She is also involved in the Mercosur treaty. Roberta Metsola was in Paris on Thursday to advance discussions on the free trade agreement with Latin America which France opposes. For La Tribune Sundaythe President of the European Parliament returns to these discussions but also to Trump's return to the White House, the escalation in Ukraine and the new European Commission.
LA TRIBUNE SUNDAY – After your meetings with Michel Barnier, Yaël Braun-Pivet and Gérard Larcher, do you think that an agreement on the treaty with Mercosur can be found?
ROBERTA METSOLA – We discussed the concerns that remain, particularly in the French agricultural sector. They are legitimate and must be heard. It is crucial to take the time to answer them completely. I hope that we will achieve a balanced solution which both protects the interests of our farmers, particularly in the most exposed sectors, and unlocks new opportunities for our businesses. Disengaging from international trade would deprive us of an opportunity to export our values and standards. If we don't get involved, others will do it for us. This applies to Latin America but also to other regions, such as Africa.
Agriculture: the very discreet winners of Mercosur
How can we reach consensus on this agreement?
There are several tracks. But whether the agreement is split or not, whether there is a majority vote on the text or not, we must not isolate member states. Because we cannot say to a country distraught by the decline of a sector and which feels abandoned: “ Sorry, but we won't listen to you! »
The French Parliament votes on this subject next week. Is this a good idea?
As a parliamentarian, I will always push for decisions and negotiations to go through Parliament. However, under the previous government, the National Assembly was excluded from many decisions. Take the recovery and resilience plans passed during the health crisis: in countries where national parliaments were bypassed, we had big problems because governments had amassed fiscal and budgetary powers normally devolved to parliaments.
Donald Trump, for his part, promised to increase customs duties. How to anticipate it?
The United States and Europe are each other's largest trading partners. A trade war will therefore not benefit anyone. It will harm European consumers as much as American consumers. In 2022, we were naive to imagine that the Inflation Reduction Act [programme d’investissements massifs lancé par Joe Biden aux États-Unis] would be limited to simple measures to support the ecological transition. Our reaction at the time could have been stronger, we could have been better prepared. From now on, we must abandon this posture of waiting for the American election to react. We must act, regardless of this result. Today we have the opportunity, with this new elected Parliament, with a new administration, to regain coherence and reduce our vulnerability.
That's to say ?
For example, in our relations with China, we cannot make 27 different voices heard as is the case today. To achieve this consistency, strong leadership is required. We will therefore work without delay, with the Commission and the Council, to align our positions. If we show that we are able to stand on our own two feet, to focus on our priorities and our competitiveness, we will immediately become stronger and we will be able to speak to the Americans as equals.
Trump targeting China? India wants to win back
But whose responsibility is it to make this change in attitude?
To all of us, each in their role. Mine is to speak to my counterpart in the United States, the Speaker of the House of Representatives. I already did it at the G7 in Verona. There will be other opportunities soon. The idea is to find common ground, rather than looking at issues on which we disagree.
Roberta Metsola was with Michel Barnier, in Paris, during an official visit, November 21, 2024. (Credits: LTD/European Union 2022 – Source: EP)
Do you approve of Joe Biden's decision to allow Ukraine to strike military targets in Russia with long-range missiles?
We cannot hope to achieve de-escalation by remaining silent and inactive. This decision is therefore welcome. In particular, it makes it possible to prevent the destruction of Ukrainian energy infrastructure. Now we need to know if it can be extended to weapons delivered by the European Union. In Germany, this still remains a big question mark. But I was reassured this week by the common position of several European foreign ministers (German, French, Polish, Italian and British) who recalled the sad anniversary of the thousand days of war. The words were strong and went beyond traditional platitudes of solidarity.
This does not prevent Europe from remaining divided over Ukraine…
Yes, but if I had been told in 2022 that we were going to achieve unanimity on all the sanctions packages decided since then, I would not have believed it. I prefer to focus on that. And then I still hope it is possible to unblock the European Peace Facility [fonds d’aide à l’Ukraine d’un montant de 6,6 milliards d’euros actuellement bloqué par un veto hongrois].
Was Olaf Scholz's call to Vladimir Putin last week useful?
We cannot say that it worked very well and that the goal was achieved. Any initiative showing that we are negotiating on Ukraine without involving kyiv directly would be a mistake.
Donald Trump could, however, ignore the opinions of kyiv and the Europeans by directly negotiating a ceasefire with Vladimir Putin…
This is something we need to be careful about. Furthermore, the European Union has invested massively to support Ukraine. Is this enough? Probably not. But this military and financial aid gives me hope that we can find common ground with the United States within NATO. In any case, the speech that we heard eight years ago and which said “the EU is not spending enough and the US is shouldering the burden alone » can no longer be valid.
The hearings of the new Commission gave rise to tensions rarely seen in Parliament. Is this due to a reconfiguration of political balances and the growing influence of nationalist and far-right movements?
The European Parliament will vote on the new Commission on Wednesday, paving the way for it to take office on December 1. It is true that the majorities changed after the last European elections. That being said, when looking at the election of the Commission President, the recent resolution on Ukraine or the commissioners' hearings, stable majorities continue to form thanks to a consensual approach with constructive pro-European groups at the center . And I don't see that changing.
In the case of the RN parliamentary assistants currently being judged, the damage to the European Parliament would be 5 million euros. Are you going to get this money back?
Our duty is above all to look after the financial interests of the EU and the money paid by European taxpayers. I am not commenting on an ongoing trial, but our legal team believes that Parliament's reputation has been damaged, financially but also in terms of credibility. We will therefore fight to have it restored.
Ukraine: what the Russian invasion costs the environment
The Commission sets the bar to the right
Unless there is a big surprise, the news Ursula von der Leyen's team will receive this Wednesday the imprimatur of Parliament to begin a new mandate on 1December 1st. The German obtained, not without difficulty, that the 26 European commissioners (one per country) whose names she had revealed two months ago were confirmed at the level of their respective commissions. But his new mandate promises to be very different from the previous one. First, his movement, the European People's Party (EPP), has made a show of force in Parliament in recent weeks during the candidates' hearings. He thus put in the spotlight the main left-wing guarantor of the new executive, the Spanish socialist Teresa Ribera, future vice-president in charge of competition and climate policy.
The aim of the maneuver was to obtain the confirmation of the Italian Raffaele Fitto – from Giorgia Meloni's far-right party, Fratelli d'Italia – as vice-president responsible for the allocation of regional aid, and that of the Hungarian Olivér Várhelyi, appointed by Viktor Orbán, whom part of the center and the left wanted to dismiss. The EPP began to forge, on different texts, changing coalitions, sometimes in the center with the socialists and liberals, sometimes on the right with the conservatives, even the sovereignists. This abandonment of the “sanitary cordon” provoked the fury of the Greens, who had nevertheless supported Ursula von der Leyen during her election in July.
Then, the latter confused the skills of its commissioners. This should give it arbitration power in major issues, such as the preparation of the next multiannual budget, or on key texts such as the “Clean Industry Pact”, the preparation of which will be entrusted to the French vice-president of the Commission. , Stéphane Séjourné. Although she is committed to supporting the von der Leyen II team, the president of the liberal Renew group, Frenchwoman Valérie Hayer, assures “redouble our vigilance so as not to let the extremes unravel the European project».
Related News :