PARIS — French President Emmanuel Macron’s celebrations over the imminent passage of the 2026 budget will be short-lived. Once it’s approved, he’s going to be a lame duck until the presidential election of spring next year. Current and former ministers, lawmakers and political aides — including three Macron allies — told POLITICO that now that the budget fight is over and the concerns of angry citizens and jittery markets are assuaged, the whole cycle of French politics will shift to campaign mode at the expense of the dirty work of lawmaking.  First will come next month’s municipal elections, where voters in all of France’s 35,000-plus communes will elect mayors and city councils. Then all attention will flip to the race for the all-powerful presidency, Macron cannot run again due to term limits, and polls show he could be replaced by a candidate from the far-right National Rally. “It’s the end of [Macron’s] term,” a former adviser close to Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu said of the budget’s passage.   Gabriel Attal, Macron’s former prime minister who now leads the French president’s party, confirmed in an interview with French media last month that he told his troops the budget marked “the end” of Macron’s second term.  “I stand by what I said,” Attal told FranceInfo.  As president, Macron continues to exert a strong influence over foreign affairs and defense, two realms that will keep him on the world stage given the geopolitical upheaval brought on by U.S. President Donald Trump’s second term. Domestically, however, he’s been hampered by the snap election in 2024 that delivered a hung parliament.  Lecornu was only able to avoid being toppled over the passage of the budget, as his two immediate predecessors were, thanks to his political savvy, some compromises and a few bold decisions. These included pausing Macron’s flagship pension reform that raised the retirement age and going back on his promise not to use a constitutional backdoor to ram it through without a vote. “Lecornu was smart enough to make the budget phase pass and end on a high note. That’s commendable, given that [former Prime Ministers Michel] Barnier and [François] Bayrou didn’t manage to do so, and he did it with considerable skill,” said a ministerial adviser who, like others quoted in this piece, was granted anonymity to speak candidly.  But Lecornu’s decision to prioritize uncontroversial measures in the coming weeks speak to the difficulties that lie ahead.   These priorities include defining the division of power between the central government and local authorities, and streamlining and centralizing welfare payments that are currently doled out in an ad hoc fashion. Lecornu is also planning to get to work early on France’s 2027 fiscal plans to try to prevent the third budget crisis in a row.  French Prime Minister Sebastien Lecornu leaves the Elysee Palace in Paris after a Cabinet meeting on Jan. 28. His decision to prioritize uncontroversial measures in the coming weeks speak to the difficulties ahead. | Mohammed Badra/EPA “There will be a presidential election in 2027. Before then, we need to agree on a bottom line which allows the country to move forward,” government spokesperson Maud Bregeon said Thursday on Sud Radio.  Lecornu has repeatedly stressed that his government should be disconnected from the race for president, blaming “partisan appetites” for both the budget crisis and the collapse of his 14-hour government, which was eventually replaced with a suite of less ambitious ministers.   But it’s ironic that some French government officials and MPs are now saying the self-described warrior-monk prime minister may have vaulted himself into the realm of presidential contender with his budget win. Mathieu Gallard, a pollster at Ipsos, said Lecornu had clearly become a more viable presidential candidate but noted that the jump from prime minister to president “is always a hard task.”  One parliamentary leader was much less sanguine. They said the same “partisan appetites” Lecornu has long warned about will likely cost him his job before voters head to the polls to choose Macron’s successor.   “[Lecornu] has few friends … And now that the budget has passed, every political group can have fun throwing him out of office to plant their flag before the next presidential election,” the leader said.  Anthony Lattier, Sarah Paillou and Elisa Bertholomey contributed to this report. 

The center-right European People’s Party is eyeing “better implementation” of the Lisbon Treaty to better prepare the EU for what it sees as historic shifts in the global balance of power involving the U.S., China and Russia, EPP leader Manfred Weber said on Saturday. Speaking at a press conference on the second day of an EPP Leaders Retreat in Zagreb, Weber highlighted the possibility of broadening the use of qualified majority voting in EU decision-making and developing a practical plan for military response if a member state is attacked. Currently EU leaders can use qualified majority voting on most legislative proposals, from energy and climate issues to research and innovation. But common foreign and security policy, EU finances and membership issues, among other areas, need a unified majority. This means that on issues such as sanctions against Russia, one country can block agreement, as happened last summer when Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico vetoed a package of EU measures against Moscow — a veto that was eventually lifted. Such power in one country’s hands is something that the EPP would like to change.  As for military solidarity, Article 42.7 of the Lisbon Treaty obliges countries to provide “aid and assistance by all the means in their power” if an EU country is attacked. For Weber, the formulation under European law is stronger than NATO’s Article 5 collective defense commitment. However, he stressed that the EU still lacks a clear operational plan for how the clause would work in practice. Article 42.7 was previously used when France requested that other EU countries make additional contributions to the fight against terrorism, following the Paris terrorist attacks in November 2015.  Such ideas were presented as the party with a biggest grouping in the European Parliament — and therefore the power to shape EU political priorities — presented its strategic focus for 2026, with competitiveness as its main priority.  Keeping the pulse on what matters in 2026  The EPP wants to unleash the bloc’s competitiveness through further cutting red tape, “completing” the EU single market, diversifying supply chains, protecting economic independence and security and promoting innovation including in AI, chips and biotech, among other actions, according to its list 2026 priorities unveiled on Saturday. On defense, the EPP is pushing for a “360-degree” security approach to safeguard Europe against growing geopolitical threats, “addressing state and non-state threats from all directions,” according to the document. The EPP is calling for enhanced European defense capabilities, including a stronger defense market, joint procurement of military equipment, and new strategic initiatives to boost readiness. The party also stressed the need for better protection against cyberattacks and hybrid threats, and robust measures to counter disinformation campaigns targeting EU institutions and societies. On migration and border security, the EPP backs tougher asylum admissibility rules, faster returns, and strengthened external borders, including reinforced Frontex operations and improved digital systems like the Entry/Exit System.  The party also urged a Demographic Strategy for Europe amid the continent’s shrinking and aging population. The text, initiated by Croatian Democratic Union (HDZ), member of the EPP, wants to see demographic considerations integrated into EU economic governance, cohesion funds, and policymaking, while boosting family support, intergenerational solidarity, labor participation, skills development, mobility and managed immigration.  Demographic change is “the most important issue, which is not really intensively discussed in the public discourse,” Weber said. “That’s why we want to highlight this, we want to underline the importance.” 

LONDON — It’s a far cry from the ice age of U.K.-China relations that characterized Rishi Sunak’s leadership — and it’s not exactly David Cameron’s “golden era,” either.  As U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer embarks on his Chinese charm offensive against a turbulent economic backdrop, he has opted for a softly-softly approach in a bid to warm up one of Britain’s most important trading partners — a marked departure from his Tory predecessors. With the specter of U.S. President Donald Trump looming over the visit — not to mention national security concerns back home — Starmer’s cautious optimism is hardly surprising.  Despite reservations from China skeptics, Starmer’s trip — the first such visit by a British prime minister since 2018 — was peppered with warm words and a smattering of deals, some more consequential than others. Britain’s haul from the trip may be modest, but it’s just the beginning, Business and Trade Secretary Peter Kyle — who joined Starmer on the trip — told a traveling pack of reporters in Beijing. “This visit is a springboard,” the minister said. “This is not the last moment, it is a springboard into a future with far more action to come.” STEP-BY-STEP On the ground in Beijing, British officials gave the impression that the prime minister was focused on getting as many uncontroversial wins over the line as possible, in a bid to thaw relations with China. That’s not to say Starmer and his team don’t have a few tangible wins to write home about. Headline announcements include a commitment from China to allow visa-free travel for British tourists and business travelers, enabling visits of up to 30 days without the need for documents.   The provisions are similar to those extended to 50 other countries including France, Germany, Italy, Australia and Japan. The timings of the visa change have not yet been set out publicly, but one official — who, like others cited in this piece, was granted anonymity to speak freely — said they were aiming to get it nailed down in coming months. “From a business standpoint, it will reduce a lot of friction,” said a British business representative, adding it will make it easier for U.K. firms to explore opportunities and form partnerships. “China is very complicated. You have to be on the ground to really assess opportunities,” they said, adding visa-free travel “will make things a lot easier.” The commitment to visa-free travel forms part of a wider services package aimed at driving  collaboration for businesses in healthcare, financial and professional services, legal services, education and skills — areas where British firms often face regulatory or administrative hurdles.  The countries have also agreed to conduct a “feasibility study” to explore whether to enter negotiations towards a bilateral services agreement. If it goes ahead, this would establish clear and legally binding rules for U.K. firms doing business in China. Once again, the timeframe is vague. David Taylor, head of policy at the Asia House think tank in London, said “Xi’s language has been warmer and more expansive, signaling interest in stabilizing the relationship, but the substance on offer so far remains tightly defined.” “Beyond the immediate announcements, progress — particularly on services and professional access — will be harder and slower if it happens at all,” he added. WHISKY TARIFF RELIEF Another victory talked up by the British government is a plan for China to slash Scotch whisky tariffs by half, from 10 percent to 5 percent.  However, some may question the scale of the commitment, which effectively restores the rate that was in place one year ago, ahead of a doubling of the rate for whisky and brandy in February 2025. The two sides have not yet set out a timeframe for the reduction of tariffs.  Speaking to POLITICO ahead of Starmer’s trip, a senior business representative said the whisky and brandy issue had become “China leverage” in talks leading up to the visit. However, they argued that even a removal of the tariff was “not going to solve the main issue for British whisky companies in China and everywhere, which is that people aren’t buying and drinking whisky.” CHINA INVESTMENT WIN Meanwhile, China can boast a significant win in the form of a $15 billion investment in medicines manufacturing and research and development from British pharmaceutical giant AstraZeneca.  ING Bank’s global healthcare lead Stephen Farelly said that increasing investment into China “makes good business sense,” given the country is “now becoming a force in biopharma.” However, it “does shine a light on the isolation of Europe and the U.K. more generally, where there is a structural decline in investment and R&D.” AstraZeneca recently paused a £200 million investment at a Cambridge research site in September last year, which was due to create 1,000 jobs.  Britain recently increased the amount the NHS pays for branded, pharmaceutical drugs, following heavy industry lobbying and following trade negotiations with the Trump administration — all in the hopes of attracting new investment into the struggling sector.  Shadow Trade Secretary Andrew Griffith was blunt in his assessment. “AstraZeneca’s a great British company but under this government it’s investing everywhere in the world other than its U.K. home. When we are losing investment to communist China, alarm bells should be ringing in No 10 Downing Street.” Conspicuously absent from Starmer’s haul was any mention of net zero infrastructure imports, like solar panels, a reflection of rising concerns about China’s grip on Britain’s critical infrastructure. XI RETURNS So what next? As Starmer prepares to fly back home, attention has already turned to his next encounter with the Chinese leader.  On Thursday, Britain opened the door to an inward visit by Xi Jinping, with Downing Street repeatedly declining to rule out the prospect of welcoming him in future. Asked about the prospect of an inward visit — which would be the first for 11 years — Starmer’s official spokesperson told reporters: “I think the prime minister has been clear that a reset relationship with China, that it’s no longer in an ice age, is beneficial to British people and British business.” As Starmer’s trip draws to a close, one thing is certain: there is more to come. “This isn’t a question of a one-and-done summit with China,” Starmer’s spokesperson added. “It is a resetting of a relationship that has been on ice for eight years.”

The U.K. and China have announced a new services partnership to support British businesses operating in China, including through visa-free travel for short stays. The partnership will see Beijing relax its visa rules for British citizens, adding the U.K. to its visa-free list of countries. This will enable visits of up to 30 days for business and tourism without the need for a visa. The timings of the visa change have not yet been set out. The partnership focuses on better collaboration for businesses in healthcare, financial and professional services, legal services, education and skills — areas where British firms often face regulatory or administrative hurdles.  Britain and China have also agreed to conduct a “feasibility study” to explore whether to enter negotiations towards a bilateral services agreement. If it proceeds, this would establish clear and legally binding rules for U.K. firms doing business in China. Prime Minister Keir Starmer said: “As one of the world’s economic powerhouses, businesses have been crying out for ways to grow their footprints in China. “We’ll make it easier for them to do so – including via relaxed visa rules for short-term travel — supporting them to expand abroad, all while boosting growth and jobs at home.” The U.K. and China have also signed pacts covering co-operation on conformity assessments for exports from the U.K. to China, food safety, animal, and plant quarantine health and the work the UK-China Joint Economic and Trade Commission. The two sides aren’t planning to publish the full texts of the pacts.

It seems impossible to have a conversation today without artificial intelligence (AI) playing some role, demonstrating the massive power of the technology. It has the potential to impact every part of business, and European policymakers are on board. In February 2025, Ursula von der Leyen, the European Commission president, said, “We want Europe to be one of the leading AI continents … AI can help us boost our competitiveness, protect our security, shore up public health, and make access to knowledge and information more democratic.” Research from Nokia suggests that businesses share this enthusiasm and ambition: 84 percent of more than 1,000 respondents said AI features in the growth strategy of their organization, while 62 percent are directing at least 20 percent of ICT capex budgets toward the technology. However, the equation is not yet balanced. Three-quarters of survey respondents state that current telecom infrastructure limits the ability to deliver on those ambitions. Meanwhile, 45 percent suggest these limitations would delay, constrain or entirely limit investments. There is clearly a disconnect between the ambition and the ability to deliver. At present, Europe lags the United States and parts of Asia in areas such as network deployment, related investment levels and scale. > If AI does not reach its full potential, EU competitiveness will suffer, > economic growth will have a ceiling, the creation of new jobs will have a > limit and consumers will not see the benefits. What we must remember primarily is that AI does not happen without advanced, trusted and future-proofed networks. Infrastructure is not a ‘nice to have’ it is a fundamental part. Simply put, today’s networks in Europe require more investments to power the AI dream we all have. If AI does not reach its full potential, EU competitiveness will suffer, economic growth will have a ceiling, the creation of new jobs will have a limit and consumers will not see the benefits. When we asked businesses about the challenge of meeting AI demands during our research, the lack of adequate connectivity infrastructure was the fourth common answer out of 15 potential options. Our telecom connectivity regulatory approach must be more closely aligned with the goal of fostering AI. That means progressing toward a genuine telecom single market, adopting a novel approach to competition policy to allow market consolidation to lead to more investments, and ensuring connectivity is always secure and trusted. Supporting more investments in next-generation networks through consolidation AI places heavy demands on networks. It requires low latency, high bandwidth and reliability, and efficient traffic management. To deliver this, Europe needs to accelerate investment in 5G standalone, fiber to enterprises, edge data centers and IP-optical backbone networks optimized for AI. > As industry voices such as Nokia have emphasized, the networks that power AI > must themselves make greater use of automation and AI. Consolidation (i.e. reducing the number of telecom operators within the national telecom markets of EU member states) is part of the solution. Consolidation will allow operators to achieve economies of scale and improve operating efficiency, therefore encouraging investment and catalyzing innovation. As industry voices such as Nokia have emphasized, the networks that power AI must themselves make greater use of automation and AI. Policy support should therefore extend to both network innovation and deployment. Trust: A precondition for AI adoption Intellectual property (IP) theft is a threat to Europe’s industrial future and only trusted technology should be used in core functions, systems and sectors (such as energy, transport and defense). In this context, the underlying connectivity should always be secure and trusted. The 5G Security Toolbox, restricting untrusted technology, should therefore be extended to all telecom technologies (including fiber, optics and IP) and made compulsory in all EU member states. European governments must make protecting their industries and citizens a high priority. Completing the digital single market Although the single market is one of Europe’s defining projects, the reality in telecoms — a key part of the digital single market — is still fragmented. As an example, different spectrum policies create barriers across borders and can limit network roll outs. Levers on top of advanced connectivity To enable the AI ecosystem in Europe, there are several different enabling levers European policymakers should advance on top of fostering advanced and trusted connectivity: * The availability of compute infrastructure. The AI Continent Action Plan, as well as the IPCEI Compute Infrastructure Continuum, and the European High-Performance Computing Joint Undertaking should facilitate building AI data centers in Europe.   * Leadership in edge computing. There should also be clear support for securing Europe’s access to and leadership in edge solutions and building out edge capacity. Edge solutions increase processing speeds and are important for enabling AI adoption, while also creating a catalyst for economic growth. With the right data center capacity and edge compute capabilities available, European businesses can meet the new requirements of AI use cases.  * Harmonization of rules. There are currently implications for AI in several policy areas, including the AI Act, GDPR, Data Act, cybersecurity laws and sector-specific regulations. This creates confusion, whereas AI requires clarity. Simplification and harmonization of these regulations should be pursued.  * AI Act implementation and simplification. There are concerns about the implementation of the AI Act. The standards for high-risk AI may not be available before the obligations of the AI act enter into force, hampering business ambitions due to legal uncertainty. The application date of the AI Act’s provisions on high-risk AI should be postponed by two years to align with the development of standards. There needs to be greater clarity on definitions and simplification measures should be pursued across the entire ecosystem. Policies must be simple enough to follow, otherwise adoption may falter. Policy needs to act as an enabler, not a barrier to innovation.  * Upskilling and new skills. AI will require new skills of employees and users, as well as creating entirely new career paths. Europe needs to prepare for this new world.  If Europe can deliver on these priorities, the benefits will be tangible: improved services, stronger industries, increased competitiveness and higher economic growth. AI will deliver to those who best prepare themselves. We must act now with the urgency and consistency that the moment demands. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Author biography: Marc Vancoppenolle is leading the geopolitical and government relations EU and Europe function at Nokia. He and his team are working with institutions and stakeholders in Europe to create a favorable political and regulatory environment fostering broadband investments and cross sectoral digitalization at large. Vancoppenolle has over 30 years of experience in the telecommunication industry. He joined Alcatel in 1991, and then Alcatel-Lucent, where he took various international and worldwide technical, commercial, marketing, communication and government affairs leadership roles. Vancoppenolle is a Belgian and French national. He holds a Master of Science, with a specialization in telecommunication, from the University of Leuven complemented with marketing studies from the University of Antwerp. He is a member of the DIGITALEUROPE Executive Board, Associate to Nokia’s CEO at the ERT (European Round Table for Industry), and advisor to FITCE Belgium (Forum for ICT & Media professionals). He has been vice-chair of the BUSINESSEUROPE Digital Economy Taskforce as well as a member of the board of IICB (Innovation & Incubation Center Brussels).

The term ‘moonshot’ references the NASA moon missions of the 1960s, describing visionary, ambitious and innovative undertakings that redefined the boundaries of science and society. In recent times, it’s a phrase that the European Commission has used in the draft Horizon Europe 2028-2034 research initiative to describe building the Future Circular Collider or achieving commercial nuclear fusion. What the phrase does not connote or encompass is the continuation of a status quo that fails to meet the needs of European citizens. As the Commission rightly points out, the EU is suffering from “an alarming failure to translate innovation into products or services”. This problem is particularly acute in the context of health research, an arena in which only a very small proportion of pre-clinical discoveries leads to actual advances for patients. This has been referred to as the “valley of death” in drug discovery, with an estimated 95 percent of promising drugs failing at clinical stage. A large percentage of this failure rate is a result of ‘animal models’ of human disease and toxicity that simply do not translate from the laboratory to human beings in the real world. > Achieving a high degree of translational relevance in biomedical models would > be a true moonshot project, with its embrace of human biology as the new gold > standard. Achieving a high degree of translational relevance in biomedical models would be a true moonshot project, with its embrace of human biology as the new gold standard and a shift in research focus and funding to augment and enhance the existing toolbox of human-specific nonanimal methods (NAMs). The EU stands on the threshold of such a moment: a €1 billion investment in a NAMs Moonshot Programme under Horizon Europe 2028-2034. Such a programme would represent a transformative, coordinated effort to accelerate the development, validation and adoption of more human-relevant research methods across the full innovation cycle, from discovery to deployment. Europe’s current investment trajectory risks leaving it behind. Under the Choose Europe for Life Sciences strategy announced in July, the Commission pledged €10 billion annually through EU funding programs to position the EU as a global leader in health and life sciences. Yet only €50 million of that investment is earmarked for NAMs in 2026-27, not nearly enough to drive EU innovation or strengthen EU competitiveness. FG Trade/Getty Images By contrast, other global actors have not only recognised the strategic value of NAMs, but they have also put forward their money. The United States launched the NIH Complement-ARIE initiative in 2024, a 10-year, US$400 million programme to advance non-animal research methods, while the Netherlands established the Utrecht Ombion Centre for Animal-Free Biomedical Translation in 2025 with a €245 million investment. The current €50 million reserved for NAMs in the Commission’s strategy is not enough to get the job done. With Horizon Europe 2028-2034 doubling its budget and foregrounding a set of visionary moonshot projects, there’s a window of opportunity for the EU to strengthen NAMs funding and secure a leadership role in human-relevant, next-generation life sciences. A structured, €1 billion EU-wide NAMs Moonshot Programme, grounded in the principles of scientific excellence, strategic autonomy and societal benefit is in close alignment with the European Research Area Action on NAMs, which focuses on validation, infrastructure, education and awareness. > With Horizon Europe 2028-2034 doubling its budget and foregrounding a set of > visionary moonshot projects, there’s a window of opportunity for the EU to > strengthen NAMs funding and secure a leadership role in human-relevant, > next-generation life sciences. To set a NAMs moonshot up for success, validation capacity (i.e., proving NAMs work reliably and accurately for their intended purpose) must be prioritised, along with solid infrastructure and training to build scientific credibility and technological scalability. Education and awareness initiatives are essential to develop a skilled workforce and sustain long-term adoption of these approaches. This investment would drive scientific innovation and strengthen EU competitiveness. NAMs and human-centred experimental design must be embedded into educational curricula across disciplines. Inter- and transdisciplinary learning, integrating complex in vitro models, in silico tools and artificial intelligence (AI) will equip future researchers with the knowledge and skills needed to lead this scientific transition. Europe should promote open-access research repositories, supported by AI technologies, to foster collaboration and knowledge sharing across sectors. Establishing a coordinated European NAMs Integration Hub would enhance alignment, build synergies and accelerate the uptake of human-relevant approaches across academia, industry, regulators and international partners. This would help avoid fragmentation while preventing the formation of new silos, enabling full knowledge sharing and cooperation. > Just as humankind once looked to the moon and saw immense possibilities, > Europe must now be bold and invest in a future for health research that > delivers for its citizens. Social sciences and humanities must also play a central role in funded health research, ensuring fair partnerships with patient groups, regulators and other key interest holders. This will help align research with real-world needs, clarify intended outcomes and ensure the feasibility and social relevance of new approaches. Just as humankind once looked to the moon and saw immense possibilities, Europe must now be bold and invest in a future for health research that delivers for its citizens. A €1 billion investment in human-specific NAMs would support improved patient outcomes, greener and more ethical research, and enhanced EU competitiveness. It would bring cutting-edge science closer to the lives it seeks to improve and place Europe in the driving seat of the next revolution in human health. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Disclaimer POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENT * The sponsor is Humane World for Animals * The ultimate controlling entity is Humane World for Animals More information here.

LONDON — British students will once again be able to take part in the EU’s Erasmus+ exchange scheme from January 2027 — following a six-year hiatus due to Brexit. U.K. ministers say they have secured a 30 percent discount on payments to re-enter the program that strikes “a fair balance between our contribution and the benefits” it offers. The move is one of the first tangible changes out of Keir Starmer’s EU “reset,” which is designed to smooth the harder edges off Boris Johnson’s Brexit settlement while staying outside the bloc’s orbit. In an announcement on Wednesday Brussels and London also confirmed they were formally beginning negotiations on U.K. re-entry into the EU’s internal market for electricity. Both sides hope the move, which was called for by industry in both sides of the Channel, will cut energy bills while also making it easier to invest in North Sea green energy projects — which have been plagued by Brexit complications. They also pledged to finish ongoing talks on linking the U.K. and EU carbon trading systems, as well as a new food and drink (SPS) deal, by the time they meet for an EU-U.K. summit in 2026. The planned meeting, which will take place in Brussels, does not yet have a date but is expected around the same time as this year’s May gathering in London. The announcements give more forward momentum to the “reset,” which faltered earlier this month after failing to reach an agreement on British membership of an EU defense industry financing program, SAFE. The two sides could not agree on the appropriate level of U.K. financial contribution. The pledge to finalize carbon trading (ETS) linkage next year is significant because it will help British businesses avoid a new EU carbon border tax — CBAM — which starts from Jan. 1 2026. While the tax, which charges firms for the greenhouse gas emissions in their products, begins on Jan. 1, payments are not due until 2027, by which time the U.K. is expected to be exempt. But it is not yet clear whether British firms will have to make back payments on previous imports once the deal is secured, and there is no sign of any deal to bridge the gap. WIDENING HORIZONS EU Relations Minister Nick Thomas-Symonds, who negotiated the agreement, said the move was “a huge win for our young people” and would break down barriers and widen horizons so that “everyone, from every background, has the opportunity to study and train abroad.” European Parliament President Roberta Metsola welcomes British Minister for the Constitution and European Union Relations Nick Thomas-Symonds. | Ronald Wittek/EPA “This is about more than just travel: it’s about future skills, academic success, and giving the next generation access to the best possible opportunities,” he said. “Today’s agreements prove that our new partnership with the EU is working. We have focused on the public’s priorities and secured a deal that puts opportunity first.” The expected cost of the U.K.’s membership of the Erasmus+ program in 2027 will be £570 million. Skills Minister Jacqui Smith said Erasmus+ membership is “about breaking down barriers to opportunity, giving learners the chance to build skills, confidence and international experience that employers value.” Liberal Democrat Universities Spokesperson Ian Sollom also welcomed U.K. re-entry into the exchange scheme but said it should be a “first step” in a closer relationship with the EU. “This is a moment of real opportunity and a clear step towards repairing the disastrous Conservative Brexit deal,” he said. “However while this is a welcome breakthrough, it must be viewed as a crucial first step on a clear roadmap to a closer relationship with Europe. Starting with negotiating a bespoke UK-EU customs union, and committing to a youth mobility scheme for benefit of the next generation.”

BRUSSELS — When the colonial governments of Belgium and Portugal ordered the construction of a railway connecting oil- and mineral-rich regions in the African interior to the Atlantic, their primary objective was to plunder resources such as rubber, ivory and minerals for export to Western countries.  Today, that same stretch of railway infrastructure, snaking through Zambia, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Angola to the port of Lobito, is being modernized and extended with U.S. and EU money to facilitate the transport of sought-after minerals like cobalt and copper. Just this month, Jozef Síkela, the EU commissioner for international partnerships, signed a €116 million investment package for the corridor, often hailed as a model initiative under Global Gateway, the bloc’s infrastructure development program. This time around, however, Brussels says it’s committed to resetting its historically tainted relationship with the region — a message European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and European Council President António Costa will stress when they address African and EU leaders at a Nov. 24-25 summit in Luanda, Angola, which is this year celebrating 50 years of independence from Portuguese rule.  “Global Gateway is about mutual benefits,” von der Leyen said in a keynote speech in October. The program should “focus even more on key value chains,” including the metals and minerals needed in everything from smartphones to wind turbines and defense applications.  The aim, she said, is to “build up resilient value chains together. With local infrastructure, but also local jobs, local skills and local industries.”  Yet Brussels is scrambling to enter a region only to find that China got there first. Batches of copper sheets are stored in a warehouse and wait to be loaded on trucks in Zambia. | Per-Anders Pettersson/Getty Images African countries are already the primary suppliers of minerals to Beijing, which has secured access to their resource wealth — unhindered by any historical baggage of colonial exploitation — and is now the world’s dominant processor. Europe’s emphasis on retaining economic value in host countries — rather than merely extracting resources for export — answers calls by African leaders for a more equitable and sustainable approach to developing their countries’ natural resources.  “The EU has been quite vocal, since the beginning of the raw minerals diplomacy two years ago, saying: We want to be the ethical partner,” said Martina Matarazzo, international and EU advocacy coordinator at Resource Matters, a Belgian NGO focusing on resource extraction, which also has an office in Kinshasa, DRC.  But “there is a big gap” between what’s being said and what’s being done, she added, pointing out that it is still unclear how the Lobito Corridor can be a “win-win” project, rather than just facilitating the shipping of minerals abroad.  Brussels finds itself under growing pressure to diversify its supply chains of lithium, rare earths and other raw materials away from China — which has demonstrated time and again it is ready to weaponize its market dominance. To that end, it is drafting a new plan, due on Dec. 3, to accelerate the bloc’s diversification efforts.   In African countries, however, Brussels is still struggling to establish itself as an attractive, ethical alternative to Beijing, which has long secured vast access to the continent’s resources through large-scale investments in mining, processing and infrastructure.  To enter the minerals space, the EU needs to walk the talk in close cooperation with African leaders — doing so may be its only chance to secure resources while moving away from its extractivist past, POLITICO has found in conversations with researchers, policymakers and civil society.  RESOURCE RUSH Appetite for Africa’s vast natural riches first drew colonizers to the continent — and laid “the foundation for post-independence resource dependency and external interference,” according to the Africa Policy Research Institute. Now, the continent’s deposits of vital minerals have turned it into a strategic player, with Zambian President Hakainde Hichilema last year setting a goal of tripling copper output by the end of the decade, for instance. Beijing has often used Belt and Road, its international development initiative, to secure mining rights in exchange for infrastructure projects. Washington, which lags far behind Beijing, is also stepping up its game, with investments into Africa quietly overtaking China’s. President Donald Trump has extended the U.S. security umbrella to war-torn areas in exchange for access to resources, for example brokering a — shaky — peace deal between Rwanda and the DRC. EU companies are “really trying to catch up,” said Christian Géraud Neema Byamungu, an expert on China-Africa relations and the Francophone Africa editor of the China Global South Project. “They left Africa when there was a sense that Africa is not really a place to do business.” DOING THINGS DIFFERENTLY Against this backdrop, the key question for the EU is: What can it offer to set itself apart from other partners? On paper, the answer is clear: a responsible approach to resource extraction that prioritizes creating local economic value, along with high environmental and social standards.  “We want to focus on the sustainable development of value chains and how to work with our African partners to support their rise of the value chains,” said an EU official ahead of the Luanda summit, where minerals will be a key topic. “This is not about extraction only,” they added. But so far, that still has to translate into a concrete impact on the ground. “We are not at the point where we can see how really the EU is trying to change things on the ground in terms of value addition in DRC,” said Emmanuel Umpula Nkumba, executive director of NGO Afrewatch. “I am not naïve, they are coming to make money, not to help us,” he added.  Not only has offtake from the Lobito Corridor been slow, but the project has also come under fire for prioritizing Western interests over African development and agency, and for potentially leading to the destruction of local forests, community displacement and an overall lack of benefits for local populations.  The 2024 Lobito Corridor Trans-Africa Summit | Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images The EU, however, views the corridor as “a symbol of the partnership between the African and European continent and an example of our shared investment agenda,” according to a Commission spokesperson, who called it “a lifeline towards sustainable development and shared prosperity.” Finally, while “value addition” has become a catchphrase, it’s unclear whether EU and African leaders see eye to eye on what the term means.  African industry representatives and officials often point to building a domestic supply chain up to the final product. EU officials, by contrast, tend to envision refining minerals in the country of origin and then exporting them, according to a report published by the European Council on Foreign Relations. A SUSTAINABLE BUSINESS CASE? The second component of the EU’s approach — strong sustainability and human rights safeguards — faces major trouble, not least in the name of making the EU more competitive.  In Brussels, proposed rules that would require companies to police their supply chains for environmental harm and human rights violations are dying a slow death, as conservative politicians channel complaints from businesses that they can’t bear the cost of complying. An investigation by the Business & Human Rights Resource Centre of the 13 mining, refining and recycling projects outside the bloc labeled “strategic” by the EU executive — including four in Africa — identified “an inconsistent approach to key human rights policies.”  However, under pressure from African leaders, stricter safeguards are slowly becoming more important in the sector: “high [environmental, social and governance] standards” are a core component of the African Union’s mining strategy published in 2024.  The Chinese, too, are adapting quickly.  “China’s also getting good with standards,” said Sarah Logan, a visiting fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations who co-authored the assessment of African and European interpretations of value addition. “If they are made to, Chinese mining companies are very capable of adhering to ESG standards.”  Therefore, besides massively scaling up investment, the EU and European companies will need to turn their promise of being a reliable and ethical partner into reality — sooner rather than later. “The only way to distinguish ourselves from the Chinese is to guarantee these benefits for communities,” Spanish Green European lawmaker Ana Miranda Paz told a panel discussion on the Lobito Corridor in Brussels. This story has been updated with comment from the European Commission.

LONDON — You might say they have nothing left to lose. Britain’s once-dominant Conservatives are still reeling from their worst-ever general election defeat. Polls put them third, behind populist insurgent Nigel Farage’s Reform UK and near-level with the leftist Green Party. Yet facing annihilation, Britain’s oldest political party has finally rediscovered attack mode. Kemi Badenoch — a year in as leader — is landing more consistent blows on Keir Starmer in their weekly clashes, after months of griping from her MPs. Badenoch’s job has been made easier by the Labour government’s plunging fortunes; changes in Tory personnel; a system that hands resources to the “official” opposition; and a secretive attack department that combines nerdy research with fighting like hell. Some Conservatives even seem to be — whisper it — enjoying themselves. “We’re not fighting dirty, just critiquing what the government is doing,” argued one person who has worked closely with Badenoch. But they added: “We’re starting to actually do the fun bit of opposition, which is whacking a failing government over the head.” Since August, the party has helped force Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner from office over a housing tax scandal, and scrutinized the personal affairs of Chancellor Rachel Reeves and (now sacked) Ambassador to the U.S. Peter Mandelson. Badenoch has also applied pressure to Starmer over Labour’s tax policy as she prepares to respond to this Wednesday’s budget. POLITICO spoke to over a dozen senior Tory aides and politicians, all of whom were granted anonymity to talk about internal strategy. Most of them doubted these successes would do anything to move the polls — or save Badenoch from a leadership challenge if local elections in May go as badly as expected. But the person above said: “It’s good for morale, right? We’re still deep in opposition, we’ve still got loads of problems to fix, but we’re in a much better place than we were a few months ago.” OUT WITH THE ‘YES MEN’ Prime minister’s questions (PMQs) guarantee Badenoch a weekly moment in the spotlight. Several people who spoke to POLITICO suggested changes in her top team have helped. Tory MP Alan Mak departed Badenoch’s tight-knit PMQs prep team when he left the shadow cabinet in a July reshuffle. Her chief of staff, Lee Rowley, and Political Secretary, James Roberts, both left the wider leader of the opposition (LOTO) team, while Badenoch’s Parliamentary Private Secretary (PPS) Julia Lopez — who liaises with backbenchers — was promoted to Mak’s old role. Into the Wednesday prep sessions came Badenoch’s new PPS, John Glen, “policy renewal” chief Neil O’Brien (who shares some of her pugilism on social media), and the ex-MP and TV presenter Rob Butler, who has helped her work on her presentation skills. Kemi Badenoch is landing more consistent blows on Keir Starmer in their weekly clashes, after months of griping from her MPs. | Lucy North/Getty Images Stephen Gilbert, who spent five years as political secretary to David Cameron in No. 10, also joined the wider LOTO team. Mid-ranking aide Stephen Alton was promoted to head Badenoch’s “political office.” “The clearout of the prep team and frankly bringing in better people is at the core of why she has markedly improved her PMQs performances,” argued one Tory official. Allies suggest Glen has improved communication with backbenchers. On Mak’s involvement, the official was ruder: “Who the fuck thought that was a good idea?” A second Tory official argued: “They’ve got rid of the yes men.” Others argue the opposite — that there is continuity, and loyalists abound. Badenoch aide Henry Newman, promoted to chief of staff after Rowley’s departure, still attends PMQs prep alongside Lopez, her spokesperson Dylan Sharpe, and uber-loyalist shadow cabinet minister Alex Burghart. There are still misses. When Rayner admitted she had underpaid housing tax moments before the first PMQs of September — a clear open goal for the opposition — Badenoch asked only a brief question before pivoting to economics. But her team is showing signs of greater agility. The following week, Badenoch pressed Starmer hard over his appointment of Mandelson. The PM stood by the ambassador, yet sacked him the next day over his ties to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. When Shadow Defence Secretary James Cartlidge stood in for Badenoch earlier this month, he quickly pivoted to ask about an accidental prisoner release — which wasn’t yet public — and succeeded in tying Deputy PM David Lammy in knots. A person with knowledge of that day’s preparation said six “beautifully crafted economy questions” were ready for Cartlidge, but “we collectively found out a bit in advance [about the prisoner] — like, 10 or 15 minutes — and we all felt he should go on it, and if he wasn’t getting a serious answer he would just need to keep going. It was a horrible decision to have to make 10 minutes beforehand, but ultimately it was the right one.” Other people offer to help. Shadow Cabinet ministers join PMQs prep on their brief. And while Badenoch’s relationship with former Cabinet colleague (now Spectator editor) Michael Gove is far cooler than it once was, he still speaks to Grimstone and Newman, who used to work for him. One person said Gove has even suggested jokes, claiming one about the government’s plan being “so thin it could have been sponsored by Ozempic” came from him. (Another person denied that Gove provides Badenoch with jokes.) ‘WE’RE GETTING KEMI TO BE MORE HERSELF’ Allies of Badenoch insist much of the improvement is down to the leader herself. “Kemi has basically cracked a way of getting at the prime minister and not letting him off the hook,” said a second person who has worked closely with Badenoch. “Her confidence has been a big change.” Badenoch’s initial style as leader had puzzled — and in some cases infuriated — some on the right who knew her as one of Westminster’s most headline-grabbing MPs. She began with a focus on “rebuilding trust,” serious reform, and policy renewal that would take years. Nigel Farage’s radical right-wing party overtook the Tories in opinion polls last Christmas and has seized the agenda since. | Oli Scarff/Getty Images Then Reform came along. Farage’s radical right-wing party overtook the Tories in opinion polls last Christmas and has seized the agenda since. “Reform became the most interesting, hottest thing in politics,” said a third person who has worked closely with Badenoch. “So the timeline got sped up, and we needed to make sure we were part of the conversation.” The scale of internal frustration at Badenoch was painted in a brutal July profile in the New Statesman. Her former performance coach Graham Davies, who parted ways with her acrimoniously after her 2024 campaign, told the author she “doesn’t do the process, doesn’t do the practice and doesn’t like it.” But Badenoch is still here, and a leadership challenge appears to be parked — at least until May. Over the summer, Badenoch decided she wanted to cut through more with the public and show the kind of politician she wanted to be, said a person with knowledge of her thinking. She even noted how public awareness of Farage soared after he took part in the reality TV show “I’m a Celebrity … Get Me Out Of Here!”. (Badenoch will not, however, be eating any animal testicles.) She also realized that the “rebuttals are as important as the questions” at PMQs, said a fourth person who has worked closely with Badenoch: “While the initial initial view was that this needs to be very prosecutorial, it’s much more of a theater event.” Allies worked to help her bring out her “sassy” side, said the second person quoted above. “Her voice has got a lot stronger,” they added. “We’re getting Kemi to be more herself.” WELCOME TO THE ‘ATTACK CELL’ The other side of the story is in Conservative Campaign Headquarters (CCHQ) — where it all began with two parliamentary questions. Known by few people beyond the Westminster bubble, the obscure “PQ” system lets MPs send technical queries to ministers. It is faster and more effective than Britain’s exemption-filled freedom of information regime. One PQ asked if Starmer paid full council tax on his grace-and-favor flat; he did. But when the other asked if Rayner did the same, ministers replied with a non-answer. This pricked up the ears of Sheridan Westlake, a veteran operator at CCHQ who spent 14 years in government — and is now turning his knowledge of its diversionary tactics against Labour. Government officials are said to sigh in frustration when another Westlake PQ comes in. Despite being signed off by different MPs three months apart, the two questions had both been crafted by Westlake and his small CCHQ team. The discrepancy triggered months of Tory and journalists’ digging into Rayner’s housing arrangements that — eventually — led to her resignation in September over a separate issue (she had failed to pay enough stamp duty on her new home.) Into the Wednesday prep sessions came Badenoch’s new PPS, John Glen, “policy renewal” chief Neil O’Brien, and the ex-MP and TV presenter Rob Butler. | Wiktor Szymanowicz/Getty Images The Rayner chase was “great fun,” said a third Tory official. They said CCHQ formed a five-man “attack cell” to co-ordinate lines with Badenoch’s office a few streets away. Much of it was based on work from the Conservative Research Department (CRD), a secretive team who keep their names hidden. The five men in the so-called cell were Westlake, CRD Director Marcus Natale, a member of his CRD, CCHQ Executive Political Director Josh Grimstone, who oversees the story “grid,” and Head of Media Caspar Michie. Rayner was not the only hit job. Three Tory officials said the CRD was involved in a story about Chancellor Rachel Reeves’ housing arrangements, though they would not be drawn on exactly how. (Reeves admitted breaking rental licensing rules for her family home, but was backed by Starmer.) CCHQ has been gathering attack material on Starmer’s likely successors, given the expectation of a Labour leadership challenge next year. It works closely with right-wing newspapers such as the Mail on Sunday, Telegraph and Sun to keep up momentum by furnishing attack research and quotes. At the same time, officials try to pump stories into the TV bloodstream by helping Badenoch work up lines to say on camera. “You force the BBC to pay attention,” the third official said. There are parallel operations too. The Guido Fawkes blog, whose publisher is former CRD director and serving Tory peer Ross Kempsell, keeps up communication with CCHQ and has always run a drumbeat of critical journalism on Labour — though a fifth Tory official said there had been some twitchiness inside CCHQ at the tone of Guido’s coverage of Reform UK, too. NOT THERE YET The Tory fightback has also involved plenty of luck. Issues the Conservatives found out about — such as Rayner’s tax arrangements, and a trust on her former family home — were neither the full picture nor proof of wrongdoing. Newspaper journalists did much of the digging. And while one person said the CRD now has about 10 members, numbers were slashed after the election. The first Tory official quoted above said the unit is “still not firing on all cylinders. They’re doing some good work, but probably the redundancies and scaling back post-election cut too deeply into what should be a key function.” CCHQ staff who survived the brutal post-election redundancies insist the operation is becoming more organized and morale has improved — but that is from a low base. New Chief Executive Mark McInnes has “oiled up the machine,” argued the third Tory official: “The sackings were brutal at the time, but we couldn’t just keep operating how CCHQ always had.” OUT OF PRACTICE Life back in opposition has taken some getting used to. The second person who has worked closely with Badenoch said: “When we were in opposition last time, it was a very different world. There was a handful of TV stations and newspapers, and now we’re in the modern age. We’ve had to bed in and learn what this crazy new environment is.” The Tories now get barely any media coverage for their initiatives unless they are genuinely head-turning. Some shadow ministers even complained internally about this at first, said one person with knowledge of the conversations. Kemi Badenoch decided she wanted to cut through more with the public and show the kind of politician she wanted to be. | Gary Roberts/Getty Images But now, argued a fourth Tory official, “the penny has dropped … unless voters hear from us, they’ll think we no longer exist.” There is no denying that much of the Tory boost has come from a Labour collapse. Badenoch simply has “way more material to attack,” argued a fifth person who has worked closely with her. “It’s an abundance of riches every week now.” The first person who has worked with her added: “[Labour] are uncannily reminiscent of our last days in government — beset by scandal, one thing goes wrong after another, no sense of direction, everyone is miserable. You can actually see it physically in the Commons … little knots of Labour MPs all whispering to each other.” With public opinion moving against Labour, Tory MPs worry less about looking like hypocrites. Many of the crises that they highlight — prisons, for example — are in public services that arguably collapsed under their tenure. The fifth person who worked with Badenoch said: “At the beginning there was a hesitancy to attack Labour because we were carrying the baggage of 14 years of mistakes.” As time wears on, collective memory might start to fade. IS ANYONE LISTENING? Even if it all goes to plan, a big challenge remains: outgunning Farage. As the “official” opposition, the Conservatives get the most money for researchers, and opportunities to hold the government to account through PQs, PMQs, committee hearings and debates in the Commons. Yet it is Reform that cost the Tories many of their seats in 2024 and now has a soaraway poll lead. Farage’s ascendant party has announced policies outside parliament, where (thanks to having only five MPs) it is barely a presence. Farage sits on the same side of the Commons chamber as Badenoch; this system is not designed to hold him to account. The fourth Tory official above voiced a fear that the public will see two establishment parties scrapping in parliament while Reform floods the zone on TV and social media. In short, the Tories are honing their game, but there’s a new game in town. Then there is May. Scotland, Wales and English metropolitan councils, including in London, will go to the polls. The elections are the closest thing Britain has to “mid-terms,” and while many areas are already Labour-controlled, Badenoch’s rivals will be watching closely. One former minister and current MP said: “The expectation is that May election results will be very bad … Tory MPs want to see an uptick in the poll performance or talk of a leadership challenge will persist. Her [party] conference speech was good and bought her more time, but clearly everyone realizes we can’t stay on 17 percent for the next three years.” The first Tory official quoted above was even blunter: “It’s ultimately froth. None of it is moving the polling needle, and that’s what we live or die by.”

As trilogue discussions on the Critical Medicines Act (CMA) approach, its potential effects on medicine supply, patient access and Europe’s competitiveness are increasingly in focus. From an industry standpoint, several considerations are central to understanding how this act can best achieve its objectives and support a robust pharmaceutical ecosystem in Europe.  Keeping the CMA focused where it matters  Much of the debate around the CMA has centered on its promises to strengthen the availability and security of supply of critical medicines in the EU while improving accessibility to other medicines. These are goals that our industry fully supports.   The European Commission’s proposal is designed to focus on critical medicines, with a vulnerability assessment foreseen to identify which products are truly at risk of disruption and tailor solutions accordingly. Alongside critical medicines, the proposal also introduces a new definition of ‘medicinal products of common interest’. Under current wording, this would include any medicine unavailable in at least three member states, regardless of the underlying reason.   Such a broad definition risks turning a targeted framework for resilience into an all-encompassing mechanism covering almost every medicine on the market, blurring the distinction between supply and access challenges. These are fundamentally different issues that require fundamentally different policy tools.   > Applying the CMA’s tools across the entire medicines market would dilute > priorities, stretch healthcare budgets and create administrative burdens for > industry without delivering real benefits for patients.   The act will be far more effective if it remains focused on where the risks are greatest — in other words, by limiting the ‘medicinal products of common interest’ definition to cases of demonstrable market failure and directing measures toward genuinely critical medicines with a proven risk of supply disruption.  Fixing supply and access hurdles needs more than joint procurement   The CMA places joint procurement at the center of its strategy to address both supply and access challenges. While this approach can contribute to improving availability in certain circumstances, joint procurement will only deliver lasting results if it is designed to address the underlying causes of access delays and shortages, which vary across geographies and products.  For medicines where the main challenge lies in fragile supply chains, joint procurement can play a role, particularly when it enhances predictability and economic viability for suppliers. Experience from the Covid-19 pandemic has shown that coordinated purchasing can be effective in targeted situations. For medicines facing access delays, joint procurement could help improve availability in countries where genuine market failures exist. However, the value of joint procurement for countries where products are already available, or where access barriers can be better addressed by improving national pricing and reimbursement systems, is very questionable.  To ensure that joint procurement does not hinder access, several safeguards are essential. Tenders should reward quality and promote innovation, recognizing the value that innovative medicines bring to patients and society. Price confidentiality must be protected to prevent unintended spillovers, such as reference pricing effects. Once joint procurement agreements are concluded, to ensure commercial and supply predictability there should be no additional national renegotiations or expenditure control measures. Finally, allowing national procurement processes to run in parallel will be key to avoid delays and maintain flexibility.  Beyond these design safeguards, real progress will depend on tackling the broader root causes of shortages and access delays. For supply fragility, this means, among other actions, reducing strategic dependencies where necessary, improving transparency across supply chains and avoiding rigid national stockpiling rules. For access delays, progress will require addressing national pricing and reimbursement challenges, and a greater willingness from governments to reward the value that innovative medicines deliver.  Protectionism won’t make Europe stronger  Few elements of the CMA debate have attracted as much attention as the idea of prioritizing EU-made medicines. The rationale is straightforward: producing more within Europe is expected to reduce reliance on third countries, reinforce strategic autonomy and, ultimately, improve supply security. While this narrative is understandable, taking it at face value risks overlooking the realities of how medicines are manufactured and supplied today.  Europe already has one of the world’s strongest pharmaceutical manufacturing footprints and, unlike some other pharma manufacturing regions, Europe exports 71 percent of its pharmaceutical production. This output depends on global supply networks for active substances, raw materials and specialized technologies. Introducing local-content requirements or preferential treatment for EU-made products would disrupt those networks, fragment supply chains and drive up costs, with limited evidence that such measures would enhance resilience. Local-content requirements could also affect Europe’s trade relationships and weaken, rather than strengthen, its industrial base in the long term, while distorting competition within the single market and undermining the competitiveness of both European and international companies operating in Europe. The likely outcome would be less diversity and greater concentration in supply chains: the opposite of what a resilient system requires.  If procurement criteria referencing resilience or strategic autonomy are used, they should be proportionate and tied to clearly demonstrated dependencies or supply risks. Protectionist approaches, however well-intentioned, cannot substitute for the broader policy environment needed to keep Europe attractive for investment in research and development and manufacturing. A competitive European ecosystem depends first and foremost on predictable intellectual-property rules, timely regulatory processes, access to capital, and a strong scientific and technical skills base.  The EU institutions still have time to steer the CMA on course  The CMA offers a real chance to get things right. The European Parliament’s proposal for more consistent contingency stock rules could help if it stays focused on medicines genuinely at risk of shortage. The act can also make reporting more efficient by using existing systems rather than creating new ones. Policymakers should also be aware that wider regulatory initiatives directly affect Europe’s ability to manufacture and supply medicines. A more coherent policy framework will be essential to strengthen resilience.  Europe’s goal must be to build an environment where pharmaceutical innovation and production can thrive. Europe’s choice is clear: supply security cannot be achieved by weakening the industry that ensures it. The CMA will only work if it tackles the right problems with the right tools and keeps competitiveness at its core.   > Europe’s goal must be to build an environment where pharmaceutical innovation > and production can thrive. Our industry remains ready to engage with EU and national policymakers to make that happen. A high-level forum on the CMA involving all stakeholders could help guide the act’s implementation in a way that improves supply security and speeds up access for patients, while reinforcing Europe’s position as a global player in life sciences.  Disclaimer POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENT * The sponsor is European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA) * The political advertisement is linked to the Critical Medicines Act More information here.