while it does for instance contain a plan for revising the chemicals law REACH, something that was originally supposed to be delivered years ago, the focus has now been distorted beyond recognition. Suddenly it is no longer about sustainability, health or the environment – but instead about simplifying the rules for industry. It is SO wrong, says Per Clausen, who continues:

The same applies to the agricultural policy. Here we now have a revision under the heading of “simplification”. However, what is actually needed is rather a reduction in the overall subsidies and a change, so that future support is given to the green transition of food production. What the Commission instead proposes, goes against what the Commission President herself promised 5 years ago.

Too many shortcomings

Per Clausen is worried not just about what is in the work programme, but also what is not there. He calls, among other things, for a clear plan for all the legislation that was promised and prepared during the last period, but which was withheld for political reasons:

I also need a comprehensive plan for all the legislation that we were promised during the Commission last Mandate, and which in some cases we know is more or less ready, but which has still not been delivered. Often without explanation. An example is the long-awaited asbestos screening directive, which should have been presented back in 2023, but which we are still waiting for.

A frivolous presentation

Lastly, Per Clausen criticizes the entire process surrounding the presentation. Originally, it was planned that EU politicians would first receive the work programme at the same time as the debate in the European Parliament. But this was later changed on Monday to the programme being published late Tuesday evening.

Finally, I must also say that I think it is a strange process that the President of the European Commission is choosing. Why do we only officially receive the work programme so soon before it is to be discussed in plenary? It smells like they do not want a real debate, but only empty praise. I honestly think that is both frivolous and disrespectful.

More on the topic

You can read more about the critique of the Commission’s working programme here:

• EnergyWatch, 12. February: Climate downgraded: EU Commission puts defense and competitiveness at top of new program