Top MEP: EU risks legal action over failure to use aid to fight poverty

Many view the dramatic shift in European Union development policy away from fighting poverty to winning a global race for investments and critical materials as a ship that has sailed, irreversible, a fait accompli. But not Barry Andrews. In his Brussels office, the new chair of the European Parliament’s Development Committee delivered a message for those behind this controversial vision in the European Commission — the EU’s executive — that they have a “constitutional obligation” to fulfill, and they can be held to account for it. On the face of it, there is little reason for the Irish politician’s self-declared “optimism,” given the second term won by commission President Ursula von der Leyen, the architect of the Global Gateway project at the heart of the investment-led strategy — and her new guidelines stating development must help propel the EU’s “economic foreign policy.” However, while eating a hurried lunch, Andrews pointed to a weak point, “a vulnerability”,” in the new approach, drawing on the method adopted to target governments which have signed up to the Paris Agreement to cut their carbon emissions — but then fail to act. It’s called the court of law. Have the architects of the EU’s policy shift paid heed to the words in its founding treaties, that “Union development cooperation policy shall have as its primary objective the reduction and, in the long term, the eradication of poverty?” Andrews explained: “The European Union has become untethered from its treaty origins. The treaties require the primary aim of development policy should be poverty eradication, but we are applying a lot of our focus, our time, our energy, on investment in infrastructure, on leveraging private sector investment, into middle-income countries.” Asked how that conflict can be resolved, he replied: “If the commission is acting in an unconstitutional way, it's a matter for the European Court of Justice to determine that. “Strategic litigation is very, very common in the environmental space. You don't see it in the development space but that doesn't mean it couldn't happen, once you have a treaty obligation. I believe there's a vulnerability.” The comments open up a new front in growing criticism of the EU and its Global Gateway strategy — attacked recently by civil society groups for the self-interested danger of “diverting the aid budget to big business.” The perceived threat has been underlined by von der Leyen’s pick of an investment banker, Czech politician Jozef Sikela, to be the new development commissioner — subject to approval by the Development Committee after a three-hour grilling scheduled for Nov. 6. In eye-popping remarks after his selection, Sikela described his International Partnerships portfolio — the commission’s rebadged title for development — as a means to combat “an increasingly dangerous situation in the world,” through the Global Gateway. “I will be tasked with developing strategic economic cooperation that will not only strengthen the interests of the European Union, but also ensure access to necessary raw materials and key technologies,” he posted on X. Sikela pledged compliance with “fundamental values, such as sustainability, equality and the protection of human rights” — but there was no mention of the development priorities of lower-income countries, let alone of poverty eradication. Andrews suggested the remarks were “probably for a domestic audience, to make sure people didn't think that he'd got a lesser portfolio,” but stressed all new commissioners must “audition for their roles” and demonstrate their policies are “fully aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals.” To pass his “audition,” Sikela must be endorsed by political group coordinators representing two-thirds of the committee’s 25 members. Alternatively, they can demand further evidence or testimony — or refuse approval, potentially forcing von der Leyen to find someone else for the post, as has happened with posts at the start of the last four commission terms. How serious is this vetting process, Devex asked Andrews, prompting the reply: “Nobody goes in with a desire to unseat somebody, but if they don't do well in the committee hearings that can have consequences. “If you don't think it's been taken seriously, you should talk to some of the commissioners-designate, because they are working very, very hard to try to absorb the vast amount of policy that is required to master their brief. They are nervous about it, I'm sure — I certainly would be.” Andrews, 57, has only been an MEP for five years, having previously been a minister in the Irish government before a spell as head of the Dublin-based aid charity GOAL. But he was the unanimous choice to chair the Development Committee. Does he really believe it’s possible to turn the EU back to a poverty-focused development policy? “Yes, I do. I even think there's an obligation,” he replied without hesitation. The goal is not to replace the Global Gateway, but to create an alternative in the poorest countries where the private sector will not invest. “Maybe we're doomed to fail, but the members of the committee are determined to find out what we're going to do about these issues. At the moment we don't have any answers,” Andrews said. Nov. 6 is also the date of the hearing for the new commissioner-designate for humanitarian aid, former Belgian foreign minister Hadja Lahbib, who — controversially — has been handed a vast brief incorporating equality issues including women’s rights, a new anti-racism strategy and an action plan on cyberbullying, as well as managing natural disasters in Europe.