An employee at French nuclear fuel company Orano has died from meningitis, French health authorities said Friday, adding that there is seemingly “no link” with the ongoing outbreak in the U.K. The Normandy Regional Health Agency said it received a report of a case of invasive meningococcal disease in La Hague, Normandy, on Thursday, and that the death was announced on Friday. Authorities are currently identifying at-risk contacts, who will be offered antibiotics “as soon as possible.” The employee worked at Orano, the health authority said. “Around 50 potential contact cases have been identified and contacted by their managers in order to receive a specific preventive antibiotic treatment,” Orano told POLITICO. The patient died at Cherbourg hospital. Cherbourg is a key port for ferries to and from the U.K. The health authority said “no link can be established with the meningitis epidemic currently underway in the United Kingdom.” The U.K. is grappling with an ongoing outbreak of meningitis in the southeast county of Kent, linked to a local nightclub. As of Friday, 29 people have fallen ill and two people have died, the U.K. Health Security Agency said. Health Secretary Wes Streeting described the outbreak as “unprecedented.” Health officials have rolled out preventive antibiotics and vaccination to those who attended the nightclub between March 5-7, to close contacts of cases and to local university and school students. France reported one case to the U.K. last weekend in someone who had also visited the university then travelled to France. The French health ministry told POLITICO the patient was “stable,” that close contacts had been alerted and offered antibiotics, and that no further cases had been reported.

LONDON — A deadly outbreak of meningitis in the United Kingdom linked to a nightclub in England’s southeast has killed two people with new cases being reported daily. Health officials are rolling out preventive antibiotics to those who attended the nightclub earlier this month, to close contacts of cases and to local university students. The latter are also being offered a vaccine. But as U.K. health officials move to contain the outbreak, it has added to proliferating cases of meningitis across Europe — and has exposed patchy access to vaccines to prevent the disease. Since 2021 Europe has seen increasing rates of invasive meningococcal disease, which is caused by a bacterial infection. The majority of cases have been linked to the same “group B” family of bacteria that caused the outbreak in England.  POLITICO looked into how prepared EU countries are for a similar outbreak. WHAT HAPPENED IN THE UK? From March 13-18 some 27 cases of invasive meningococcal disease were identified in the southeast of England, the U.K. Health Security Agency said Thursday. Nine have been confirmed as Neisseria meningitidis group B.  At least 10 people who caught the illness had attended a nightclub in Canterbury from March 5-7. Most are students from the University of Kent in Canterbury or are upper-year students from local secondary schools.  The illnesses have been severe with rapid deterioration. Two young people have died: an 18-year-old high school student and a 21-year-old university student. Health Secretary Wes Streeting described the cases as “an unprecedented outbreak.” France reported one case to the U.K. in someone who had also visited the university then travelled to France, Streeting told parliament on Tuesday. “The patient has been hospitalized and is in stable condition,” a health ministry spokesperson told POLITICO, adding that close contacts had been alerted and offered antibiotics, and that no further cases had been reported. HOW IS THE UK RESPONDING? Health officials have set up four centers in and near Canterbury for students and those who attended the nightclub to receive preventive antibiotics. Family doctors in the region have been advised to offer treatment to anyone who visited the nightclub. “This is the main intervention that will help protect people and halt the spread of the outbreak,” said Trish Mannes from the U.K. Health Security Agency. In addition, “as a further precaution,” 5,000 university students are being contacted and offered a vaccine to protect against meningitis group B, Mannes said.  Nearby hospitals and schools have been told how to spot symptoms, how to prevent infection and respond.    A student receives an injection at the University of Kent campus in Canterbury, U.K. on March 19, 2026. | Gareth Fuller/PA Images via Getty Images HAVE CASES BEEN RISING ELSEWHERE? Since 2021, cases of invasive meningococcal disease in Europe have been rising. In 2023 there were 1,895 confirmed cases, including 200 deaths in the EU plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein. Group B remains the major cause of the disease, accounting for 57 percent of cases with known type, and was the dominant group in all ages under 65 years. “Its notification rate has been increasing since 2021,” a European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control report said. France, Germany and Spain accounted for 57 percent of all confirmed cases, while Belgium, the Netherlands and Lithuania reported the second highest notification rate. Group Y infections were the second-most reported (20 percent of cases with known serogroup) and the most reported in those over 65. Group W infections were the third-most reported overall (15 percent of cases with known serogroup). Around 20 percent of young people carry the MenB bacteria in their noses and throats; the disease happens when the bacteria enter the bloodstream and when a person’s immune system is low. It causes a high fever, headache, vomiting and drowsiness, and can lead to inflammation of the brain and sepsis. It has a mortality rate of around 10 percent. Those that survive are at risk of lifelong disability due to the amputations or brain damage caused by the infection. WHO CAN GET THE VACCINE? GlaxoSmithKline’s MenB vaccine Bexsero was approved in Europe (including the U.K.) in 2013 and was rolled out as routine vaccination in the U.K. to infants in 2015. Infants are most at risk due to their lack of immunity. There are over 100 different strains of MenB; the vaccine covers between 75 percent and 80 percent of them, said Adam Finn, professor emeritus of pediatrics at the University of Bristol. “The level of protection after 2 doses is very high and lasts for some years at least,” he added. Infections also arise in adolescents, but the U.K. hasn’t offered MenB vaccinations in older children since it was launched.  In Europe, 12 countries routinely offer the vaccine to infants for free —  the Czech Republic, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Portugal and Spain. Croatia and Poland offer it to children and adults with compromised immune systems. Austria recommends the vaccine in infants but doesn’t fund it. Meanwhile, 12 countries — Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, the Netherlands, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia and Sweden — don’t offer the vaccine at all. Seventeen EU countries offer vaccination against meningococcal serogroups A, C, Y and W. British Health Secretary Wes Streeting arrives in Downing Street in London for a Cabinet meeting on Jan. 17, 2026. | Zeynep Demir/Anadolu via Getty Images WHY ISN’T VACCINATION UNIVERSAL?  Each EU country takes advice from their independent immunization committees, which recommend which vaccines to offer citizens. “National epidemiology — based on surveillance data — and cost effectiveness considerations determine these decisions,” Beate Kampmann, professor of pediatric infectious diseases and immunology and professor of global health, told POLITICO. That means vaccine schedules in EU countries “differ as a result.” “MenB meningitis is a rare disease and the vaccine is expensive,” Brendan Wren, professor of microbial pathogenesis at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, said of the U.K. position. “Although given to young children who are the most vulnerable to MenB, it is not freely available to the whole population.”  In light of the ongoing outbreak, however, Streeting told parliament that the country’s vaccination committee was reviewing whether to expand eligibility for the MenB jab. In 2019, Belgium’s immunization experts decided not to offer the vaccine to infants or adolescents, citing the low incidence of the disease, the need to administer three shots, and the fact the vaccine “is not very cost-effective.” The Netherlands said in 2022 that its Health Council wasn’t recommending the MenB vaccine “due to the relatively small burden of disease, the side effects of the vaccine and need for several doses, as well as cost.” But the council is now reviewing its position again, with a decision expected in the next quarter, a ministry spokesperson told POLITICO. COULD THE EU BUY VACCINES? The EU can procure vaccines for groups of countries, with the Health Emergency Preparedness and Response Authority acting as a negotiator with drugmakers in such cases.  This could be an option for vaccines like Bexsero, should there be interest. “The Netherlands had a positive experience with the EU role in the procurement of COVID-19 vaccines and is open to discussing a role for the EU in other joint procurement procedures,” the Dutch health ministry said. Meanwhile, the vaccine is available for private purchase in most EU countries, but supplies in the U.K. are limited.  The EU can procure vaccines for groups of countries. | Alicia Windzio/picture alliance via Getty Images “Pharmacies are being inundated by requests from concerned patients for MenB vaccination, which the vast majority of our members across the country have no stock currently available to fulfil,” said Olivier Picard, chair of the National Pharmacy Association. COULD THE OUTBREAK SPREAD TO EUROPE? That’s unlikely since it’s not as easily transmitted among people. “This outbreak is caused by a bacterial infection and by its nature it is a lot less infectious compared to Influenza, Measles or SARCOV-2,” said Bharat Pankhania, senior clinical lecturer at the University of Exeter Medical School. “These bacterial infections require close contact and it is a heavy droplet aerosol spread, thus not very infectious and you need to be in close prolonged contact with a case, a family member, or a kissing contact,” he said, adding there is no need for restrictions on movement. In Belgium, the health ministry said it is convening its scientific risk-assessment group “to evaluate the situation for our citizens and country.” Meanwhile, ECDC issued a statement Wednesday evening saying the risk to the general population in Europe from the British outbreak was “very low.” “Outbreaks of meningitis caused by Neisseria meningitidis typically occur in small clusters around cases or in places where many people gather. Although some secondary cases can occur among close contacts of cases, the disease does not spread in the community like, for example, a respiratory virus,” the disease agency said. Claudia Chiappa contributed to this article. Update: This article has been updated with UKHSA data issued March 19.

World Health Organization officials are preparing for a nuclear catastrophe if the U.S.-Israel war with Iran escalates further. U.N. staff are monitoring the fallout of U.S-Israeli attacks on Iran’s atomic sites and remain “vigilant” for any type of nuclear threat, Hanan Balkhy, WHO regional director for the eastern Mediterranean, told POLITICO. “The worst-case scenario is a nuclear incident, and that’s something that worries us the most,” Balkhy said. “As much as we prepare, there’s nothing that can prevent the harm that will come … the region’s way — and globally if this eventually happens — and the consequences are going to last for decades.” Staff are prepared for a nuclear incident in its “broader sense,” including an attack on a nuclear facility or the use of a weapon, Balkhy said. “We are thinking about it, and we’re just really hoping that it does not happen.” U.S. President Donald Trump has vowed to “eliminate the imminent nuclear threat posed by the Iranian regime,” though he has provided no evidence that Tehran was developing a nuclear weapon. Last June, the U.S. in coordination with Israel targeted nuclear infrastructure throughout Iran. The Atomic Energy Organization of Iran confirmed that attacks took place at its Fordow, Isfahan and Natanz sites. The U.S. and Israel have continued to target nuclear sites since they launched their new offensive on Feb. 28. U.S. President Donald Trump is seen during the his departure the White House en route Hebron, Kentucky on March 11, 2026, in Washington DC. | Celal Gunes/Anadolu via Getty Images Israel and the United Arab Emirates also have nuclear facilities within range of Iran’s missiles, though there are no reports of these being targeted. Israel is itself widely believed to have a significant arsenal of nuclear weapons. To date there have been no reported signs of radioactive contamination anywhere in the region. But if a nuclear incident did expose people to dangerous levels of radiation, it would risk causing significant immediate trauma to their lungs and skin, and heighten the danger of developing cancer and mental health problems, Balkhy explained. The 1986 nuclear accident at the Soviet nuclear plant in Chernobyl, Ukraine officially caused around 30 deaths in the first few months, and later contributed to a surge in thyroid cancers, numbering in the thousands, and to high anxiety among the local population over the following decades. “I think those who read the history of previous incidents, whether intentional or accidental, are very aware of what we’re talking about,” Balkhy said. An estimated 110,000 to 210,000 people died from the U.S. nuclear attacks on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. As the war continues, some senior figures have begun to speculate on the use of nuclear warheads. David Sacks, Trump’s AI adviser, said he worried about “Israel escalating the war by contemplating using a nuclear weapon.” Trump rubbished the suggestion, telling reporters: “Israel wouldn’t do that.” The WHO is refreshing its staff on how to respond in the event of a nuclear incident, including providing advice to officials on the public health risks and what measures people should take to protect themselves.  Smoke rises after airstrikes in Tehran, Iran on March 13, 2026. | Fatemeh Bahrami/Anadolu via Getty Images Balkhy also warned there could be significant health impacts, such as respiratory illness, from the attacks on Iranian oil facilities earlier this month that have covered Tehran in smoke. ATTACKS ON HEALTH SYSTEMS Meanwhile, the WHO has continued to decry attacks on health infrastructure in the region. The WHO has so far recorded 46 attacks on health workers in Iran and Lebanon, with 38 killed, since the war began on Feb. 28. Israel killed 14 health workers in Lebanon in two strikes on March 13, including an attack on the Bourj Qalaouiyeh primary health care center in the south of the country. In a follow-up statement to POLITICO, Balkhy called the attacks “tragic and unacceptable,” adding that health workers must be protected under international law “at all times.” Health workers and United Nations officials have previously accused Israel of systematically destroying Gaza’s health system. Israel has denied that charge, typically stating the attacks are justified on military grounds or, such as in the case of a deadly double-tap strike on Nasser Hospital last year, a “tragic mishap.” By mid-2025, 94 percent of Gaza’s hospitals had been damaged or destroyed, according to the WHO. Kuwait reported on March 17 that two paramedics were injured when shrapnel from an Iranian attack fell on a medical center. A view of tents as Lebanese families who were forced to leave their homes due to Israeli attacks, took shelter in a school building in the Dahieh district of the capital Beirut, Lebanon, on March 15, 2026. | Houssam Shbaro/Anadolu via Getty Images Health ministries in Iran and Lebanon reported 1,444 and 886 civilian deaths, respectively, as of March 17. Lebanon says 107 children have died from the latest bombardment. The United Nations estimates that between 600,000 and 1 million Iranian households have been temporarily displaced, while there are 946,000 self-registered displaced individuals in Lebanon, according to figures provided to POLITICO by the WHO. The Israeli Ministry of Health does not include casualties in its daily updates on the war. As of March 8, the government said 13 people had been killed. The fragile health system in Lebanon, which was already under severe pressure before the latest attacks from Israel, is struggling to deal with the large numbers of displaced. “You’re talking about access to good food, clean water, the disruption of medical care provision, whether it’s childhood immunizations, whether it’s access to their medications, the dialysis patients, the cancer patients, it will have a huge toll on the people of Lebanon,” Balkhy said. An ambulance belonging to the Islamic Health Organisation seen outside Jabal Amel Hospital after an Israeli airstrike in Tyre, Lebanon on March 17, 2026. | Sally Hayden/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images The conflict is also exacerbating a Palestinian health crisis, with heavy restrictions on the amount of aid entering Gaza, Balkhy said. The WHO has reported critical shortages of medicines and medical supplies in Gaza, despite Israel saying there is enough aid entering the territory to meet humanitarian needs. The Palestinian Ministry of Health, meanwhile, says there are zero stocks of 46 percent of essential medicines. The scale of destruction in Gaza was so overwhelming, Balkhy said, that it would take “billions of dollars” and “decades to re-establish a dignified environment for these people to live in.”

Teresa Graham, © EFPIA European governments navigate an ever more competitive global landscape, stagnating productivity and competing demands on budgets. We have successfully faced and solved many challenges in the past, but this situation is different: the choices we make today will shape our health care systems and patient care, and these choices will dictate Europe’s economic performance and global relevance for decades to come. For those of us in the life sciences, these aren’t just macroeconomic trends — they are the pulse of a system that determines how quickly a breakthrough reaches a patient. It is a high-stakes environment where policies on health care and innovation carry urgent human and economic consequences. When a medicine has the power to treat or potentially cure, neither innovators nor policymakers want to drag their heels, because no person requiring health care can afford the luxury of delay. > The true economic burden of health care isn’t financing health innovation, but > the cost of failing to do so. Europe’s challenge is clear: we must better align our industrial strength in life science with public health goals, ensuring innovation reaches both patients and economies faster. The question is no longer what Europe wants to be — it is where Europe chooses to invest to remain a global player. Health as e conomic i nfrastructure Under the weight of mounting budget pressures, it is understandable that governments often view health primarily as a cost to be contained. However, this perspective is disconnected from modern economic reality. And let me be clear: the true economic burden of health care isn’t financing health innovation, but the cost of failing to do so. For years, Europe has already been paying the price of lost productivity: citizens forced out of the workforce too early and chronic diseases managed too late. For instance, cardiovascular diseases alone cost the E uropean U nion economy up to €282 billion annually. This creates a massive yet avoidable strain on national budgets, especially as pharmaceutical innovation is estimated to be responsible for up to two-thirds of life expectancy gains in high-income countries . 1 > Every medical breakthrough that enables a citizen to return to work or care > for their family is a direct investment in Europe’s economic strength. We must shift our mindset . H ealth is not merely a social good; it is economic infrastructure. Healthier societies are inherently more productive and resilient, and every medical breakthrough that enables a citizen to return to work or care for their family is a direct investment in Europe’s economic strength. Investing in innovation today is the only way to secure a competitive workforce and reduce long-term systemic costs. The c ompetitiveness t est: a s trategic a sset, n ot a l ine i tem Europe’s life sciences sector is one of the few remaining areas that retains genuine global competitiveness and strength, contributing more than €300 billion to annual output and supporting 2 million high-skilled jobs across m ember s tates . 2 It anchors Europe’s trade resilience, generating a trade surplus 66 percent higher than all other EU sectors combined . 3 But the warning signs are clear: while Europe still accounts for 20 percent of global pharmaceutical research and development , its share of global investment is shrinking as capital and talent migrate elsewhere . 4 Europe’s world-class science is being held back by fragmentation and regulatory inertia. > We must treat this sector as a pillar of our sovereignty and a strategic > asset, not merely a cost to be managed. If we want to lead the next wave of medical breakthroughs, we must move at the speed of global change. This requires a fundamental shift: simplifying clinical trial regulations, deploying AI-driven digital tools, incentivizing research through strong intellectual property frameworks and establishing a public-private dialogue on innovative pharmaceuticals. We need a clear action plan, not just more legislation, to translate our scientific leadership into tangible health outcomes.   We must treat this sector as a pillar of our sovereignty and a strategic asset, not merely a cost to be managed.  A  c onsequential  c hoice  Europe has to choose. Either we can continue to approach life science innovation as a budgetary threat, only to reali z e too late that we have weakened our competitiveness and delayed new treatments for patients. Or we can recogni z e innovation for what it is  —  an economic multiplier that strengthens our productivity, resilience  and global influence  —  and ensure that Europe remains a place where the next generation of medical breakthroughs is discovered, developed  and delivered to patients.  There is no middle ground. Europe must stop focus ing solely on the cost of innovation and start asking how much innovation it can afford to lose. In the global race for talent and capital, hesitation is a decision. The rest of the world is not waiting. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- References 1. The value of health: Investing in Europe’s future [EPC 2026] 2. Economic and Societal Footprint of the Pharmaceutical Industry in Europe [VE / PwC 2024] 3. International trade of EU and non-EU countries since 2002 by SITC [Eurostat 2026] 4. The 2025 EU Industrial R&D Investment Scoreboard [EC 2025] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Disclaimer POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENT * The sponsor is European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA) * The entity ultimately controlling the sponsor is European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA) * The political advertisement is linked to  EU pharmaceutical regulation and innovation policy. More information here.

LONDON — Ministers are poised to axe the watchdog that measures the U.K.’s overseas aid spending as part of deep cuts to the development budget, set to be confirmed this week.  Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced last year he would reduce the aid budget from 0.5 percent to 0.3 percent of economic output in order to pay for a boost to defense spending, but has not yet spelled out where those cuts will fall. Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper is expected to unveil details before the Easter recess, including tough funding settlements for the BBC World Service and the British Council.  The Independent Commission for Aid Impact (ICAI), which scrutinizes official development assistance (ODA), may be downsized or scrapped altogether under the plans, according to three people with knowledge of discussions with the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO). The move comes as Starmer’s government shifts away from a focus on international development — a cornerstone of Labour Party foreign policy since the 1990s — and plows those resources into defense. An ICAI spokesperson said: “The Independent Commission for Aid Impact costs less than 0.03 percent of the total U.K. aid budget. … As the government reduces the aid budget and changes the way it does development, independent scrutiny and learning become even more important, not less.” The ICAI’s latest report lambasted the government for a lack of “an overarching strategy or set of priorities,” pointing out that aid cash is being spent on supporting refugees in the U.K. rather than on the global poor. The potential closure of the ICAI has drawn concern from within Starmer’s own ranks, with Labour MPs pointing out that the party made an explicit commitment to “work closely” with the watchdog in their 2024 election manifesto. Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper is expected to unveil details before the Easter recess. | WPA pool photo by Jaimy Joy/Getty Images Sarah Champion, chair of the international development committee, said the ICAI’s latest report “underlines why the government should row back from its plans to scrap the U.K.’s aid watchdog.” She added: “At a time of brutal budget cuts, it is more important than ever that the government spends its aid wisely and transparently.” Fleur Anderson, a member of the foreign affairs committee, told POLITICO: “When something works as well as ICAI, why are we even considering dismantling it?” Beccy Cooper, a 2024 intake MP, said: “More than ever, we need to ensure effectiveness and maximum impact of our aid funding.” Asked about the body’s future in January, International Development Minister Jenny Chapman said: “I have to ask myself whether that is the right use of that money or whether we could get what we need more efficiently.” The government is expected to prioritize multilateral aid while slashing funding for bilateral donations and in-country projects including public health initiatives and education for women and girls. A Labour MP briefed on the plans, granted anonymity to speak candidly, raised fears that some cuts would go against ministers’ own stated aims for the remaining aid budgets. The MP flagged proposals to reduce funds for the British International Investment development bank, despite a stated aim to boost private investment in development projects, and to reduce the headcount of Whitehall staff working on ODA, despite professing a wish to focus on expertise. Fleur Anderson, a member of the foreign affairs committee, told POLITICO: “When something works as well as ICAI, why are we even considering dismantling it?” | Brian Lawless/PA Images via Getty Images Chapman held briefings on the plans last week and will hold more sessions next week as the government tries to keep MPs onside as the details emerge of where savings will be made. An FCDO spokesperson said: “National security is the first duty of this government. That’s why, to fund a necessary increase in defense spending, the government has taken the decision to reduce the U.K. ODA budget to 0.3 percent of [economic output] by 2027.   “We remain absolutely committed to tackling the global challenges of hunger, disease, insecurity and conflict, but we have been clear we must modernize our approach to development to reflect the changing global context.” 

Every day across Europe, millions of citizens wear, sleep on, eat off or rely on rental textiles provided by industrial laundries. From hospital linens and reusable surgical gowns to industrial workwear, hotel bedding, restaurant textiles and hygiene products, textile services operate quietly but indispensably at the heart of Europe’s economy. In many countries, more than 90 percent of hospitals and hotels would be forced to close within days without a continuous supply of hygienically cleaned textiles, while pharmaceutical and food production facilities would halt operations within 24 hours. Behind this essential service stands a highly organi z ed European industry that combines operational excellence with a circular, service-based business model — washing and keeping textiles in use for longer, reducing waste and lowering environmental impact while safeguarding public health. By relying on reuse, repair and professional maintenance, the system significantly reduces the need for virgin raw materials sourced from outside Europe. At the same time, these locally anchored service models create skilled jobs, generate tax revenues in the communities where companies operate and drive continuous innovation in circular solutions — supporting new business opportunities and industrial development across the European Union . > In this time of on going and challenging geo-political change, it will become > crucial to fully recogni z e the strategic value of circular, service-based > business models, which strengthen competitiveness and resilience while > delivering on Europe’s sustainability objectives. > > Hartmut Engler, CEO of CWS Workwear As several important legislative files move forward in Brussels, it is time to reflect on what textile services need to continue to implement sustainable solutions. Public procurement rules are a great vector to promote and encourage circular business models while delivering on the strategic autonomy ambition of the EU. Public authorities across the EU spend over € 2.6 trillion annually on purchasing services, works and supplies, accounting for around 15 percent of the EU ’s GDP. However, too much of this investment is directed toward linear services and disposable goods, slowing down progress toward Europe’s environmental and industrial objectives. With the revision of the EU public procurement rules, it should be recogni z ed that the EU’s circular economy and environmental aims are greatly advanced by the textile rental industry. Specifically, g reen p ublic p rocurement should become mandatory across all EU m ember s tates and should also encourage alternatives to direct purchase such as leasing models or product-as-a-service business models. Public procurement should not be driven solely by value-for-money considerations, but by a holistic lifecycle approach that reflects long-term environmental and social performance. Introducing mandatory lifecycle costing as an award criterion would ensure that sustainability is measured over the full duration of a contract, not just at the point of purchase. > Longevity of product should be the first priority of the upcoming Circular > Economy Act. The most sustainable product is ultimately the one that is kept > in use the longest, putting durability and repairability at the centre of > environmental benefits. > > Elena Lai, s ecretary g eneral of the European Textile Services Association European Textile Services Association (ETSA) members already deliver sustainable business models with product-as-a-service models implementing repair, reuse and extended use. Such business models should be empowered and further supported in legislation, hand in hand with recycling. Extending a product’s useful life delivers far greater climate and resource benefits than breaking products down for recycling after short use cycles. It preserves the embedded energy, water and raw materials already invested. However, prioriti z ing longevity does not mean neglecting end-of-life solutions. At the same time, ETSA members are joining forces to invest in a joint recycling pilot project, translating circular ambition into practical industrial solutions. They are developing innovative processes to transform end-of-life textiles into recycled fib er s suitable for insulation materials, industrial wipers and other high-value applications — with the long-term vision of advancing closed-loop systems in which recycled fib er s can increasingly serve as raw materials for new textile production. Recycling requires stable markets and long-term policy certainty, and the sector is actively investing in building both. By developing concrete use cases for recycled content, these initiatives help strengthen European recycling value chains while further reducing dependency on third-country suppliers. > Europe does not need to invent circular solutions from scratch. They already > exist. The priority now is to put in place policies that support circular, > service-based business models. These models are built on durability and > extending product lifespans to get more value from the resources we already > use. > > Elena Lai, s ecretary g eneral of the European Textile Services Association Textile services are not an emerging concept but a proven, scalable European solution — reducing consumption, anchoring jobs locally, safeguarding public health and lowering emissions. By recogni z ing and supporting service-based reuse models in forthcoming legislation, the EU can accelerate its sustainability ambitions while strengthening competitiveness and strategic autonomy. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Disclaimer POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENT * The sponsor is ETSA – European Textiles Service Association * The ultimate controlling entity is ETSA – European Textiles Service Association * This political advertisement advocates for the recognition and support of circular, service-based business models within forthcoming EU legislation; by addressing the Circular Economy Act, the revision of EU Public Procurement rules, Green Public Procurement requirements and lifecycle costing criteria, it seeks to influence policymakers and the public debate on EU sustainability, industrial policy and procurement frameworks, bringing it within the scope of the TTPA. More information here.

BRUSSELS — In the corridors of Brussels, policymakers endlessly debate the intricacies of the Vision for Agriculture and Food, the urgency of the European Child Guarantee and the future of the Common Agricultural Policy. Yet the place where these high-level strategies actually collide, and succeed or fail, is likely the noisiest room in any building: the school canteen. This week, as we mark International School Meals Day, we need to stop treating school food as a mere logistical cost or a side dish to education. Instead, we must recognize it for what it is: the single most powerful but under-utilized lever for systemic change. Beyond the plate: a systemic warning The statistics are sobering. Today, one in four European adolescents is overweight or obese, according to the World Health Organization. This is not merely a matter of individual choice or poverty. This trend is driven by a food landscape where ultra-processed, low-nutrient options have become the most accessible and affordable default for almost every family, regardless of socio-economic background. For many children, school meals are the only reliable window of high-quality nutrition in a day otherwise dominated by a broken food system. On the production side, our farmers are protesting for fair incomes, while the climate crisis demands a shift to sustainable food systems. It sounds like an impossible knot to untie. But for the past three years, a growing revolution has been taking place in close to 4,000 schools across 22 European countries, reaching over one million children. > For many children, school meals are the only reliable window of high-quality > nutrition in a day otherwise dominated by a broken food system. Through the EU-funded initiative SchoolFood4Change (SF4C), cities and schools have gone far beyond updating their menus; they have dismantled the old model entirely. While thousands have begun transforming how food is sourced, prepared and valued, more than 850 schools have taken the leap even further by fully implementing the Whole School Food Approach (WSFA). The results, published by Rikolto in a new report this week, offer a blueprint for an EU-wide roll-out of the model. “Evidence proves the framework works, yet we are currently hitting a bureaucratic ceiling,” explains Amalia Ochoa, head of sustainable food systems at ICLEI Europe and coordinator of SF4C. “Healthy school meals combined with food education represent the most accessible pathway to food system transformation, directly benefiting the 93 million children and young people across Europe. By aligning existing initiatives under a coherent framework, the EU can deliver on its promises to public health and both economic and environmental sustainability in one integrated approach.” Breaking the silos The WSFA works because it shifts the focus from the individual plate to the entire ecosystem. It recognizes that school meals are not an isolated education cost, but a powerful crossroads where public health, regional economics and environmental policy meet. Credit: LAYLA AERTS The approach integrates four pillars: meaningful policy leadership; sustainable procurement (favoring local and organic); hands-on education (gardening and cooking); and community partnership. When procurement is aligned with regional sustainability goals, magic happens. Children understand the value of food, waste less and local farmers gain a stable, predictable market, shielding them from global market volatility, while simultaneously lowering the long-term healthcare costs associated with diet-related diseases. The missing ingredient: it’s not just the food, it’s the people However, the report reveals a critical bottleneck. The biggest barrier to scaling this success isn’t necessarily the cost of the ingredients; it is the lack of dedicated coordination. > School meals are not an isolated education cost, but a powerful crossroads > where public health, regional economics and environmental policy meet. Transformation requires human power. It needs local coordinators who can navigate the labyrinth between a city’s health department, the procurement office and the school board. Too often, we fund the infrastructure but forget the implementation. For the WSFA to become an EU-wide standard, national and regional authorities need to move beyond project-based thinking. It’s not just another subsidy; it’s a strategic investment in Europe’s social and ecological resilience. As Thibault Geerardyn, director at Rikolto Europe, notes in the report:“The true obstacle to scaling up is institutional, not ideological. Changes in policy must be embedded in the current system, not merely added to it as a ‘nice to have’ project.” The mandate for change: a strategic imperative As the EU begins implementing its new mandate, school food offers a rare ‘triple dividend’ that hits every major political target on the Brussels agenda. It serves as a public health shield, a guaranteed market for local farmers and a tangible safety net for the European Child Guarantee. > Systemic change cannot be led by temporary staff or volunteers. The EU can > make the difference. However, this potential remains locked as long as school food is treated as a secondary concern. Systemic change cannot be led by temporary staff or volunteers. The EU can make the difference. We call on the European Parliament and Commission to: 1. Standardize quality: establish an EU-wide minimum standard of healthy school food and education to drive quality upwards across all member states. 2. Fund the coordinators: move away from short-term grants toward long-term strategic investment in the permanent operational implementation and coordination needed to guide schools through this transition. You cannot build a resilient system on temporary project cycles. 3. Connect the dots: create an interdepartmental taskforce. School food is currently a political orphan, sitting awkwardly between agricultural, health, youth and social policies. It needs a permanent home in the EU institutions and a unified strategy. The revolution is on the menu. We have the recipe. We have the evidence from more than 850 schools. Now, what’s needed is the political courage to serve it. Read the full evidence-based report here: “From Pilots to Policy: Evidence from Three Years of Implementing the Whole School Food Approach in Europe.” This article has been published with funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under grant agreement No 101036763. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Disclaimer POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENT * The sponsor is Rikolto België vzw * The ultimate controlling entity is Rikolto België vzw * The political advertisement is linked to encouraging change to European policy on food systems with calls to action for EU Institutions. Reference to the Green Deal, the European Child Guarantee, and agricultural reform. More information here.

Andrej Babiš built his fortune making fertilizer. But another, lesser-known arm of his business empire has helped bring more than 170,000 children into the world across Europe. The Czech prime minister’s name is rarely attached to FutureLife, one of Europe’s largest IVF clinic networks, spanning 60 clinics in 16 countries from Prague to Madrid to Dublin. But is just one part of a commercial empire that spans nitrogen-based fertilizers and industrial farms, assisted reproduction, online lingerie stores and more. And the Czech leader holds this portfolio while sitting at the table negotiating EU budgets, health rules and industrial policy. Yet in Brussels, nobody can answer a deceptively simple question: Which of the companies associated with Babiš receives EU money — and how much? “We might be giving him money and we don’t even know,” said Daniel Freund, a German Green lawmaker who led the European Parliament’s inquiries into Babiš during his first term as Czechia’s prime minister from 2017 to 2021. In 2021, the Parliament overwhelmingly adopted a resolution condemning Babiš over conflicts of interest involving EU subsidies and companies he founded. Under EU rules, member countries are responsible for checking conflicts of interest and reporting on who ultimately benefits from EU funds. But there is no single EU-wide register linking ultimate beneficial owners to all EU payments — making cross-border oversight difficult. The issue has resurfaced as Babiš returns to power and once again takes a seat among other EU heads of state and government in the European Council. In that exclusive body, he helps negotiate the bloc’s long-term budget, agricultural subsidies and other funding frameworks that shape the sectors in which his companies might operate. For years, debates over Babiš’s conflicts of interest have revolved around a single name — Agrofert, the agro-industrial empire that EU and Czech auditors found had improperly received over €200 million in EU and national agricultural subsidies. The payment suspensions and repayment demands continue: This week, Czech authorities halted some agricultural subsidies to Agrofert pending a fresh legal review of the company’s compliance with conflict-of-interest rules. Babiš has consistently rejected accusations of wrongdoing. His office said he “follows all binding rules” and that “there is no conflict of interests at the moment,” adding that Agrofert shares are managed by independent experts and that he “is not and will never be the owner of Agrofert shares.” In a parliamentary debate earlier this month, he dismissed the controversy as politically motivated, accusing opponents of having “invented” the conflict-of-interest issue because they were unable to defeat him at the ballot box. But critics argue that the renewed focus on Agrofert obscures a far broader commercial footprint. “Agrofert is only half of the problem,” said Petr Bartoň, chief economist at Natland, a private investment group based in Prague. “The law does not say ‘thou shalt not benefit from companies called Agrofert.’ It says you must not benefit from any companies subsidized by or receiving public money.” The concern, critics argue, arises from the sheer number of companies and sectors with which Babiš remains associated. THE INVISIBLE PILLAR Separate from Agrofert sits Hartenberg Holding, a private-equity vehicle Babiš co-founded with financier Jozef Janov in 2013. He holds a majority stake in the fund through SynBiol, a company he fully owns and which, unlike Agrofert, has not been transferred into any trust arrangement. With assets worth around €600 million, Hartenberg invests in health care, retail, aviation and real estate. Yet it has attracted only a fraction of the scrutiny directed at the agricultural holding, according to Lenka Stryalová of the Czech public-spending watchdog Hlídač státu. “Alongside Agrofert, there is a second, less visible pillar of Babiš’s business activities that is not currently intended to be placed into blind trusts,” she said. That pillar includes FutureLife, whose 2,100 specialists help individuals and couples conceive across Czechia, Slovakia, the U.K., Ireland, Romania, the Netherlands, Spain, Italy and Estonia. The clinics operate in a policy-sensitive space shaped primarily by national health reimbursement systems and insurance rules, rather than decisions taken directly in Brussels. Those systems, however, function within a broader EU regulatory framework governing cross-border care and state aid. Hartenberg owns 50.1 percent of FutureLife. The company said in a statement that Babiš has no operational role, no board seat and no decision-making authority. It added that FutureLife clinics operate like other health care providers and, where applicable, are reimbursed by national public health insurance systems under the same rules as other providers. Like thousands of other companies, some FutureLife entities received pandemic-era wage support under Czechia’s Covid relief programs. There is no evidence of any irregularity in those payments.  But health care is only one corner of the portfolio. Through Hartenberg, Babiš-linked capital also flows into everyday retail life. Astratex, a Czech-founded online lingerie retailer that began as a catalogue business before moving fully online in 2005, now operates localized e-shops across roughly 10 European markets and generates tens of millions of euros in annual revenue. Hartenberg acquired a controlling stake in 2018, marking one of the fund’s early expansions into cross-border digital retail. In Czechia, shoppers may also encounter Flamengo florist stands, a network of around 200 outlets selling bouquets, potted plants and funeral flower arrangements inside supermarkets and shopping malls. Hartenberg acquired a majority stake in the chain in 2019, backing its expansion and push into online delivery. Other online businesses linked to Babiš include sports equipment, and wool and textile retailers. Through Hartenberg, Babiš has also invested in urban development and real estate. Hartenberg was an early majority investor in the project company behind Prague’s Císařská vinice, a premium hillside development of villas and apartments near Ladronka park, partnering with developer JRD to finance construction. JRD Development Group said the project company is now 100 percent owned by JRD and that neither Babiš nor companies linked to him hold any direct or indirect ownership interest. The firm added that the development has not received EU funds or other public financial support. None of the Hartenberg businesses have ever been accused of misusing EU subsidies. But the long-running “Stork’s Nest” case, first investigated more than a decade ago and still unresolved, shows how difficult it can be to follow Babiš’s business web. The alleged fraud involved a €2 million EU subsidy provided in 2008 to the 31-room Čapí Hnízdo (Stork’s Nest) recreational and conference center in central Czechia, then part of Babiš’s Agrofert conglomerate. Prosecutors have accused Babiš and his associates of manipulating the center’s ownership and concealing his control of the business in order to obtain the subsidy. Babiš has always denied wrongdoing, telling POLITICO in 2019 that the case was politically motivated. He was acquitted in 2023, but an appeals court later overturned that verdict and ordered a retrial, which remains pending. Today, the resort itself is no longer part of Agrofert. It is owned by Imoba, a company fully controlled by Babiš’s SynBiol, the same holding that controls Hartenberg. Hartenberg itself holds no stake in Stork’s Nest. Taken together, Babis’ non-Agrofert portfolio spans health care reimbursement systems, online retail regulation, aviation safety oversight, real estate and city-planning decisions across multiple EU jurisdictions. In theory, a Czech consumer could encounter Babiš-linked companies at nearly every stage of life: the fertilizer on the fields that grow the wheat, the bread on the supermarket shelf, the bouquet for the wedding, the apartment in Prague and even the clinic that helps bring the next generation into the world. And at the end, perhaps, the flowers once more. WHY BRUSSELS CAN’T KEEP TRACK During Babiš’s previous term, the European Commission concluded that trust arrangements he put in place did not eliminate his effective control over Agrofert. A leaked legal document reported by POLITICO this month has since renewed accusations that his latest trust setup does not fully address those concerns either. Babiš rejects that interpretation, saying the arrangement complies with Czech and EU law and insisting he has done “much more than the law required” to distance himself from the company. The Commission said it does not maintain a consolidated list of companies ultimately owned or controlled by Babiš across member countries. Nor does it hold a comprehensive accounting of EU funds received by companies linked to him beyond Agrofert. Instead, responsibility for collecting beneficial ownership data lies primarily with national authorities implementing EU funds. The Commission can audit how member countries manage conflicts of interest and take measures to protect the EU budget if needed, but it does not itself aggregate that information across borders. The Commission confirmed to POLITICO that it has asked Czech authorities to explain how conflicts of interest are being prevented in relation to companies under Babiš’s control beyond Agrofert. Czech Regional Development Minister Zuzana Mrázová on Thursday acknowledged receiving the Commission’s letter earlier this month, saying it will be answered in line with applicable legislation and adding that, in her view, the prime minister has done everything necessary to comply with Czech and EU law. “From my perspective, there is no conflict of interest,” she said. Freund argues that the corporate complexity has become a problem in its own right. “The tracking of beneficial owners or beneficial recipients of EU funds is at the moment very difficult or sometimes even impossible,” said the EU lawmaker. Part of the difficulty lies in Europe’s fragmented ownership registers, which exist on paper across the EU but don’t speak the same language or even list the same owners. Freund described them as “inconsistent,” with some national databases listing Babiš in connection with certain companies while others do not. Babiš’s defenders argue that his steps regarding Agrofert go beyond what Czech law strictly requires. Critics counter that the law was never written with billionaires running multi-sector empires in mind and that resolving the conflict of interest identified by auditors in relation to Agrofert does not settle the wider concerns raised by the scale of his business interests. “For some reason, the perception has been created that once Agrofert is resolved, that resolves the conflict of interest,” Bartoň said. “As if the president were the arbiter of what needs and needs not be dealt with.” In reality, many companies owned through Hartenberg and Synbiol structures continue to operate in areas shaped by public spending, regulation and political decisions without being part of any divestment or trust arrangement. Those assets “still not only [pose] conflict of interest,” said Bartoň, but they are “not even in the process of being dealt with.” From fertilizer to fertility to funeral flowers, the structure is easy enough to trace in everyday life. It is far harder to trace on paper. Ketrin Jochecová contributed to this report.

The risk of infants in Europe being exposed to cereulide in formula is now low following widespread recalls earlier this month, the European Food Safety Authority and European Centre for Disease Control concluded in a joint rapid outbreak assessment published today. Thanks to “large-scale control measures implemented in the EU,” the agencies said in a press release, “the likelihood of exposure to contaminated products has decreased and is considered low.” While risk of encountering the toxin is low, the impact of exposure to cereulide is “low to moderate,” depending on the age of the baby, the assessment said. Seven countries in Europe — Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Luxembourg, Spain and the U.K. — have reported gastrointestinal issues in infants that had consumed formula. However, investigations are still ongoing to establish whether these cases are linked to the formula products. The agencies cautioned that linking common symptoms to the toxin “can be challenging.” The assessment comes after large scale recalls began in December of last year, when cereulide was found in formula products containing an ingredient supplied by a Chinese based producer. Even more products were pulled off shelves in February following an EFSA assessment on safe levels of cereulide.

AbbVie SA/NV – BE-ABBV-260011 (V1.0) – January 2026 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Disclaimer POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENT * The sponsor is AbbVie Inc. * The advertisement is linked to policy advocacy around the Neurological Health Strategy. More information here.