Brussels,20thof June2024

Concerning: Vote Von der Leyen out!

Dear Sir / Madam,

Dear representatives of the European Parliament,

As you know, European Action strives to inform Europe’s policy makers about important and sometimes controversial matters, by means of these open letters. It is a mission of European Action to lobby for more direct democracy in Europe and to help European citizens who feel that they are otherwise not heard in Brussels and Strasbourg to voice their concerns in the house of European democracy.

A NEW LEGISLATURE, A NEW COMMISSION

The European elections have just been concluded, and it is known that the candidates for the EU’s top jobs are currently the subject of discussion between the members of the European Council.

However, it is considered highly likely that Ursula von der Leyen will be once more nominated by the Council for the post of President of the Commission. Unfortunately.

At that point, it will come up to you, as an elected member of the European Parliament, to either accept or reject the candidate that is presented, as it one of the very few real powers of the European Parliament to vote either YES or NO on the appointment of the leader of the Commission.

Through this letter, we openly and urgently ask you to vote AGAINST the candidacy of Ursula von der Leyen, if and when it happens that she is once more presented by the Council as their chosen candidate.  We can offer many reasons why you, as MEP, should vote against Ursula von der Leyen as Commission president. The most important, however,is trust.

THE EU’S BIGGEST PROBLEM: LACK OF TRUST

As you can imagine, a political project like the EU requires a certain level of basic support from the population to turn out successful. However, the European elections that have just passed show unambiguously that the EU suffers from a significant lack of trust, support and commitment from the European population. After all, inreal figures:

The average turnout across the EU for these past elections was 50%. Note however, that this includes those EU countries that have mandatory voting, such as Belgium, which artificially pushes the average upwards. In real terms, this means that 50% of Europe’s population did not consider it worth the effort to turn up for the elections, even though voting is not a huge effort. This does NOT speak of widespread grass-roots support from the European public.

Moreover, of those 50% that did vote, about 25% voted for right-wing parties and centre-right parties, and roughly 25% voted for left-wing and centre-left parties – especially far-right and radically left-wing parties have scored well. The fact that the big winner in France was the Front National, is a good indication of this. It is, however, significant that according to the official results, the biggest losers of these elections have been the openly pro-European federalist parties: Renew and the Greens, who have been decimated in the polls.

From this (as well as from other indicators) we can honestly conclude that the European public does not have much interest or trust in the EU. Which is unfortunate, but hardly surprising.

The question is: Whose fault is this?

WHOSE FAULT IS THIS?

The observable truth is that Ursula von der Leyen has done much to destroy the public’s trust in the European institutions.

Instead of trying to open up the European decision making process to public scrutiny and public responsibility, she has shown an outspoken authoritarian inclination over the past 5 years. This authoritarianism included the blank refusal to be open and transparent about her decision making that has become infamous as Pfizergate. The fact that mrs Von der Leyen is the subject of a scandal of this magnitude and at the same time can still be considered for the post of Commission president, does not prove to the average member of the public that the EU is an institution that worth his or her trust.

At the same time, the Commission’s uncompromising insistence on the“Green Deal” has antagonized many Europeans, both on the right and the left of the political spectrum, as many of these regulation that are imposed in the name of fighting climate change are in fact highly damaging to our European nature, environment and economy.

The Commission’s stubborn insistence on the “Green and Digital Transition” has, amongst other things, led to an sharp increase in the EU’s energy consumption, as well as an even greater future need for electricity, as more electrical energy is required to power all the “Green and Digital” technology that the Commission is trying to push through. This electricity has, however, to be generated through various means, the bulk of which is coal, oil, gas, lpg and nuclear – none of which are in any way “green”. Moreover, Europe’s energy infrastructure is not designed for such a huge increase in power consumption, which has already led to electricity rationing for EV’s, heatpumps and other “green” technology in several European nations. In a nutshell: The Commission’s “Green Deal” has led to greater power consumption, more burning of fossil fuels, more destruction of nature through mining and drilling, and is therefore both illogical and horrible, as Europe’s environment actually is important!

Another example of this, is the Commission proposed weakening of Europe’s legislation on Genetic Engineering and Genetically Modified Organisms, which the Commission has rather bizarrely described as “key to fighting climate change”, even though it comes down in practice to polluting Europe’s natural environment and taking citizens’ right away to choose if they want to eat GM food or not. And is it not the basic idea of democracy that people should at least havea choice? (You can read our previous open letter on this subject here: https://eschrama.com/european-action/#EP-letter-against-hidden-GMOs)

From this we can logically conclude that Mrs Von der Leyen’s “Green and Digital Transition” is an illogical and counterproductive policy, as it actually damages our climate and our environment ,rather than repair it. On review, it can be concluded that many, many of the regulations that have come out of the Von der Leyen commission are in fact illogical and counterproductive, and have only helped t ofurther break down the European public’s trust in the EU. In any vote on Mrs Von der Leyen’s capacity to lead the EU, it must be addressed whether her actions have either increased or decreased the public’s trust in the European institutions. And the conclusion seems obvious.

This same tendency can be seen in other areas …

The Commission’s emphasis on the need for Europe’s “strategic autonomy” while at the same time openly supporting Europe’s dependency on NATO and the US is also illogical, as these two aims are mutually contradictory. Moreover, many European citizens, both on the left and the right of Europe’s political spectrum, reject America’s continuing military and political involvement in European affairs. Unfortunately, Mrs Von der Leyen has often referred to herself as a “transatlanticist”, which means that Europe will never be independent of foreign interference as long as Mrs Von derLeyen remains in charge of the European Commission, which, as you know, is the EU’s executive and legislative branch. This openly advertised refusal to see the EU as an independent political entity, has also done much to undermine trust in the EU’s ability to defend Europe’s interests.

Similarly, Mrs Von der Leyen’s statements on the situation in Ukraine, such as“Ukraine is ours” and “Ukraine will join the EU in a few years” were simply stupid, as it ignored the basic reality that EU membership takes years, if not decades, as well as the reality that many European citizens, both in East and West Europe, would simply not support Ukraine joining the EU. This too is an example of how the unthinking and impolitic statements of Mrs Von der Leyen have helped to further divide European society.

At the same time, Europe is falling ever behind in its ability to innovate and compete with the rest of the world. During the past 5 years, Mrs Von der Leyen has failed miserably to improve the EU’s competitive advantage vis-a-vis the US, China and Russia. In fact, thanks to Mrs Von der Leyen’s neolib policies, we have witnessed a flood of Chinese electric cars, solar panels and other technology that have washed over Europe’s economy, while at the same time European high-tech entrepreneurs have been swallowed by the Americans. After 5 years of this, the Von der Leyen commission has FINALLY come to the conclusion that something must be done about this! 5 years! Which is too little, too late, as it shows unambiguously that Europe’s economic well-being has suffered under the Von der Leyen Commission.

To make it even worse, to add insult to injury, Mrs Von der Leyen has clearly indicated that leading the Commission is not her first choice, as she has shown clear interest over the past year to become the new head of NATO. The question that should be asked is this:Do we really want a president of the European Commission who considers the EU to be the second, less appealing option? Someon who would rather do something else and who only wants to return to her old job in the Commission because her ultimate dream of leading NATO did not come true? Or should we prefer a leader who is actually interested in Europe first, and nothing else? (See here for commentary on the subject.)

Besides this, Ursula von der Leyen has failed in her most basic duty: To provide inspired and effective leadership to the EU and improve cooperation and solidarity between Europe’s states. We can look back with shame to the way Europe’s countries closed their borders and hoarded their resources during the Covid Crisis. It is nothing less than shameful how Europe turned their backs on the Italians at that time. And not surprisingly: Mrs Von der Leyen, as head of the commission and de-fact president of the EU, said NOTHING about it.

The same can be said about the war in Ukraine: For more than two years the EU has tried to get Russia on its knees through economic sanctions, but this has failed. Why? Maybe because the EU ignores its own sanctions and keeps on importing Russian oil and gas. And why is this? Maybe because the EU lacks a natural leader who can inspire Europe’s citizens to put aside their petty differences and work together for a change.

In other words: Ursula von der Leyen has proven herself to be outright incompetent to fulfil the role of president of the European Commission and de-facto leader of the Union. This is why I ask you kindly yet urgently to REJECT Ursula von der Leyen as President ofthe European Commission, and urge you to also demand from the Council that a more suitable candidate be presented (even though, in a real European democracy, the president of the commission should be directly elected by the EP). Instead of the continued failure of Ursula von der Leyen, I ask you to vote Von der Leyen out and let the EU be led by someone who can actually inspire Europeans, someone who actually gives a damn about Europe!

I look forward to your response with interest.

With kind and European regards,

Erik Schrama

For European Action

|web: www.eschrama.com/european-action

|e-mail: erik@eschrama.com

|telegram: https://t.me/eurodemocracy

|twitter: https://x.com/euroreform

Are you interested in a different vision for Europe?

Then read Erik Schrama’s new novel:

Superpower – a European Utopia:

https://eschrama.com/superpower-a-novel-about-europe.html

Why not write to your

direct European representative?