Von der Leyen wins a second term with 401 votes and a programme she now has to fund

On Thursday 18 July 2024, in Strasbourg, the European Parliament elected Ursula von der Leyen President of the European Commission for a second term. The secret ballot gave her 401 votes in favour, 284 against and 15 abstentions, with 7 invalid ballots. She needed 360 votes[1]. Five years earlier, on 16 July 2019, she had obtained 383 votes against 327, with 22 abstentions, when 374 were required[2]. The margin of 2019 was nine votes. The margin of 2024 is 41. That difference is the first fact of the new mandate, and it is a political fact before it is an arithmetic one.

A majority built in the centre, with help from the Greens

The vote followed the procedure of Article 17 of the Treaty on European Union. The European Council takes account of the elections and proposes a candidate, and the Parliament elects that candidate by a majority of its component members[3]. The European Council made its proposal on 27 June 2024. On the same evening it elected António Costa as its own President from December, named Kaja Kallas as High Representative and adopted the Strategic Agenda for 2024-2029. Giorgia Meloni abstained on von der Leyen and voted against Costa and Kallas[4].

The Parliament vote was secret, so no official breakdown by group exists. The core coalition of the European People's Party, the Socialists and Democrats and Renew Europe holds 401 seats, and some of its members were expected to vote against her. The Greens joined the informal alliance, which is what gave her a comfortable margin[5]. On the right, Brothers of Italy said its delegation voted against her, and Lega said the same[1]. Within her own political family, the Slovenian EPP member Romana Tomc said that von der Leyen "was never our choice"[1].

We read the result in a simple way. Von der Leyen courted the European Conservatives and Reformists during the campaign and was criticised for it. Asked after the vote whether that approach had been right, she answered that the results showed it was[6]. The numbers say something else. Meloni's group voted against her, and the Greens voted for her. The majority that elected her is a majority of the centre, enlarged to the left, and it is on that majority that she now depends.

What the guidelines promise, and what they do not say

Her programme is a document titled "Europe's Choice", dated Strasbourg, 18 July 2024, which she published shortly before her speech[7]. It has seven chapters. The first is on prosperity and competitiveness, the second on defence and security, the third on the social model, the fourth on food, water and nature, the fifth on democracy, the sixth on Europe in the world and the seventh on the Union's own functioning[7].

The commitments with dates are few and we list them. A Clean Industrial Deal is to come within the first 100 days. A White Paper on the future of European defence is to come within the same 100 days, under a Commissioner for Defence, with a European Air Shield and cyber defence projects as the first steps towards a European Defence Union. A European Competitiveness Fund is to be proposed within the next long-term budget to finance strategic technologies. A Commissioner will hold housing in their remit for the first time, with a European Affordable Housing Plan. A 90 per cent emissions reduction target for 2040 is to be written into the European Climate Law. A Commissioner for Enlargement will be appointed and accession stays merit-based[7]. In the chamber, she pledged support for Ukraine for as long as it takes and said that the next five years "will define Europe's place in the world for the next five decades"[5].

For our generation, the youth chapter deserves a close reading. The guidelines promise a President's Youth Advisory Board, annual Youth Policy Dialogues from the first 100 days, a stronger Erasmus+ that covers vocational training and a Commissioner for intergenerational fairness[7]. Each of these is an institution for consultation. None of them is a budget line. The guidelines also diagnose the capital problem in plain figures: EUR 300 billion of household savings leave the Union for foreign markets every year, and a completed Capital Markets Union could add an estimated EUR 470 billion of investment annually[7]. That diagnosis is correct. It is also not new, and the Savings and Investments Union is a new name for the Capital Markets Union that previous Commissions did not complete.

The document is silent on the one question that governs all the others. The Defence Union, the Competitiveness Fund, the housing plan and the 2040 target all require money that the current multiannual financial framework does not contain. The guidelines refer the Fund to the next long-term budget, which will be negotiated from 2025 and will not apply before 2028. A programme whose financing arrives in the second half of the mandate is a programme that the next Parliament will judge, and the next Parliament is the one our generation will elect in larger numbers than this one.

What we recommend

First, the Commissioner for intergenerational fairness should receive a defined portfolio and a right of opinion on the next multiannual financial framework, so that the function is a competence and not a title. Second, the Parliament should attach a reporting obligation to the 100-day commitments, with a plenary debate in November 2024 on the Clean Industrial Deal and the defence White Paper. Third, the Youth Policy Dialogues should be given a published agenda and a written Commission response, in the manner of the Conference on the Future of Europe, so that consultation leaves a record. Fourth, the Competitiveness Fund should be designed before the budget negotiation starts, with a public estimate of its size, because a fund without a figure is a promise without a cost.