The last plenary: the main research policy issues of EU’s 9th legislature

MEPs are gathering in Strasbourg this week for the last plenary session in the current EU legislature, with many of them about to enter into campaign mode ahead of the 9 June ballot.  

On the agenda this week are votes on a report by Tomislav Sokol and Annalisa Tardion on the European Health Data Space, another vote on how EuroHPC computers can help boost the EU AI industry by Maria da Graça Carvalho, and a debate on the Net Zero industry act, a piece of legislation spearheaded by Christian Ehler.  

Last week we also had a look at the MEPs on the research and industry committee (ITRE) who are likely to return for another term and shape the tenth EU Framework Programme, FP10 and the next five years of EU policymaking in the field. 

As we look back at the past five years, what have been the main debates, votes and political accomplishments of the outgoing cohort of MEPs with direct impact on research and innovation? 

MEPs meet Commissioners 

Their mandate started as usual with grilling sessions of EU Commissioners put forward by European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen, with most candidates able to sail through the parliamentary hearings. 

At the time, the incoming commissioner for research and innovation, Bulgaria’s Mariya Gabriel promised MEPs she would take action to tackle the gaping disparity in research performance between rich and poor countries across the EU, as Science|Business reported back in September 2019. MEPs questioned Gabriel on bridging the east-west gap in science and innovation and how she would tackle brain drain.  

Margrethe Vestager, the Danish politician von der Leyen picked to lead efforts to regulate big tech had to answer questions on how the EU would become a player in the development of ethical and human-centred artificial intelligence. Stella Kyriakides, the incoming health commissioner had to answer probes by MEPs who wanted to test her knowledge on a range of public health and food safety issues, from fertilisers in agriculture to the impact of antimicrobial resistance on human health. Other commissioners-in-waiting also told MEPs that more funds will need to be allocated to research at the expense of cohesion and agriculture budgets.  

The fight for the Horizon Europe budget 

As the 2019 cohort of MEPs were settling into their new seats in Brussels and Strasbourg, a battle over the 2021-2027 multiannual EU budget was looming, with friends of research and innovation in the parliament trying to secure a big pot for Horizon Europe. David Sassoli, the late president of the Parliament urged member states to reach a budget agreement that would match the Commission’s ambitious investment plans in digital and green technologies.  

The budget row continued throughout 2020, with negotiations further complicated by the COVID-19 pandemic. A deal was not reached until the summer, after member states agreed on an economic recovery fund to complement the usual EU budget.  

In the end, Horizon Europe received an additional €5 billion from the pandemic recovery pot, but before getting there, MEPs had started issuing warnings in early 2020 that a delayed budget agreement would mean a delayed start of the research and innovation programme. The whole process was also held up because MEPs could not agree whether additional cash in the EU budget should go to research or to protecting traditional programmes such as the common agriculture policy and cohesion. 

However, by June, MEPs in the industry and research committee (ITRE) voted to enter trilogue negotiations with the Council and the Commission on Horizon Europe and three other pieces of legislation with a heavy R&D focus, Digital Europe, the European Defence Fund and the EU’s new space programme. The vote was one of the final steps needed for reaching an agreement on the legislative files before their scheduled launch in January 2021. 

A month later, a flurry of MEPs across all parties came out to defend Horizon Europe in the first plenary meeting, after EU heads of state agreed to cut the budget for the research programme to €80.9 billion, vowing to work together on finding more money for future-oriented R&D. MEPs also warned they would block the long-term budget if R&D didn’t get more money. 

By October 2020, an agreement on the budget was still elusive, as MEPs wanted the €5 billion from the pandemic recovery pot to be distributed across the entire Horizon Europe programme, and not just to the priorities set by the European Commission.  

Some MEPs grew increasingly dissatisfied with how the member states wanted to repay the loans the Commission had to take from international markets to create the pandemic recovery fund. One of them, budget rapporteur Pierre Larrouturou went on hunger strike to demand for more money for health, research and climate in the EU multiannual budget.   

Talks continued to be difficult, but MEPs eventually managed to claw back money for health and student exchanges. After one-and-a-half days of intense negotiations in Brussels, EU governments and the European Parliament announced an extra €4 billion would be added to the EU’s 2021-2027 research budget. 

A final deal was reached in mid-December, after a marathon haggle between MEPs and member states. The final agreed budget for Horizon Europe was €95.5 billion, which included €4 billion retrieved in a compromise deal with member states and €5 billion from the EU’s COVID stimulus fund. Horizon Europe rapporteur Christian Ehler said legislators had come up with “the best, most modern research programme in the world.” 

In April 2021, MEPs voted to unlock Horizon Europe, giving their final stamp of approval to the legislation for the programme. The vote marks the end of almost three years of negotiations on the content and budget. 

Other R&I legislative files by sector 

Artificial intelligence: In 2021 MEPs started unpicking a Commission proposal on new rules for artificial intelligence (AI).  Romanian MEP  and chair of the European Parliament’s committee on AI Dragoș Tudorache told Science|Business the Parliament should ensure the regulation won’t become a heavy burden on innovators. 

Fast forward to 2024, MEPs voted through the AI act with a resounding majority. The legislation has a crucial role in research since it includes various initiatives to aid AI start-ups and foster innovation. These include the creation of 'AI factories' equipped with supercomputers that are freely accessible to start-ups and SMEs.  

International cooperation: MEPs also fought back against proposals to limit international research cooperation in sensitive areas, such as quantum and space projects in Horizon Europe. German MEP Niklas Nienass said the EU would “shoot itself in the foot” if it were to introduce such restrictions in EU funding programmes.   

Horizon association: MEPs also pushed for a greater role for the Parliament in negotiations between the Commission and third countries on Horizon Europe association deals. The Commission has sought to expand Horizon Europe association outside the continent to rich democracies worldwide, but MEPs are concerned that they are not being given enough information about or say over negotiations which they argue are highly political and need wider democratic oversight. 

Net-Zero: Earlier this year, MEPs and member states reached a provisional agreement on the Net-Zero Industry act to support domestic production of the technologies such as solar panels, fuel cells and electrolysers needed to achieve Europe’s climate goals. 

Health data: MEPs and member states have recently reached a deal on the European Health Data Space (EHDS), a piece of legislation that aims to improve individual access and control over their health data in Europe and to facilitate cross-border research and innovation in health.  

Pharmaceutical regulation: A debate on revamping the EU rules for pharmaceuticals has generated disagreements among MEPs over the last few years. Belgian MEP Marc Botenga, the Parliament’s rapporteur for the EU pharmaceutical strategy said companies should be forced to invest more of their profits in R&D. His view was rebuffed by other MEPs who compared his ideas to “the Soviet model”. 

Later on, the legislation was the focus of a scandal in the Parliament’s Panel for the Future of Science and Technology (STOA). The scientific advice announced it will update its transparency rules, following a heated debate in which MEPs accused the panel’s administration of overstepping its powers by withdrawing an independent report on the pharma strategy. 

Despite disagreements, MEPs have reached a deal on the legislation, but the file will not be finalised until after the June elections.  

EIT: In the first months of her term, Portuguese MEP Maria da Graça Carvalho, one of two leaders on EIT legislation in the European Parliament managed to convince member states to use a regional innovation scheme to boost the innovation capacity of low-performing countries and to co-opt new partners into the European Institute for Innovation and Technology’s (EIT) big public-private consortia, the Knowledge and Innovation Communities (KICs).