Ursula von der Leyen won a second term as president of the European Commission on the back of an ambitious list of promises for her next five years.
But in securing enough support in the European parliament on Thursday, she has stretched her executive to-do list and raised expectations across the EU’s political spectrum on a host of issues that have long frustrated Brussels officials.
Mujtaba Rahman, of consultancy Eurasia Group, warned that von der Leyen could be “setting herself up for failure” by offering commitments “that aren’t particularly coherent” to secure the support of a broad coalition.
Here we assess her boldest pledges and most formidable political challenges for her 2024-29 term:
Is a capital markets union possible?
Von der Leyen on Thursday rebranded a long-promised push to create a capital markets union as the “European Savings and Investments Union” — but a new name does not remove old obstacles.
The arguments in favour are enormous. Integrating EU capital markets, a decade-old project, could unleash up to €470bn in private investment annually, von der Leyen estimated. That would create much-needed private sector cash to help fund sectors such as defence, technology and the green transition.
But resistance to pooling national competence such as market supervision and corporate tax and bankruptcy rules has so far proved unmovable.
There have been recent attempts to revive political appetite, but it is unclear how she plans to break the deadlock. Softer measures, such as a pan-European investment product, could advance, while core issues such as further EU centralised supervision of banking will remain contentious.
Can she build a European defence union?
Aside from creating a dedicated defence commissioner, von der Leyen also pledged to create “a single market for defence” and common projects such as a “European Air Shield”.
Few member states disagree with the need to pool resources given the huge investment required after decades of shrinking spending and the threat from Russia. But hardly any are willing to delegate choices over what equipment to buy, where to manufacture it — or how to pay for it.
France and Germany have rival ideas for pan-European air defence projects; countries want to protect their domestic arms producers for national security reasons; and interoperability — national armed forces’ ability to work seamlessly with each other — has long been a focus of Nato, with mixed results.
“There are some who are perhaps uncomfortable with the idea,” von der Leyen said on Thursday. “But what we should be uncomfortable about are the threats to our security.”
Will competition rules be eased?
Von der Leyen has said a revamp of competition enforcement should focus on “innovation and resilience”, comments that reignited a long-standing debate over whether Europe should relax merger controls to allow larger companies to blossom.
Her political guidelines called for a “new approach to competition policy” that was “more supportive of companies scaling up in global markets, while always ensuring a level playing field”. The guidelines added: “This should be reflected in the way we assess mergers so that innovation and resilience are fully taken into account.”
That could mark a big policy shift from the commission’s often-cited 2019 prohibition of the merger between Siemens and Alstom, which the German and French companies cast as a way to create a European champion in the rail market.
But officials in Brussels are sceptical that the remarks, which included no commitment to legislation, will lead to a wholesale change in approach. Any significant move to ease constraints — a stance long advocated by France and Germany — would face staunch opposition from pro-competition capitals seeking to protect small business.
Big member states including France, Germany, Poland and Italy asked to revise the rules at the start of von der Leyen’s first term, only to be faced with opposition from 16 other capitals.
“I still struggle to see which merger the EU blocked in the past that prevented innovation,” said a senior EU official.
Should the EU budget be linked to rule of law?
The commission president has pledged to make national disbursements from the EU budget conditional on adherence to the rule of law and structural reforms, while extending conditions such as respect for democratic norms and fundamental rights to all EU funds.
“We will keep a very clear principle in our budget: respecting the rule of law is a must for EU funds. In this budget, and in the future,” she said.
The commission currently has the power to withhold certain slices of EU cash over rule-of-law breaches. That sparked confrontations with Poland and Hungary, but was seen as an effective tool to halt democratic backsliding.
Applying still more conditions to EU funding will win support from richer countries that want tighter control over shared cash, but is likely to be opposed by countries that see such moves as political blackmail and an over-reach from Brussels into domestic affairs.
Can Brussels help in housing and mental health?
In June’s European elections, voters including many young adults turned to far-right parties. They won about 30 per cent support and topped the polls in Italy, France and other countries.
Centrist lawmakers including those from von der Leyen’s own European People’s party believe the far right successfully linked housing shortages to increased migration, appealing to 20-somethings who cannot afford to leave their parents’ homes.
Iratxe García Pérez, the Socialist leader in parliament, said “access to housing is a vital need of our citizens” and called for €50bn of annual EU investment. But housing remains under the control of national or even regional governments, and analysts question how Brussels can unblock planning procedures in 27 countries.
Von der Leyen also highlighted how excessive social media usage was exacerbating a youth “mental health crisis”, saying she would tackle “excessive screen time and addictive practices” and “will take action against the addictive design of some platforms”.
“We will tackle the plague of cyber bullying,” she added. But while Brussels has a role in tech regulation, law enforcement and screen time rules are national.
