Biotechnology is central to modern medicine and Europe’s long-term competitiveness. From cancer and cardiovascular disease to rare conditions, it is driving transformative advances for patients across Europe and beyond . 1         Yet innovation in Europe is increasingly shaped by regulatory fragmentation, procedural complexity and uneven implementation across  m ember s tates. As scientific progress accelerates, policy frameworks must evolve in parallel, supporting the full lifecycle of innovation from research and clinical development to manufacturing and patient access.  The proposed EU Biotech Act seeks to address these challenges. By streamlining regulatory procedures, strengthening coordination  and supporting scale-up and manufacturing, it aims to reinforce Europe’s position in a highly competitive global biotechnology landscape .2       Its success, however, will depend less on ambition than on delivery. Consistent implementation, proportionate oversight and continued global openness will determine whether the  a ct translates into faster patient access, sustained investment and long-term resilience.  Q: Why is biotechnology increasingly seen as a strategic pillar for Europe’s competitiveness, resilience and long-term growth?  Gilles Marrache, SVP and regional general manager, Europe, Latin America, Middle East, Africa and Canada, Amgen:  Biotechnology sits at the intersection of health, industrial policy and economic competitiveness. The sector is one of Europe’s strongest strategic assets and a leading contributor to  research and development  growth . 3    At the same time, Europe’s position is under increasing pressure. Over the past two decades, the EU has lost approximately 25  percent of its global share of pharmaceutical investment to other regions, such as the  United States  and China.   The choices made today will shape Europe’s long-term strength in the sector, influencing not only competitiveness and growth, but also how quickly patients can benefit from new treatments.  > Europe stands at a pivotal moment in biotechnology. Our life sciences legacy > is strong, but maintaining global competitiveness requires evolution .” 4   > >  Gilles Marrache, SVP and regional general manager, Europe, Latin America, > Middle East, Africa and Canada, Amgen. Q: What does the EU Biotech Act aim to do  and why is it considered an important step forward for patients and Europe’s innovation ecosystem?  Marrache: The EU Biotech Act represents a timely opportunity to better support biotechnology products from the laboratory to the market. By streamlining medicines’ pathways and improving conditions for scale-up and investment, it can help strengthen Europe’s innovation ecosystem and accelerate patient access to breakthrough therapies. These measures will help anchor biotechnology as a strategic priority for Europe’s future  —  and one that can deliver earlier patient benefit  —  so long as we can make it work in practice.  Q: How does the EU Biotech Act address regulatory fragmentation, and where will effective delivery and coordination be most decisive? Marrache: Regulatory fragmentation has long challenged biotechnology development in Europe, particularly for multinational clinical trials and innovative products. The Biotech Act introduces faster, more coordinated trials, expanded regulatory sandboxes and new investment and industrial capacity instruments.   The proposed EU Health Biotechnology Support Network and a  u nion-level regulatory status repository would strengthen transparency and predictability. Together, these measures would support earlier regulatory dialogue, help de-risk development   and promote more consistent implementation across  m ember  s tates.   They also create an opportunity to address complexities surrounding combination products  —  spanning medicines, devices and diagnostics  —  where overlapping requirements and parallel assessments have added delays.5 This builds on related efforts, such as the COMBINE programme,6 which seeks to streamline the navigation of the In Vitro Diagnostic Regulation , 7 Clinical Trials Regulation8 and the Medical Device Regulation9 through a single, coordinated assessment process. Continued clarity and coordination will be essential to reduce duplication and accelerate development timelines .10 Q: What conditions will be most critical to support biotech scale-up, manufacturing  and long-term investment in Europe?  Marrache: Europe must strike the right balance between strategic autonomy and openness to global collaboration. Any new instruments under the Biotech Act mechanisms should remain open and supportive of all types of biotech investments, recogni z ing that biotech manufacturing operates through globally integrated and highly speciali z ed value chains.   Q: How can Europe ensure faster and more predictable pathways from scientific discovery to patient access, while maintaining high standards of safety and quality?   Marrache: Faster and more predictable patient access depends on strengthening end-to-end pathways across the lifecycle.  The Biotech Act will help ensure continuity of scientific and regulatory experti z e, from clinical development through post-authori z ation. It will also support stronger alignment with downstream processes, such as health technology assessments, which  are  critical to success.   Moreover, reducing unnecessary delays or duplication in approval processes can set clearer expectations, more predictable development timelines and earlier planning for scale-up.    Gilles Marrache, SVP and regional general manager, Europe, Latin America, Middle East, Africa and Canada, Amgen. Via Amgen. Finally, embedding a limited number of practical tools (procedural, digital or governance-based) and ensuring they are integrated within existing  European Medicines Agency and EU regulatory structures can help achieve faster patient access . 11 Q: What role can stronger regulatory coordination, data use and public - private collaboration play in strengthening Europe’s global position in biotechnology?  Marrache: To unlock biotechnology’s full potential, consistent implementation is essential. Fragmented approaches to secondary data use, divergent  m ember   state interpretations and uncertainty for data holders still limit access to high-quality datasets at scale. The Biotech Act introduces key building blocks to address this.   These include Biotechnology Data Quality Accelerators to improve interoperability, trusted testing environments for advanced innovation, and alignment with the EU AI Act ,12  European Health Data Space13 and wider EU data initiatives. It also foresees AI-specific provisions and clinical trial guidance to provide greater operational clarity.  Crucially, these structures must simplify rather than add further layers of complexity.   Addressing remaining barriers will reduce legal uncertainty for AI deployment, support innovation and strengthen Europe’s competitiveness.  > These reforms will create a moderni z ed biotech ecosystem, healthier > societies, sustainable healthcare systems and faster patient access to the > latest breakthroughs in Europe .” 14 > > Gilles Marrache, SVP and regional general manager, Europe, Latin America, > Middle East, Africa and Canada, Amgen.  Q: As technologies evolve and global competition intensifies, how can policymakers ensure the Biotech Act remains flexible and future-proof?  Marrache:  To remain future-proof, the Biotech Act must be designed to evolve alongside scientific progress, market dynamics and patient needs. Clear objectives, risk-based requirements, regular review mechanisms and timely updates to guidance will enhance regulatory agility without creating unnecessary rigidity or administrative burden.  Continuous stakeholder dialogue combined with horizon scanning will be essential to sustaining innovation, resilience and timely patient access over the long term. Preserving regulatory openness and international cooperation will be critical in avoiding fragmentation and maintaining Europe’s credibility as a global biotech hub.  Q: Looking ahead, what two or three priorities should policymakers focus on to ensure the EU Biotech Act delivers meaningful impact in practice?  Marrache: Looking ahead, policymakers should focus on three priorities for the Biotech Act:    First, implementation must deliver real regulatory efficiency, predictability and coordination in practice. Second, Europe must sustain an open and investment-friendly framework that reflects the global nature of biotechnology.  And third, policymakers should ensure a clear and coherent legal framework across the lifecycle of innovative medicines, providing certainty for the use of  artificial intelligence   —  as a key driver of innovation in health biotechnology.  In practical terms, the EU Biotech Act will be judged not by the number of new instruments it creates, but by whether it reduces complexity, increases predictability and shortens the path from scientific discovery to patient benefit. An open, innovation-friendly framework that is competitive at the global level will help sustain investment, strengthen resilient supply chains and deliver better outcomes for patients across Europe and beyond. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- References 1. Amgen Europe, The EU Biotech Act Unlocking Europe’s Potential, May 2025. Retrieved from https://www.amgen.eu/media/press-releases/2025/05/The_EU_Biotech_Act_Unlocking_Europes_Potential 2. European Commission, Proposal for a Regulation to establish measures to strengthen the Union’s biotechnology and biomanufacturing sectors, December 2025. Retrieved from https://health.ec.europa.eu/publications/proposal-regulation-establish-measures-strengthen-unions-biotechnology-and-biomanufacturing-sectors_en 3. EFPIA, The pharmaceutical sector: A catalyst to foster Europe’s competitiveness, February 2026. Retrieved from https://www.efpia.eu/media/zkhfr3kp/10-actions-for-competitiveness-growth-and-security.pdf 4. The Parliament, Investing in healthy societies by boosting biotech competitiveness, November 2024. Retrieved from https://www.theparliamentmagazine.eu/partner/article/investing-in-healthy-societies-by-boosting-biotech-competitiveness#_ftn4 5. Amgen Europe, The EU Biotech Act Unlocking Europe’s Potential, May 2025. Retrieved from https://www.amgen.eu/docs/BiotechPP_final_digital_version_May_2025.pdf   6. European Commission, combine programme, June 2023. Retrieved from https://health.ec.europa.eu/medical-devices-topics-interest/combine-programme_en  7. European Commission. Medical Devices – In Vitro Diagnostics, March 2026. Retrieved from https://health.ec.europa.eu/medical-devices-vitro-diagnostics_en 8. European Commission, Clinical trials – Regulation EU No 536/2014, January 2022. Retrieved from https://health.ec.europa.eu/medicinal-products/clinical-trials/clinical-trials-regulation-eu-no-5362014_en 9. European Commission, Simpler and more effective rules for medical devices – Commission proposal for a targeted revision of the medical devices regulations, December 2025. Retrieved from https://health.ec.europa.eu/medical-devices-sector/new-regulations_en#mdr 10. Amgen Europe, The EU Biotech Act Unlocking Europe’s Potential, May 2025. Retrieved from https://www.amgen.eu/docs/BiotechPP_final_digital_version_May_2025.pdf   11. AmCham, EU position on the Commission Proposal for an EU Biotech Act 12. European Commission, AI Act | Shaping Europe’s digital future, June 2024. Retrieved from https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/regulatory-framework-ai 13. European Commission, European Health Data Space, March 2025. Retrieved from https://health.ec.europa.eu/ehealth-digital-health-and-care/european-health-data-space-regulation-ehds_en 14. The Parliament, Why Europe needs a Biotech Act, October 2025. Retrieved from https://www.theparliamentmagazine.eu/partner/article/why-europe-needs-a-biotech-act -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Disclaimer POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENT * The sponsor is Amgen Inc * The ultimate controlling entity is Amgen Inc * The political advertisement is linked to advocacy on the EU Biotech Act. More information here.

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 — One week after Donald Trump called the Spanish government “terrible” and threatened to cut trade ties with Madrid, Spain’s leaders remain furious with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz for sitting in silence in the Oval Office while the U.S. president delivered his tirade. In an interview with POLITICO on Monday, Deputy Prime Minister Yolanda Díaz said Merz was among a current crop of EU leaders “who have no idea how to manage the historic moment we’re living in.” “What Europe needs today is leadership, not vassals who pay homage to Trump,” she said. Merz has been under fire since clamming up during a March 3 press conference at the White House during which Trump threatened to impose an embargo on Madrid for refusing to allow U.S. military planes to use Spanish air bases to attack Iran, and slammed Spain for its refusal to commit 5 percent of its GDP to military spending. After the meeting, the chancellor claimed he hadn’t spoken up to defend a fellow EU member because he hadn’t wanted to risk “aggravating” the situation by rebuking Trump in public. He added he’d later told the president behind closed doors that economic sanctions can’t be imposed on a single EU country. But that spin has done little to soothe tempers in Madrid. In the hours following the Washington meeting, Spanish Foreign Minister José Luis Albares blasted Merz for failing to stand up for a fellow EU member, and said he couldn’t imagine former German chancellors Angela Merkel or Olaf Scholz remaining silent in a similar situation. The chancellor was also pilloried in Spain’s national press, with pundits labelling Merz a “coward” and newspaper editorials scolding him for “failing to defend a European partner as a basic sense of solidarity would have demanded.” TENSIONS? WHAT TENSIONS? Merz’s spokesperson, Stefan Kornelius, downplayed the evident discord between the two countries, telling POLITICO on Monday that “the relationship is not tense at all.” He also deflected criticism of Berlin’s handling of the situation and said Germany’s top foreign policy and security official, Günter Sautter, had debriefed his Spanish counterpart immediately after the Trump meeting. But he conceded that the two leaders haven’t spoken since the chancellor’s visit to Washington. According to Kornelius, Merz has attempted to call Sánchez twice but failed to reach him; he added that the chancellor left the prime minister a voice message and is waiting for a call back. Contacted by POLITICO, a spokesperson for Sánchez later said Merz’s calls went unanswered because the German chancellor dialed a number that is no longer in service, not realizing that the prime minister changes it periodically for security reasons. While the confusion has since been cleared up and Merz has been given updated contact information, the two leaders haven’t yet spoken, the spokesperson said. Missed calls aside, the public nature of the spat is unusual given that Madrid and Berlin have historically enjoyed excellent relations, with Spanish prime ministers and German chancellors sharing strong bonds regardless of their political backgrounds. German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul also insists that the two countries remain close allies, and that Berlin stands with Madrid in the face of Trump’s tariff threats. Spanish Foreign Minister José Luis Albares blasted Merz for failing to stand up for a fellow EU member. | Luis Soto/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images “Spain can always count on European solidarity, and thus also on German solidarity, when it comes to threats of new trade barriers,” he said on Thursday. “We stand together in the closest possible unity.” ‘ILLEGITIMATE WAR’ Díaz on Monday expressed confidence that Spanish-German relations would survive the current disharmony, but also emphasized her frustration with the reluctance of Merz and other EU leaders to join Spain in condemning the U.S. and Israel’s ongoing attacks on Iran. “Article 1 of the United Nations Charter is clear about what defines an illegitimate war,” she said. “Any EU leader should be expected to speak out clearly in defense of international law.” Merz on Monday reiterated his support for the U.S.-Israeli offensive, citing Iran’s connections to Russia and its longstanding support for militant proxies such as Hamas. “Iran is the center of international terrorism,” the chancellor told reporters in Berlin. “This center must be shut down, and the Americans and Israelis are doing that in their own way.” Díaz, who leads the far-left Sumar party, the junior partner in socialist Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez’s coalition government, attributed Merz’s support for Trump’s policies to Germany’s “position of extreme weakness in economic terms,” and said it reflected Europe’s broader overreliance on the United States. “We need strategic autonomy … we need to have our own European industries,” she said. “And we need to reduce our our technological, financial and energetic dependence on both the United States and Beijing. We need to own our own souls.” Hans von der Burchard contributed reporting.

Today, cancer remains one of Europe’s leading causes of death and disability, accounting for 23 percent of all deaths in 2022 and 17 percent of disability-adjusted life years in 2021. Four Europeans are diagnosed with cancer every minute, a number that is expected to rise over the next several decades due to population aging. As the EU Beating Cancer Plan reaches the end of its initial phase, Europe now stands at a critical moment. The question is not whether progress has been made, but whether Europe will build on that momentum or allow it to stall, with consequences not only for health outcomes, but also for economic growth and scientific leadership. Gilles Marrache At this juncture, cancer care must be understood not as a cost to be contained, but also as a strategic investment that delivers measurable returns in survival, productivity and Europe’s global competitiveness. > Continued investment in oncology is therefore not only a moral imperative but > also a proven economic and social multiplier. Cancer innovation delivers proven returns Investment in cancer innovation has already delivered extraordinary value for European patients and societies. Since 1989, advances in oncology have helped prevent an estimated 5.4 million deaths. More recently, since 2012, innovative cancer medicines have generated approximately 1.1 million quality-adjusted life years, all while accounting for just 6.6 percent of total health budgets. These gains are not abstract. They represent longer lives, improved quality of life, and the ability for people to remain active contributors to their families, workplaces and communities. Continued investment in oncology is therefore not only a moral imperative but also a proven economic and social multiplier. Delayed access is holding Europe back Despite these returns, Europe continues to struggle with timely access to innovative cancer medicines and diagnostics. According to EFPIA’s 2025 W.A.I.T. data, only 46 percent of centrally approved innovative medicines are available to patients on average across Europe, with a mean delay of 578 days between EU approval and patient access. In oncology, these waits have grown since 2023, which undermines patient outcomes and weakens Europe’s competitiveness in health innovation. Europe’s innovation edge is at risk Without decisive action, Europe risks falling further behind other regions. High-income European countries currently invest roughly half as much per capita in innovative medicines as the United States. This gap is driven largely by differences in how new therapies are valued, assessed and reimbursed. The impact of this underinvestment is already visible. Over the past two decades, Europe has lost around a quarter of its global share of biopharmaceutical research and development. Along with that loss comes fewer high-quality jobs, reduced private investment and weakened strategic autonomy in a sector that is increasingly central to economic and health security. > evidence suggests that every euro invested in health can generate up to four > euros in economic value, unlocking an estimated €10 trillion in GDP and saving > up to 60 million lives. Smart health investment drives growth and resilience By increasing targeted investment in innovative medicines, including in oncology, Europe can improve health outcomes for citizens, support workforce participation  and stimulate sustainable economic growth. Globally, evidence suggests that every euro invested in health can generate up to four euros in economic value, unlocking an estimated €10 trillion in GDP and saving up to 60 million lives. What European policymakers should do next To support oncology patients and safeguard innovation, regional and national governments must act across policy, funding and access: — Value what matters: modernize health technology assessment frameworks to better capture the full societal and economic benefits of innovation, while reducing duplicative and inefficient evidence requirements. This is particularly important as oncology products begin going through the new EU Joint Clinical Assessment. — Accelerate access: introduce time-bound, predictable pricing and reimbursement pathways; address regional and formulary-level delays; and invest in diagnostic and biomarker testing capacity to ensure patients receive the right treatment at the right time. — Back prevention and screening: fully finance the EU Beating Cancer Plan’s screening ambitions and scale proven pilot programmes that detect cancer earlier and improve outcomes. — Invest in innovation: increase public spending on innovative medicines in line with their true societal impact, while eliminating clawbacks and other cost-containment measures that disproportionately undermine the value of these therapies. A defining choice for Europe Europe stands at a crossroads. It can choose to invest now in cancer innovation, which would help to close survival gaps, strengthen competitiveness and deliver long-term value for citizens. Or it can allow delays, underinvestment and fragmented policies to widen those gaps further. Aligning policy, funding and access around innovation would not only improve cancer outcomes but make health one of Europe’s most powerful and sustainable investments for the future.     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- POLITICAL ADVERTISEMENT * The sponsor is European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA) * The political advertisement is linked to advocacy on securing a technology-neutral EU road-transport decarbonisation framework through recognition of renewable fuels, strengthened grid and infrastructure enablers, and avoiding mandates that limit operators’ choice and competitiveness. * The ultimate controlling entity is European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA) More information here.

Presented as an instrument aimed at strengthening farmers’ position in the food supply chain, the targeted revision of the Regulation on the Common Market Organisation was intended to address structural challenges within the sector. Yet, as the trilogue approaches, the debate has gradually crystallized around a different issue: restricting certain denominations used for plant-based products. This shift deserves careful scrutiny. How would limiting widely understood terms concretely improve farmers’ position in the food chain? The connection between the original objective of the proposal and the measure currently under discussion remains insufficiently substantiated. If the stated ambition is to reinforce resilience and fairness within the agricultural chain, it is legitimate to question whether terminology restrictions meaningfully contribute to that goal. > How would limiting widely understood terms concretely improve farmers’ > position in the food chain? In a letter addressed to Members of the European Parliament, GAIA calls for maintaining the current regulatory framework and rejecting the proposed restrictions, whether concerning existing plant-based products or future products derived from cellular agriculture. The objective is clear: to preserve coherent and proportionate regulation that protects consumers without weakening an innovative and strategic sector. Behind a word: a market and jobs Europe holds a leading position in several innovative segments of plant-based alternatives. The European market was estimated at €2.7 billion in 2024 and continues to structure a dynamic industrial ecosystem across member states. Companies operating in this field invest significantly in research and development, expand production capacities, create qualified jobs and actively contribute to the industrial dynamism of the single market. This ecosystem extends well beyond food production. It supports technological innovation, specialised logistics, supply chain transformation and new forms of industrial cooperation. It contributes to the modernization of the European agri-food sector and strengthens the competitiveness of the internal market. In a period where industrial policy and strategic autonomy are central to the European agenda, introducing regulatory uncertainty risks undermining a competitive advantage built on sustained investment and innovation. > The issue therefore goes beyond semantics: it concerns the stability and > predictability of the European regulatory framework. “Behind denominations lies a real European economy: jobs, innovation and competitiveness.” Restricting widely understood terms would entail compliance costs, packaging adjustments, potential litigation and a risk of divergent interpretations across member states. The issue therefore goes beyond semantics: it concerns the stability and predictability of the European regulatory framework — factors that are essential for long-term investment decisions and business planning. Cellular agriculture: anticipate without destabilizing The same reasoning applies to products derived from cellular agriculture. Although not yet present on European shelves, these technologies hold significant potential for future development. Estimates suggest that the cultivated protein value chain could represent between €15 billion and €80 billion in new markets, with the potential to create between 25,000 and 90,000 jobs in Europe. The European Union already counts 47 companies active in cultivated meat out of 174 worldwide, as well as 61 out of 158 companies operating in precision fermentation and biomass technologies. This demonstrates that Europe is not a passive observer but an active participant in emerging food technologies. Yet European investment in novel foods currently represents less than 1 percent of total agri-food innovation funding. In this context, regulatory stability becomes a decisive factor in consolidating emerging technological leadership and retaining investment within the EU. Introducing additional denomination restrictions at such an early stage may send an unintended signal of unpredictability. For innovative sectors that depend on long development cycles and significant capital expenditure, clarity and proportionality in regulation are structural conditions for growth. “Europe can be demanding. It cannot afford to be unpredictable in sectors where it seeks to innovate.” Consumer protection: a framework already validated Consumer protection is a legitimate objective and a cornerstone of EU law. However, it operates within an already established and functional legal framework. The Food Information to Consumers Regulation requires clear, accurate and non-misleading labeling. Annex VI explicitly provides that the absence or substitution of animal-derived ingredients must be indicated. In case C-438/23, the Court of Justice of the European Union confirmed that this framework provides sufficient safeguards against misleading practices. “The Court of Justice of the European Union has confirmed it: EU law already protects consumers.” > A plant-based product clearly identified as such does not constitute > linguistic ambiguity for the vast majority of consumers. The central argument in favor of additional restrictions rests on an assumption of consumer confusion. Yet available evidence indicates that consumers clearly distinguish animal-based products from plant-based alternatives when origin and composition are explicitly stated. Labeling transparency, rather than categorical prohibitions, remains the key instrument for ensuring informed choice. A plant-based product clearly identified as such does not constitute linguistic ambiguity for the vast majority of consumers. The debate should not be trivialized, but one principle deserves emphasis: regulation must protect without infantilizing. Suggesting that a single word, taken in isolation, would systematically mislead consumers underestimates their ability to read labels, understand context and make informed decisions. “Protecting consumers does not mean presuming a lack of discernment.” More than 600 companies and organizations from 22 member states have called for maintaining the current framework, underlining the importance of preserving single market coherence and avoiding regulatory fragmentation detrimental to innovation and competitiveness. Europe can reconcile consumer protection, legal certainty and competitiveness. It can do so by fully enforcing existing rules and targeting actual abuses rather than introducing general prohibitions that generate costs, legal uncertainty and unintended economic consequences. Ultimately, the question is not whether a word is liked or disliked. It is whether, in a context marked by major challenges related to industrial competitiveness, climate transition, economic security and geopolitical tension, this is where the union should concentrate its political and regulatory capital.

BERLIN — Germany’s Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul said France needs to spend more on defense even if it means cutting other kinds of spending. Wadephul’s comments are likely to fuel ongoing tensions between Berlin and Paris at a time when Chancellor Friedrich Merz and President Emmanuel Macron have openly clashed on everything from trade to common borrowing. German officials have increasingly criticized Macron for speaking passionately about the need for Europe to achieve strategic autonomy from the U.S., while not, in their view, delivering on that rhetoric by increasing defense spending aggressively enough. “[Macron] repeatedly and correctly speaks of our pursuit of European sovereignty,” Wadephul told German public radio in an interview on Mondayo. “Anyone who talks about this must act accordingly in their own country. Unfortunately, efforts in the French Republic have so far been insufficient to achieve this.” Wadephul called on Paris to abandon calls for eurobonds, or a joint EU borrowing scheme, in order to finance defense spending. Instead, the French government needs to find cuts in other areas to create fiscal room, the German foreign minister argued. “We therefore call on France to do what we are doing here, with difficult discussions, to create investment capacity, including in the social sector, to take one or two austerity measures, to make savings in other areas too, in order to have the breathing space needed to achieve the vitally important goal of European defense capability,” Wadephul said. Wadephul said the same lesson applies to all European countries and urged them to implement NATO’s defense spending target of 5 percent of gross domestic product by 2035, as agreed last year. “Anyone talking about independence from the U.S. today needs to do their homework first. And Europe still has a lot of work to do in this regard.”  While tensions between Macron and Merz over spending and defense are not new, Wadephul’s unsolicited advice on how the French should spend was not well received in Paris. “I would like to recall the facts. In 2017, France increased its defense budget. Since then, that budget has doubled,” a French economy ministry official, speaking on condition of anonymity in line with government practice, said in response to Wadephul’s comments. “We are convinced that strong Franco-German ambition is absolutely necessary for European defense.” The tensions come at a particularly sensitive time, just days after Merz, at the Munich Security Conference, said he had early talks with the French president on a European nuclear deterrent. Berlin has no nuclear weapons of its own and, amid growing concerns about the reliability of U.S. security guarantees, is increasingly looking to France, which has its own nuclear weapons. At the same time, Berlin wants to maintain alliance with the U.S. to the extent possible. Wadephul on Monday cautioned against writing off the transatlantic alliance. “I strongly advise that we stop these debates now, that we stop questioning the NATO alliance and cohesion when no one in Washington is questioning it,” Wadephul said. “Without the U.S. nuclear umbrella, without U.S. intelligence information, we are defenseless here.” France was expected to spend 2.05 percent of GDP on defense in 2025, according to NATO data. Germany, which in years before Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine spent relatively little on defense, was on track to spend 2.4 percent, according to government data. Giorgio Leali contributed to this report from Paris.

Listen on * Spotify * Apple Music * Amazon Music Nach der Münchner Sicherheitskonferenz geht die zentrale Debatte in Berlin weiter: Wie souverän muss Europa werden, wenn das Vertrauen in die USA brüchiger wird. US-Außenminister Marco Rubio wählt versöhnliche Worte, doch die strategischen Zweifel bleiben. Eine Analyse von Gordon Repinski. Im 200-Sekunde-Interview ordnet Unions-Fraktionschef Jens Spahn die Konsequenzen aus München ein. Er plädiert für eine stärkere europäische Säule innerhalb des transatlantischen Bündnisses und dafür, auch über nukleare Teilhabe offen zu sprechen. Parallel wird in Brüssel über wirtschaftliche Souveränität verhandelt. Finanzminister Lars Klingbeil wirbt für Fortschritte bei der Kapitalmarktunion. Ziel ist es, Europas Start-ups besseren Zugang zu Kapital zu verschaffen..Rasmus Buchsteiner berichtet, wie Klingbeil internationale Foren auch nutzt, um wirtschaftspolitisches Profil zu gewinnen. Die Ausgabe der Talkshow von Caren Miosga mit Gordon seht ihr hier und unseren neuen POLITICO-Podcast „Power & Policy” gibt es hier zu hören! Das Berlin Playbook als Podcast gibt es jeden Morgen ab 5 Uhr. Gordon Repinski und das POLITICO-Team liefern Politik zum Hören – kompakt, international, hintergründig. Für alle Hauptstadt-Profis: Der Berlin Playbook-Newsletter bietet jeden Morgen die wichtigsten Themen und Einordnungen. Jetzt kostenlos abonnieren. Mehr von Host und POLITICO Executive Editor Gordon Repinski: Instagram: @gordon.repinski | X: @GordonRepinski. POLITICO Deutschland – ein Angebot der Axel Springer Deutschland GmbH Axel-Springer-Straße 65, 10888 Berlin Tel: +49 (30) 2591 0 information@axelspringer.de Sitz: Amtsgericht Berlin-Charlottenburg, HRB 196159 B USt-IdNr: DE 214 852 390 Geschäftsführer: Carolin Hulshoff Pol, Mathias Sanchez Luna **(Anzeige) Eine Nachricht von Amazon: Unabhängige Verkaufspartner stehen heute für über 60 % aller bei Amazon verkauften Produkte. Ein Beispiel ist 3Bears aus München: Caroline und ihr Team haben ihre Leidenschaft in ein erfolgreich wachsendes Unternehmen verwandelt. Über Amazon bringt 3Bears hochwertigen Porridge auf Frühstückstische in ganz Europa. Sie sind eines von rund 47.000 deutschen kleinen und mittleren Unternehmen, die bei Amazon erfolgreich verkaufen. Jetzt mehr erfahren auf: AboutAmazon.de.**

MUNICH, Germany — French President Emmanuel Macron on Friday called on Europeans to become stronger — and on the U.S. to show some respect. “A stronger Europe would be a better friend for its allies,” the French president told a packed hall at the Munich Security Conference. “Europe has to become a geopolitical power. We have to accelerate and deliver all the components of a geopolitical power: defense, technologies and de-risking from all the big powers.” “I don’t talk about France or Germany becoming a geopolitical power, but Europe as a whole,” he said. The French president has consistently called on Europeans to be more independent, popularizing the term “strategic autonomy” since entering office in 2017. Macron hammered that idea home in Munich, attending the conference for the first time since 2023. Prior to the conference, a person close to the president said France hopes that Europeans will continue pushing for more independence from the U.S., even if Trump’s threat to annex Greenland has abated for now. “We mustn’t let the momentum fade,” the aide said, nothing that in past crises such as Trump’s Oval Office ambush of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, European outrage quickly waned following calming words from Washington.  In clear rebuke of last year’s bruising attack on Europe by U.S. Vice President JD Vance, Macron on Friday painted a positive picture of the continent, rejecting accusations that EU countries are stifling free speech with digital regulations. Instead, he argued that social media and online platforms, mostly American-owned, are amplifying foreign interference and disinformation that is undermining democracy. In a sign of the importance he placed on the Munich event, he was accompanied by Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot, Deputy Defense Minister Alice Rufo and Deputy Europe Minister Benjamin Haddad. NUCLEAR UMBRELLA Macron also teased a much-anticipated speech on France’s nuclear doctrine, which is expected in the coming weeks. POLITICO first reported the address would take place in Brest, where French nuclear submarines are stationed.  Europe needs to rebuild a new defense architecture, and that includes nuclear deterrence, especially now that the New START treaty limiting the American and Russian arsenals has expired, the French president said. Earlier on Friday, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz confirmed that talks were ongoing with Paris about how France’s nuclear weapons could contribute to Europe’s security. Pressed about Merz’s comments, Macron said he will provide more “details” in his upcoming speech. France and some European countries are looking to see “how we can articulate our national doctrine with special cooperation, common security interest, this is what we’re doing for the first time in history [with Germany],” Macron told the audience. Despite multiple reports, including by POLITICO, that the Future Combat Air System is at a dead end, Macron said he still “believed” in the fighter jet project with Germany and Spain. Earlier this week, Germany’s Defense Minister Boris Pistorius struck a much less enthusiastic tone. A defense official also told POLITICO on Friday that Airbus, one of the project’s main contractors, was weighing participation in the rival Global Combat Air Programme led by Italy, the U.K. and Japan. Macron also backed more promising European defense industrial cooperations, such as a project to jointly develop deep precision strike capabilities known as ELSA with a group of European countries including Germany and Poland, and another one called JEWEL with Germany about early-warning systems to track missiles.  Victor Goury-Laffont and Jordyn Dahl contributed to this report.

Listen on * Spotify * Apple Music * Amazon Music EU leaders gather at Alden Biesen castle to debate how to revive Europe’s economy — and whether “strategic autonomy” can survive internal divisions. POLITICO’s Chief EU Correspondent Zoya Sheftalovich is joined by policy editor Sarah Wheaton to unpack the competitiveness retreat. Plus: The Hungary funds case nears a turning point in Luxembourg, as the Court of Justice of the European Union issues a key opinion in the Parliament’s lawsuit against the Commission — with political stakes ahead of Hungary’s April parliamentary election. And finally: Why are EU leaders so fond of castles? Zoya and Sarah also share listeners’ karaoke picks sent to our WhatsApp number: +32 491 05 06 29 With Valentine’s Day approaching, send us a shoutout to your loved one — or maybe a missed connection. That person you exchanged a glance with in the Berlaymont lift. The policy wonk you queued behind for coffee at Schuman. The brunette who walked into the Commission building before you could say hello. Send us a voice note — we might help Brussels’ most bureaucratic love stories find a happy landing. **A message from Amazon: Across Europe, businesses are growing with the AWS Cloud to build innovative, scalable products. From Europe’s largest enterprises and government agencies to the continent’s fastest growing startups, learn more about how AWS Cloud is helping businesses across Europe grow at AWS.eu.**

EUROPE’S AUTONOMY PUSH EXPOSES OLD FAULT LINES The renewed drive to reduce reliance on Washington is bringing up familiar disagreements ahead of an EU leaders’ summit on Thursday. By NICHOLAS VINOCUR and GABRIEL GAVIN in Brussels While the meeting is not expected to produce binding commitments, it will set a broad political direction for the European Commission. | Sebastien Bozon/AFP via Getty Images EU leaders are gearing up for major fights over issues ranging from joint defense projects to economic reforms as a drive to loosen Europe’s dependence on Donald Trump’s America lays bare deep divisions among the bloc’s 27 countries. Ahead of an informal leaders’ retreat on Thursday focused on competitiveness, capitals had pledged to show unity and plot a path toward greater European autonomy after the U.S. president’s threats against Greenland set off the worst transatlantic crisis in decades. But as leaders prepare for their summit, that united front is already cracking — and long-standing disagreements are resurfacing over how to turn lofty ambitions for “strategic independence” into concrete action. While the meeting is not expected to produce binding commitments, it will set a broad political direction for the European Commission, which is due to draw up proposals ahead of a formal summit in late March. “Everyone around the table must … face a moment of truth,” said Manfred Weber, leader of the European People’s Party, whose members include German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. Leaders should “not complain about each other” but do their “homework” to ensure reforms can be completed, he added. Estonian Foreign Minister Margus Tsahkna told POLITICO ahead of the summit that “Europe has lots of leverage. We just need to stick together and make decisions … instead of whining and complaining, we need to understand that through strength Europe will actually have [a firm] position.” A glaring example is the recent disagreement between EU powerhouses France and Germany, whose leaders clashed over Emmanuel Macron’s refusal to endorse the EU-Mercosur trade deal. In an interview published Tuesday by several European newspapers, the French president trumpeted the need for joint European borrowing to finance ambitious industrial and defense projects — a call that was promptly rebuffed by Germany.  “You will have seen the interview with the French president published today,” said a senior German government official, granted anonymity to discuss sensitive summit preparations. “We think that … this distracts a little from what it’s actually all about, namely that we have a productivity problem.” Other capitals were quick to chime in. “[It’s] good that Macron sees the need to invest in Europe’s future economy,” said an EU diplomat from a mid-sized country. But, the diplomat added, such a push amounts to “daydreaming” given the possibility to spend via the EU’s long-term budget. In his interview, Macron also threatened to suspend a Franco-German program to jointly develop a battle tank, after a blame game over the lack of progress on a joint fighter jet program. “You can imagine that, if the German partner questioned the future of the joint plane, we would have to question the joint tank.” Pool photo by Sebastien Bozon/AFP via Getty Images It’s one of dozens of fault lines being exposed ahead of Thursday’s retreat in a flurry of position papers from EU capitals. While France is advocating “Buy European” policies that would prioritize EU industries for subsidies and public procurement contracts, Nordic and Baltic countries have pushed back against the idea in a joint position paper, saying it would add unwanted complexity just as Europe is trying to deregulate. At the same time, Germany has joined forces with Italy to push back against French initiatives, instead promoting an agenda heavily focused on deregulation. In a joint discussion paper backed by Merz and Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, they call for an “emergency brake” on new EU legislation, granting capitals the right to stop Brussels from coming up with laws they don’t like. But diplomats from other countries argue that the Berlin-Rome push misses the larger point, which is that Europe needs to wean itself off foreign dependencies. “Simplification (deregulation) is important,” said a second EU diplomat. “But it cannot be the alpha and the omega of our European policy. Bureaucracy isn’t everything. We urgently need to think about supply chains and how to reduce our dependencies.” A third EU diplomat put the situation bluntly: “We have the diagnosis, we have the prescription, we haven’t gone to the pharmacy.” TRUMP IN THE ROOM If these disagreements are now emerging into the cold light of day, it’s because leaders who have long avoided difficult conversations about internal reforms can now no longer afford to do so. Trump’s threats against Greenland triggered a reckoning among leaders during an extraordinary Council gathering in January, at which von der Leyen said Europe must now take the path of independence. Several diplomats briefed on the leaders’ discussions described the summit as a Rubicon moment from which there was no turning back. “Without GDP growth we will be really vulnerable for external shocks,” said Polish Finance Minister Andrzej Domański. The Commission and other EU policymakers, he said, will have to “focus on growth, focus on deregulation and being more ambitious,” something that critics say has been too little, too slow. The problem is that translating that rhetoric into reality comes at huge political cost for leaders. Indeed, reforms to finalize the bloc’s fragmented single market or build up a true European deterrent capacity have been on the table for years, in some cases decades. Leaders have long opted to politely ignore them because following through on reforms would threaten national industries. Take the proposal to form a European capital markets union.  The idea of joining up the EU’s fragmented capital markets to create a far vaster pool of investable capital was first pitched more than a decade ago, and has won endorsement from former European Central Bank President Mario Draghi as a crucial step toward independence. But it has gone nowhere for years due to opposition from Berlin and Rome, among other capitals, which have blocked the initiative due to the threat it poses to regional banks. “Look at the Capital Markets Union,” said the EPP’s Weber. “The concept, the initiatives are on our table for years now.” The elephant in the room when leaders gather Thursday will be Europe’s relationship with the Trump administration. Despite consensus around the need for Europe to plot its own path, several countries are unwilling to risk alienating Washington — or seeing their companies prevented from selling into U.S. markets — due to protective EU policies. Relations between Brussels and Washington may well snap back to normal after the Greenland crisis, some diplomats suggest. But for some leaders, there is no turning back to the way things were before. “As we left the worst of the [Greenland] crisis, there was a cowardly form of relief,” Macron said. “There are threats and intimidation, then all of a sudden Washington retreats, and we think it’s over. But don’t think that for one single second … every day, there are new threats.” Max Griera and Nette Nöstlinger contributed reporting.