What did just happen in the European Parliament? Here are our take-aways after studying the political behavior of MEPs and the trends across the continent. 

The facts

Although the centrist groups — the EPP, S&D and Renew — reached a compromise on the Simplification Omnibus I package (covering the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive, CSRD, and the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive, CSDDD), the request to open interinstitutional negotiations with the Council on the basis of this compromise mandate was narrowly rejected in the plenary by a margin of just eight votes.

Secrecy as a tactical tool: according to the EP’s Rules of Procedure, a secret ballot is automatically accepted if requested by at least one-fifth of all MEPs (144 of 720). The request for a secret vote in this case came jointly from Patriots, ECR, ESN — together holding 187 votes, above the required threshold.

The request for a secret ballot by PfE, ECR, and ESN was a tactical move aimed at undermining the cohesion of the centrist coalition (EPP–S&D–Renew), capitalising on the existing dissent within the centrist groups over the compromise on CSRD and CSDDD.

Importantly, under the European Parliament’s Rules of Procedure, a request for a secret vote takes precedence over a request for a roll-call vote. Although the EPP and The Left groups called for a transparent vote, their request was overridden by the motions for secrecy.

The interpretations

The decision to block the compromise could be perceived as an act of sabotage by the political fringes, aimed at undermining the EU legislative process and paralysing decision-making. However, if we scratch beneath the surface, this is so far not confirmed by their voting behavior on other matters: they have not systematically attempted to indiscriminately block legislation as such. Rather, they selectively attempt to block legislation that is not in line with their orientations. 

Past records show that the ECR and Patriots have backed several simplification measures proposed by the European Commission, including: 1) the first part of the Omnibus package delaying the implementation of the reporting and due diligence directives, 2) the simplification of the CBAM framework, 3) amendments to the CO₂ standards regulation providing manufacturers with greater compliance flexibility, and 4) amendments to the CAP removing certain environmental standards.

Hard-right changed strategy: while the EPP aligned with ECR, PfE, and ESN only occasionally, e.g. in November to support further dilution of the deforestation rules compared to the Commission’s original proposal, the EPP group has, overall in the current EP term, overwhelmingly cooperated with S&D and Renew on other simplification files. This includes CBAM, CO₂ standards for cars, and the first part of the revisions to the reporting and due diligence directives.

Subsequent attempts by ECR, PfE, and ESN to further dilute regulatory requirements were unsuccessful, as their amendments were ultimately rejected by a coalition of the EPP and its centrist allies. Overall, actual data shows that EPP voted alongside the S&D against the Patriots around 85% of the time in this EP term.

However, the views inside the centrist political groups are not shared by all of the MEPs. In fact, considerable minorities have a different view. Consequently, to capitalise on the divisions within the S&D group (this time), the right-wing forces adopted a different tactics — rather than seeking to amend the text, they saw the opportunity to block the compromise altogether, in order to re-open the internal policy discussion within the European Parliament. Their request for secrecy allowed those (less vocal minorities) to deviate from the centrist groups' position. 

The implications for the future

By blocking the compromise, the right-wing sent a signal to the EPP that regulatory simplification cannot be pursued solely through agreements with S&D and Renew, pushing the EPP to choose between moving taking some of the right-wing on board in these negotiations, or moving further to the left, towards the Greens. 

In either scenario, the fringes on both the left and the right gain leverage. Overall, the political centre faces an increasingly difficult situation not only in the EP, but also "on the ground". Our latest projections for the 2029 European Parliament elections indicate a continued erosion of the traditional centrist majority (EPP, S&D, Renew) and a further rise of fringe groups—particularly the ECR, PfE, ESN and the Left.

If current trends persist, the centrist coalition could lose its combined majority for the first time, marking a historic realignment in EU politics - see chart here. 

Can the political centre still hold in the EU? Reversing the long-term trend of increasing polarisation and fragmentation within the European Parliament demands a profound change of approach of EU politics, but also reinventing the communication of the act of policy making in Brussels and Strasbourg towards the citizens.

As the powers of the Commission and the EP have increased and the debates have reached more and more the eyes and the ears of citizens "back home", the EU policy-makers are increasingly exposed to scrutiny and the Commission is increasingly seen as the de-facto political government. In a way, we can say that the EU political system is reaching maturity, as it moves from the perception of an opaque bureaucratic system to the same party-political drama as national politics, with all the pros and cons. 

Currently, the Commission remains the most stable form of government on the continent (the only one that doesn't fall before its term, therefore ensuring a higher level of predictability than any national government). However, the current trends could change that.

For the future, the key will be who will dominate the communication towards the citizens. Here, not only the institutions, the political parties and the media, but also the industry associations, the NGOs and the academia have a key role to play. 

For further analysis of the voting behavior in the EP, forecasts, etc, feel free to reach out to us at [email protected].

About EUmatrix.eu

It was nominated top influencer in the EU Capital for providing "a data-driven crystal ball to help stakeholders navigate systemic changes in the EU" (Politico).

EU Matrix is a leading independent research institute adapted to the digital age, which combines political expertise with big data-driven analysis to provide accurate and objective reports to a wide range of institutions and stakeholders.  

www.eumatrix.eu