European Parliament sidelined from new 'rearm Europe’ plan

The European Parliament has been sidelined from the decision-making process on the recently announced €800 billion plan to step up its efforts to support Ukraine in the short term and ensure its strategic autonomy to defend itself in the long term.    

As part of the so-called 'Rearm Europe' plan, EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has proposed to create a new financial instrument, worth €150 billion in loans under Article 122 of the Treaty, which allows the EU executive to submit a text directly to the Council in an emergency – thus bypassing the European Parliament.  

"This is the only possibility for emergency financial assistance, and that is what we need now," von der Leyen told MEPs in Strasbourg, adding that the EU executive would keep Parliament informed of progress.  

Article 122 was first introduced into the EU Treaties in 2007 and has since been used in very few situations, including during the COVID-19 pandemic. 

It allows the EU to agree on "measures appropriate to the economic situation, in particular if severe difficulties arise in the supply of certain products", without the consent of the European Parliament.  

Von der Leyen’s decision has triggered mixed reactions among MEPs, including from her own political party.  

Manfred Weber, who leads the European People's Party (EPP) group in the Parliament, has said that more democratic legitimacy is needed in the process and that the Parliament must be fully involved.  

"Bypassing Parliament with Article 122 is a mistake. Europe's democracy stands on two pillars: its citizens and its member states, (and) we need both for our security," Weber told his counterparts in the Strasbourg plenary.  

Just last week, European Parliament president Roberta Metsola said that during the last EU elections in June 2024, the chamber saw a big shift to the right and "more and more people voting out of a sense of frustration and desperation". 

"Working through the European Parliament, especially on decisions of this magnitude, is a way of fostering trust in our union," she told EU leaders during the special European Council summit on 6 March. 

“Yes, we need swift action, but acting together is the only way of ensuring broad and deep public backing,” Metsola added, promising that the Parliament would adapt to the demanding circumstances by working quickly, efficiently, and effectively. 

The European Parliament had the chance on Wednesday to express its view on the plan, but only through a non-legislative resolution, approved by 419 votes in favour, 204 against and 46 abstentions. 

MEPs from across the political spectrum called for a stronger “Parliament oversight and scrutiny role, in line with the expansion of the EU’s role in defence”. 

In Wednesday's resolution, MEPs urged member states to increase their defence spending to at least 3% of GDP, to support the creation of a bank for defence, security and resilience, and to explore a system of European defence bonds to pre-finance major military investments, among other measures. 

However, the resolution agreed by the Parliament didn't include any specific censure of the use of article 122, despite some MEPs having attempted to table such an amendment.  

Some lawmakers from the groups of The Left and The Greens/EFA proposed to include the following recital: “The Parliament deplores the choice to use Art.122 [...] for the new EU instrument meant to support members states defence capabilities; expresses deep concern for being excluded from decisional process”. 

But the amendment was rejected with 444 votes against: among them, almost all the members from the groups of the EPP, the Socialist and Democrats (S&D), Renew Europe and European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR). 

“We would prefer to be more involved in the shaping of this plan, but this is not a major battle for us,” ECR co-president Nicola Procaccini told Euronews, explaining his group's decision. 

Estonian MEP Riho Terras, who sits as EPP vice-chair of the Security and Defence Committee (SEDE), believes it's a time-critical issue and that the EU should focus on delivering results rather than the process itself.   

"We (the SEDE committee) do not feel sidelined as long as we have oversight and transparency of the use of the funds that the Commission lends to the member states,” Terras told Euronews.