This article is presented by EFPIA with the support of AbbVie I made a trip back to Europe recently, where I spent the vast majority of my pharmaceutical career, to share my perspectives on competitiveness at the European Health Summit. Now that I work in a role responsible for supporting patient access to medicine globally, I view Europe, and how it compares internationally, through a new lens, and I have been reflecting further on why the choices made today will have such a critical impact on where medicines are developed tomorrow. Today, many patients around the world benefit from medicines built on European science and breakthroughs of the last 20 years. Europeans, like me, can be proud of this contribution. As I look forward, my concern is that we may not be able to make the same claim in the next 20 years. It’s clear that Europe has a choice. Investing in sustainable medicines growth and other enabling policies will, I believe, bring significant benefits. Not doing so risks diminishing global influence. > Today, many patients around the world benefit from medicines built on European > science and breakthroughs of the last 20 years I reflect on three important points: 1) investment in healthcare benefits individuals, healthcare and society, but the scale of this benefit remains underappreciated; 2) connected to this, the underpinning science for future innovation is increasingly happening elsewhere; and 3) this means the choices we make today must address both of these trends. First, let’s use the example of migraine. As I have heard a patient say, “Migraine will not kill you but neither [will they] let you live.”[1] Individuals can face being under a migraine attack for more than half of every month, unable to leave home, maintain a job and engage in society.[2] It is the second biggest cause of disability globally and the first among young women.[3] It affects the quality of life of millions of Europeans.[4] From 2011-21 the economic burden of migraine in Europe due to the loss of working days ranged from €35-557 billion, depending on the country, representing 1-2 percent of gross domestic product (GDP).[5]   Overall socioeconomic burden of migraine as percentage of the country’s GDP in 2021 Source: WifOR, The socioeconomic burden of migraine. The case of 6 European Countries.5 Access to effective therapies could radically improve individuals’ lives and their ability to return to work.[6] Yet, despite the staggering economic and personal impacts, in some member states the latest medicines are either not reimbursed or only available after several treatment failures.[7] Imagine if Europe shifted its perspective on these conditions, investing to improve not only health but unlocking the potential for workforce and economic productivity? Moving to my second point, against this backdrop of underinvestment, where are scientific advances now happening in our sector? In recent years it is impressive to see China has become the second-largest drug developer in the world,[8] and within five years it may lead the innovative antibodies therapeutics sector,[9] which is particularly promising for complex areas like oncology. Cancer is projected to become the leading cause of death in Europe by 2035,[10] yet the continent’s share of the number of oncology trials dropped from 41 percent in 2013 to 21 percent in 2023.10 Today, antibody-drug conjugates are bringing new hope in hard-to-treat tumor types,[11] like ovarian,[12] lung[13] and colorectal[14] cancer, and we hope to see more of these advances in the future. Unfortunately, Europe is no longer at the forefront of the development of these innovations. This geographical shift could impact high-quality jobs, the vitality of Europe’s biotech sector and, most importantly, patients’ outcomes. [15] > This is why I encourage choices to be made that clearly signal the value > Europe attaches to medicines This is why I encourage choices to be made that clearly signal the value Europe attaches to medicines. This can be done by removing national cost-containment measures, like clawbacks, that are increasingly eroding the ability of companies to invest in European R&D. To provide a sense of their impact, between 2012 and 2023, clawbacks and price controls reduced manufacturer revenues by over €1.2 billion across five major EU markets, corresponding to a loss of 4.7 percent in countries like Spain.[16] Moreover, we should address health technology assessment approaches in Europe, or mandatory discount policies, which are simply not adequately accounting for the wider societal value of medicines, such as in the migraine example, and promoting a short-term approach to investment. By broadening horizons and choosing a long-term investment strategy for medicines and the life science sector, Europe will not only enable this strategic industry to drive global competitiveness but, more importantly, bring hope to Europeans suffering from health conditions. AbbVie SA/NV – BE-ABBV-250177 (V1.0) – December 2025 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [1] The Parliament Magazine, https://www.theparliamentmagazine.eu/partner/article/unmet-medical-needs-and-migraine-assessing-the-added-value-for-patients-and-society, Last accessed December 2025. [2] The Migraine Trust; https://migrainetrust.org/understand-migraine/types-of-migraine/chronic-migraine/, Last accessed December 2025. [3] Steiner TJ, et al; Lifting The Burden: the Global Campaign against Headache. Migraine remains second among the world’s causes of disability, and first among young women: findings from GBD2019. J Headache Pain. 2020 Dec 2;21(1):137 [4] Coppola G, Brown JD, Mercadante AR, Drakeley S, Sternbach N, Jenkins A, Blakeman KH, Gendolla A. The epidemiology and unmet need of migraine in five european countries: results from the national health and wellness survey. BMC Public Health. 2025 Jan 21;25(1):254. doi: 10.1186/s12889-024-21244-8. [5] WifOR. Calculating the Socioeconomic Burden of Migraine: The Case of 6 European Countries. Available at: [https://www.wifor.com/en/download/the-socioeconomic-burden-of-migraine-the-case-of-6-eu­ropean-countries/?wpdmdl=358249&refresh=687823f915e751752703993]. Accessed June 2025. [6] Seddik AH, Schiener C, Ostwald DA, Schramm S, Huels J, Katsarava Z. Social Impact of Prophylactic Migraine Treatments in Germany: A State-Transition and Open Cohort Approach. Value Health. 2021 Oct;24(10):1446-1453. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2021.04.1281 [7] Moisset X, Demarquay G, et al., Migraine treatment: Position paper of the French Headache Society. Rev Neurol (Paris). 2024 Dec;180(10):1087-1099. doi: 10.1016/j.neurol.2024.09.008. [8] The Economist, https://www.economist.com/china/2025/11/23/chinese-pharma-is-on-the-cusp-of-going-global, Last accessed December 2025. [9] Crescioli S, Reichert JM. Innovative antibody therapeutic development in China compared with the USA and Europe. Nat Rev Drug Discov. Published online November 7, 2025. [10] Manzano A., Svedman C., Hofmarcher T., Wilking N.. Comparator Report on Cancer in Europe 2025 – Disease Burden, Costs and Access to Medicines and Molecular Diagnostics. EFPIA, 2025. [IHE REPORT 2025:2, page 20] [11] Armstrong GB, Graham H, Cheung A, Montaseri H, Burley GA, Karagiannis SN, Rattray Z. Antibody-drug conjugates as multimodal therapies against hard-to-treat cancers. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2025 Sep;224:115648. doi: 10.1016/j.addr.2025.115648. Epub 2025 Jul 11. PMID: 40653109.. [12] Narayana, R.V.L., Gupta, R. Exploring the therapeutic use and outcome of antibody-drug conjugates in ovarian cancer treatment. Oncogene 44, 2343–2356 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41388-025-03448-3 [13] Coleman, N., Yap, T.A., Heymach, J.V. et al. Antibody-drug conjugates in lung cancer: dawn of a new era?. npj Precis. Onc. 7, 5 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41698-022-00338-9 [14] Wang Y, Lu K, Xu Y, Xu S, Chu H, Fang X. Antibody-drug conjugates as immuno-oncology agents in colorectal cancer: targets, payloads, and therapeutic synergies. Front Immunol. 2025 Nov 3;16:1678907. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2025.1678907. PMID: 41256852; PMCID: PMC12620403. [15] EFPIA, Improving EU Clinical Trials: Proposals to Overcome Current Challenges and Strengthen the Ecosystem, efpias-list-of-proposals-clinical-trials-15-apr-2025.pdf, Last accessed December 2025. [16] The EU General Pharmaceutical Legislation & Clawbacks, © Vital Transformation BVBA, 2024.

OTTAWA — Canada’s ambassador to the United States and its chief trade negotiator with the Trump administration said she is stepping down in the new year. “I have advised Prime Minister [Mark] Carney that I will be ending my tenure in the United States in the New Year. It has been the greatest privilege of my professional life to have served and represented Canada and Canadians during this critical period in Canada-U.S. relations,” Kirsten Hillman said in her resignation letter posted on X on Tuesday afternoon. Hillman’s departure comes after eight years in Washington, as the Carney government navigates President Donald Trump’s abrupt cancellation of bilateral trade talks in October and prepares for next year’s review of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement. Hillman, a trade lawyer and career diplomat, was a key member of the Canadian negotiating team that faced off against Trump’s first administration during the talks that led to the creation of the USMCA. “While there will never be a perfect time to leave, this is the right time to put a team in place that will see the CUSMA Review through to its conclusion,” she wrote, using the Canadian acronym for the new North American trade pact. Despite the current trade disruptions and the aftermath of navigating the Covid-19 pandemic, Hillman said her greatest accomplishment was working to secure the release of two Canadian men who spent more than 1,000 days arbitrarily imprisoned in China from 2018 to 2021. “In a relationship as deep and complex as ours, pressing and consequential issues arise almost daily,” she wrote. “Yet none was more personal to me than the hundreds of hours I spent with U.S. and Chinese counterparts working for the release of Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor.”

LONDON — Chancellor Rachel Reeves has insisted that the government’s new trade deals will boost growth, after the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) snubbed a request to count them in its growth forecast. In its pre-budget forecast on Wednesday, the OBR acknowledged that new trade deals “have the potential to increase U.K. trade and GDP,” including the government’s Brexit “reset” deal with the EU and its free trade agreement with India. But the budget watchdog indicated that neither of the deals had met the criteria to be included in its forecast. As elements of the U.K.-EU reset deal were still under negotiation, the OBR said there was “not sufficient detail to assess their potential fiscal and economic impacts.” In the case of the India deal, the OBR said it could be seen to increase GDP by 0.13 percent, in line with the government’s impact assessment, but only once ratified. When it came to the U.S. trade pact — which saw the U.K. hit with 10 percent baseline tariffs on most goods — the OBR noted that some “details of the future trading arrangement are yet to be negotiated and confirmed.” The assessments came as a disappointment for Reeves, who had pinned her hopes on trade as a booster for growth. In an interview with the BBC on Thursday, the chancellor said she was “confident that the growth policies that we’re pursuing will grow our economy,” pointing to trade deals with the EU, India and U.S., as well as planning and pensions reforms. “Why do I say that?” Reeves added. “Because the OBR said in the spring our economy would grow by 1 percent this year. They revised it up yesterday to 1.5 percent. The IMF, the OECD, the Bank of England, also revised up their growth forecasts for this year.” “So I’ve defied the forecast this year, and I’m determined to defy them next year and the year after, because it is absolutely the case that the best way to fund our public services and keep taxes down is to grow the economy.” GLOBAL HEADWINDS While the U.K.-EU reset deal and India deal are not included in the OBR’s current forecast, it does offers some hope for the future. “The result of the UK-EU strategic partnership and the Youth Mobility Scheme are still being negotiated and therefore there is not sufficient detail to assess their potential fiscal and economic impacts,” it said. “We will consider whether any such impacts should be included in the forecast once the full details of the agreements have been finalised, published and agreed by both the EU and UK. This is the standard approach we have taken to assessing the fiscal and economic impacts of trade deals and other international agreements.” The assessments came as a disappointment for Reeves, who had pinned her hopes on trade as a booster for growth. | Neil Hall/EPA Once the U.K.-India free trade agreement is ratified by both countries, the OBR said it could increase real GDP by amounts rising to 0.13 percent by 2040, in line with the government’s impact assessment. But Reeves has less reasons to be cheerful about the state of trade overall, with global trade growth expected to slow from 3.7 percent in 2024 to 2.3 percent in 2026 in line with the IMF’s forecast. Speaking at a Resolution Foundation event on Thursday, OBR chair Richard Hughes said tariffs and global trade restrictions had played a part in their decision to downgrade productivity. “There are some new global headwinds in the global economy since our forecast in March — U.S. tariffs going up and also just wider global trade restrictions being put in place,” Hughes warned. “Trade wars are very bad things for everybody, especially an open economy like the U.K., which relies a lot on trade as a driver for growth so and for the first time that I’ve seen in my career, the IMF is actually forecasting over the next five years trade falling as a share of GDP.”

THE ALTAR BOYS WHO GREW UP TOGETHER — AND TRIED TO KEEP EUROPE’S CENTER FROM CRUMBING The lives of Daniel Caspary and René Repasi often overlapped as they grew up. In the European Parliament, they became political rivals — but were also united in common cause. By MAX GRIERA and NETTE NÖSTLINGER in Stutensee, Germany Photo-illustrations by Klawe Rzeczy for POLITICO Sometimes it’s the least extraordinary places that throw up the most startling of coincidences.   In this case, a tiny German town — nothing special: a stone’s throw from the Rhine river, a small 18th century castle, the kind of suburban sleepiness where boys like Daniel Caspary and René Repasi while away their teenage years cycling to the city to party or the nearest lake to cool off — has produced rival leading European politicians who have been key to assuring EU political stability in a time of unprecedented fragmentation.  The way their lives have intertwined is astonishing. Caspary, now 49, and Repasi, three years his junior, went to the same school. There, they both organized a cabaret of political satire. They honed their skills on the student newspaper. They were both altar boys in the same church. And they both scored their first political victories on their town’s council. Almost since birth, their lives have taken staggeringly parallel paths. Now, they’re on different sides in the European Parliament.  Advertisement Caspary is leader in the Parliament of the center-right Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and its Bavarian sister party, the Christian Social Union (CSU), the largest faction in the European People’s Party. Repasi is the equivalent for the center-left Social Democratic Party (SPD), the third-largest national delegation in the Socialists and Democrats group. The EPP and the S&D are the two biggest Parliament groups and for decades have between them held a grip on EU power. Despite the rivalry between their umbrella political families, with antagonism only worsening since the 2024 EU elections, the two men have cemented their reputation as the backchannels between the two sides, attempting to safeguard what in EU circles is known as the “grand coalition” between center right and center left. That’s significant because the Parliament is fractured like never before. Aping a trend seen across western democracies, the middle ground is crumbling. Politicians like Caspary and Repasi represent the old ways of doing things ― political opponents, yes, but ready to put aside their differences so their two sides can work together to face down the extremes. Increasingly, that’s no longer a given in the European Parliament. That was evident when the EPP, earlier this month, abandoned its traditional centrist allies and pressed ahead with the support of far-right groups to approve cuts to green rules.  Daniel Caspary, the charismatic old-school conservative deeply rooted in his community, in his class photo from the year he graduated. | Stutensee’s Thomas Mann-Gymnasium 1993-1994 annuary René Repasi, the cosmopolitan and slick social democrat with an impressive track record in academia, in his class photo from the year before he graduated. | Stutensee’s Thomas Mann-Gymnasium 1993-1994 annuary A good relationship between the pair has been particularly useful because the leaders of the two pan-European groups rarely conceal their mutual dislike and are increasingly finding it tough to reach compromise positions on new laws, such as on green rules for business or on controlling migration.  “Of course we have many differences politically, but it’s good if you can talk,” Caspary told POLITICO. “We’ve known each other for ages … We know that we can trust each other.”   “He was always a sort of leading figure,” Repasi said, remembering their shared childhoods in Stutensee. I “looked up to him.”  Advertisement While their paths overlapped, they could barely be more different personally and politically. Caspary is the charismatic old-school conservative deeply rooted in his community, pressing the flesh at local events and using the language of the person in the street. He still lives in the area. Repasi, by contrast, is the cosmopolitan ― the slick social democrat with an impressive track record in academia, a man of scholarly rhetoric who moved away from Germany completely. “What Repasi lacks,” said Mathias Zurawski, a journalist who attended the same school, “Caspary offers. And vice versa.”   ALTAR BOYS Stutensee’s discreet Catholic St. Josef Church is in the town’s backstreets. The garden surrounding it boasts abundant fruit trees. Posters advertise meetings of the scout group.  It’s humble in comparison to the more spectacular Protestant church on the main street. It’s here where the Caspary and Repasi families worshipped. And it’s where the two boys built trust in each other.  “We met for the first time in the youth groups of the Catholic church,” Caspary said. “We talked about this. I think this stands for some values. We always try to be honest.”  Those early religious experiences play a big role in Caspary’s life today, said Ansgar Mayr, a regional CDU politician who has known him since he made his first steps in politics.    Stutensee’s St Josef Catholic Church, where Caspary and Repasi used to serve as altar boys. | Max Griera/POLITICO “He was greatly influenced by his time in the Catholic Church and also his time with the Scouts, who are Catholic Scouts,” Mayr said. “His circle of friends, outside the political bubble, comes very much from the Catholic Church and parish youth groups.”   The pair served as altar boys, assisting the priest at Mass and kneeling as part of the liturgy. On Christmas, they sang carols around town. The Social Democrat Repasi’s Catholicism has lapsed somewhat, but despite being “one of those guys who go to church only at Christmas,” he said Christian values serve as guidance for his daily life and political career. CHAOS AND REVOLUTION The pair’s paths crossed again as teenagers in high school. The Thomas-Mann Gymnasium is just a stone’s throw from the church. It’s seen better days and is due to be renovated next year. For now, it still looks as it did in the 1990s. It’s easy to imagine Caspary and Repasi here. The lockers they’d have used line the corridors and the classrooms are plain, aside from the vintage orange cubical washbasins. In those years, they both dived into extracurricular activities. Caspary founded an annual political cabaret show. At 18, he handed the organizing baton to Repasi, who suddenly found himself facing the daunting task, he said, of raising money to cover costs.  “If the whole thing was a success, [that] was due to the fact that he [Caspary] handed it over, and we did the transition period together,” said Repasi.  Advertisement The boys’ school yearbooks portray two kids destined for greater things. Alongside a photo of Caspary humorously dressed as a medic, his classmates described him as “source of the most creative interjections (‘yes, but…’) that elicit a wide range of reactions from teachers, ranging from amusement to annoyance.” It’s “hard to believe,” the entry said, “that this chaotic person will one day take on a leading role as a conservative politician.”  Repasi’s friends saw him as a revolutionary. His portrait shows him wearing a Soviet hat. “Discussions with him often turn into fights,” his schoolmates said. “But no one else is as good at arguing objectively.”  The boys also bumped into each other on the school’s newspaper, Pepperoni. Caspary was already acting as a sporadic school reporter, when Repasi — a couple of years later — became editor in chief. The boys weren’t scared of hitting the establishment where it hurt. Pepperoni signified “something that stings”  so was “a means to express criticism,” said former teacher Sabine Graf, who taught French and German at the school at the time.  Yearbook of Daniel Caspary, featuring a photo of Thomas Mann blended with Albert Einstein’s famous tongue picture, symbolizing science. | 50 years anniversary book, Thomas Mann Gymnasium 1974-2024 Covers of the Pepperoni school magazine, which both Caspary and Repasi contributed to. | 50 years anniversary book, Thomas Mann Gymnasium 1974-2024 Yearbook of René Repasi, featuring a pig with a black flag, symbolizing social class revolution and anarchism. | 50 years anniversary book, Thomas Mann Gymnasium 1974-2024 Those shared experiences form the basis of the two men’s relationship in the Parliament today. “You can always say you can trust me,” Repasi said. “But actually you can only do so if you have experienced it. And I experienced it in my past that I can trust him and that I can rely on him.”  VOTERS’ CRITICISM These days, Stutensee isn’t immune to the political winds that blow across the whole of Europe. With populism, of right and left, on the rise, centrist politicians who broadly prefer to focus on points of agreement rather than division aren’t in vogue. The Alternative for Germany (AfD) came in second in Germany’s national election earlier this year ― the best showing for a far-right party since the Nazi rise to power. The AfD isn’t represented on the city council here, but locals acknowledge there’s a desire to kick the establishment. An establishment symbolized by men like Caspary and Repasi. Despite their deep roots in the town, many reject the idea they’re local heroes. “They show up at some celebratory events around town with their family a couple of times a year, but you don’t hear from them afterwards,” said a 37-year-old bartender at the smoke-filled bar in town, who gives his name only as Dominik. A handful of people at the bar hear his remarks and nod.  Dominik also went to Thomas-Mann Gymnasium. He knew Caspary’s brother. But he insisted neither politician can be trusted. They’re not “looking out for the interests of the people,” he said.  But early on in their careers, the two politicians made some tangible changes for locals. When they were both on their school’s student council,  Caspary campaigned for a night bus line between Stutensee and the city of Karlsruhe, 10km away. In some ways, he succeeded, advancing a cause that led to the construction of a durable tram connection built years later.   “During this campaign, I realized that if you start engaging with the town representatives, like the mayor, like the city council members, then you can change things,” Caspary said.      Advertisement Repasi’s political awakening came when the regional government tried to cut by a year the time that students attended high school to align practices with other European countries. The school’s leadership wanted to participate in the pilot, despite most students being opposed. “I found it total nonsense,” Repasi said. “I was mobilizing the school kids to come to this meeting of the municipal council, and I think for the first time ever it was totally full.”     The students cheered loudly when their arguments, compiled by Repasi, were presented to the mayor. The council ultimately rejected the plan. If the bus line was Caspary’s first political victory, this was Repasi’s.  MR. STUTENSEE VS. MR. EUROPE Eventually, they drifted apart.   These days, Caspary’s image is one of a politician still deeply rooted to his home, who found his way to Brussels by chance. People close to him describe him as a family man, raising his five children just a few kilometers from where he grew up. Repasi, in contrast, is seen as a professor-turned-politician, someone with a strong passion for European affairs who deliberately chose to build his life abroad.   Classroom of Thomas Mann Gymnasium, intact since Caspary and Repasi studied in it. | Max Griera/POLITICO For Repasi, who was raised by a German mother and Hungarian father, “cosmopolitanism runs through his life,” said Graf, the schoolteacher. She and another former teacher both recalled his in-depth study on the Yugoslav Wars. He became a professor of European law in Geneva and Rotterdam, where he raised two sons with his Polish wife.    Caspary was elected to the European Parliament almost by accident in 2004, at 28, because of the CDU’s exceptionally strong showing.   “My plan was to become the chairperson of the group in my city council,” he said.  Advertisement For Repasi, on the other hand, ending up working in an EU institution was his dream, according to colleagues. He even dabbled with joining Caspary in the CDU. But in his village, the party didn’t feel very welcoming, he said. “I’m Western-looking enough not to have any discrimination experiences like Turkish people, but my strange family name was strange enough in my village,” he said.   Repasi’s road to the Parliament was bumpier than Caspary’s. He ran in three elections but never made it, ultimately joining when another SPD member gave up her mandate in 2022. TOGETHER IN BRUSSELS ― AND THEN APART AGAIN Reuniting in the European Parliament was almost like a homecoming for Repasi. Caspary presented him with a basket of delicacies from the region around Stutensee. Repasi’s rise since then has been rapid. He became the head of the SPD faction in the S&D only two years after his arrival. And in that time, they’ve put their friendship to good use. Cordial catchups soon turned into high-level political negotiations. They were suddenly in charge of leading the biggest German parties in the Parliament and had to overcome the increasing estrangement between their group leaders, Manfred Weber, the head of the EPP group, and Iratxe García, the S&D chair. Caspary was elected to the European Parliament almost by accident in 2004 because of the CDU’s exceptionally strong showing. | Michael Kappeler/picture alliance via Getty Images For Repasi, ending up working in an EU institution was his dream. | Marijan Murat/picture alliance via Getty Images That’s why they have been in constant dialogue, “to bring together political lines,” Caspary said. “We do speak about conflicts that are arising,” Repasi said. “Whether we can totally solve them is a different question.”  Other MEPs say the good relationship between the German conservatives and Socialists has proved critical. “The stability of the mandate” ― European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s loose coalition of centrist parties ― “is at stake, and what can help cement a stronger cooperation is the link between the CDU and SPD,” said Javi López, a Spanish S&D lawmaker and Parliament vice-president.     But nothing lasts forever and the double act is about to split once more. In October, the German government nominated Caspary to be its representative at the European Court of Auditors, in Luxembourg. Advertisement On Thursday he is expected to be confirmed by the Parliament. That will leave a gap, according to his colleagues. “Over the years, he has been a steady and unifying presence, bringing together a team of highly diverse personalities,” said Niclas Herbst, chair of the Parliament budgetary control committee, and one of the names floated to succeed Caspary. “He is, in the best sense, a true generalist — someone who can swiftly and thoroughly grasp complex political issues … I know there is great anticipation in Luxembourg for his arrival.”  When Caspary departs, Repasi will have to find himself another opposite number to build up a trusting relationship. But it remains to be seen whether the fraying ties between center right and center left can retain at least one strong thread. While that won’t be impossible, it certainly won’t come as easy as a relationship forged in little Stutensee. Out of experiences in church, student politics and the school newspaper, the foundations held up well.

President Donald Trump is suddenly reversing his monthslong campaign to bottle up a bipartisan effort to disclose federal records dealing with Jeffrey Epstein — just as scores of House Republicans prepare to defy his demands concerning the late convicted sex offender. “House Republicans should vote to release the Epstein files, because we have nothing to hide, and it’s time to move on from this Democrat Hoax,” he wrote Sunday night on Truth Social, adding, “I DON’T CARE! All I do care about is that Republicans get BACK ON POINT” discussing economic issues. The U-turn came after months of drama inside the House GOP over a bill that would compel the Justice Department to release its entire Epstein file. An effort by Trump and Speaker Mike Johnson to prevent a floor vote on the measure imploded last week amid an intense White House push to try to keep Republicans in line. The vote is now expected Tuesday. At the end of last week, Johnson and senior House leaders appeared powerless to stop perhaps as many as 100 Republicans from breaking ranks and voting with Democrats to release the files. The situation worsened over the weekend, as Trump lashed out in deeply personal terms at Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), who is leading the effort to force a House vote on Epstein, and publicly spurned Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), a one-time close ally who has recently broken with Trump on Epstein and other matters. Even before that, some members closest to House GOP leadership were mulling whether to support Massie’s effort. Those include lawmakers like Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.), who as Rules Committee chair is among the most trusted members of Johnson’s inner circle. She declined to say in an interview last week whether she would support Massie’s measure. But she suggested she favored it coming to a vote, which GOP leaders expect to happen Tuesday. “I’m a big full disclosure person,” Foxx said. “I have nothing to hide, and I assume nobody else does, either.” Rep. Blake Moore of Utah, the Republican conference vice chair, said in an interview last week he normally doesn’t discuss how he will vote. Rep. Kevin Hern of Oklahoma, the House GOP policy chair, acknowledged “a lot of consternation” inside the party about what to do. Asked about his own vote, Hern said, “We’ll make that decision at game time.” The internal GOP strife underscores how politically toxic Trump’s association with Epstein has become, especially after Democrats on the House Oversight Committee released an email Wednesday in which Epstein suggested that Trump “knew about the girls.” Evidence has not linked Trump to wrongdoing in the Epstein case, and the president has maintained that he and the disgraced financier had a falling out years ago. Trump appeared trained on keeping the defections to a minimum as recently as Friday, when he sent multiple Truth Social posts where he accused Democrats of pushing an “Epstein Hoax … in order to deflect from all of their bad policies and losses” and ordered Attorney General Pam Bondi to investigate Democrats’ connections to Epstein. The posts, according to three Republicans granted anonymity to discuss the sensitive matter, were part of an effort to limit mass GOP defections on this week’s vote. “Some Weak Republicans have fallen into their clutches because they are soft and foolish,” he wrote, telling them, “don’t waste your time with Trump. I have a Country to run!” Trump normally enjoys an iron grip over the House, where Republicans are rarely anything but subservient to the president. He’s seen hints of pushback recently on key nominees and his demand to eliminate the Senate filibuster. But he’s lost all control over the chamber when it comes to the Epstein matter, and Hill Republicans have grown increasingly wary of Trump’s fixation on the issue, according to five other people granted anonymity to describe internal GOP conversations. One senior Republican marveled at Trump’s “erratic” and unsettling effort last week to kill the bipartisan end-around led by Massie and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.). That included pulling Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) into the White House Situation Room to try to remove her name from the discharge petition she had signed alongside GOP Reps. Nancy Mace of South Carolina and Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia. The effort failed, and Trump administration officials privately warned that Mace’s defiance is likely to cost her an endorsement in the South Carolina governor’s race. One of her Republican opponents in that campaign, Rep. Ralph Norman, suggested he may not vote for the bill in an interview last week: “Oh, I don’t know. We’ll see.” A major source of Trump’s obsession over the House vote is Massie, who has opposed a raft of major GOP legislation, including spending bills and the megabill that passed this summer. Trump is now intent on ousting Massie in next year’s primary, but the Kentucky Republican has now managed to outmaneuver the president despite Trump and Johnson trying to hold him off for months. Massie said in an interview that the Epstein vote will reflect how Republicans are starting to take stock of a post-Trump world. “They need to look past 2028 and wonder if they want this on their record for the rest of their political career,” he said. “Right now, it’s okay to cover up for pedophiles because the president will take up for you if you’re in the red districts — that’s the deal,” Massie later told reporters. “But that deal only works as long as he’s popular or president. … If they’re thinking about the right thing to do, that’s pretty obvious: You vote for it.” That is reflected in the broad swath of House Republicans who said last week they were ready to back Massie, ranging from conservative hard-liners to moderate dealmakers to endangered swing-seat targets, including Rep. Tom Barrett of Michigan and Reps. Rob Bresnahan and Ryan Mackenzie of Pennsylvania. “If it’s on the floor, I’ll be voting for it,” Mackenzie said. On the right flank, Reps. Eli Crane of Arizona, Warren Davidson of Ohio, Eric Burlison of Missouri and Tim Burchett of Tennessee said they planned to support the measure. (Burchett sought to pass it on a voice vote last week, but Democrats insisted on a recorded vote.) More centrist-leaning Reps. Jeff Van Drew of New Jersey, Kevin Kiley of California and Don Bacon of Nebraska said they would vote for the bill. Bacon, who is retiring, suggested the last-minute pressure campaign from the White House was ill-advised. “The train has already left the station, so we should move on,” he said. Johnson, arguing Republicans have been “for maximum transparency of the Epstein files from the very beginning,” made clear last week he would not vote for the bill himself. He has argued that the bill would not do enough to protect Epstein’s victims, a claim Massie and Khanna reject. He and Trump still had good reason to try and avoid a total GOP jailbreak: A big vote could increase pressure on the Senate to take up the bill and send it to the president’s desk, forcing an embarrassing veto that would prolong the controversy. Senate GOP leaders have not committed to holding a vote, and Republicans widely expect the measure to die in the chamber. Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), who authored a Senate version of the bill, is coordinating with Massie, and Democrats have some options to force the issue, including seeking to force a vote by unanimous consent or to amend unrelated legislation. Some key GOP blocs remained split on the matter, including the hard-line House Freedom Caucus and the Republican Study Committee, composed of 189 conservatives. But the legislation is likely to get universal Democratic support in addition to considerable GOP backing, Khanna said before Trump reversed course. “While there might be pressure from the White House, there is even more pressure from the public,” he said. “People are sick of our system protecting the Epstein class.” Nicholas Wu and Hailey Fuchs contributed to this report.

EINDHOVEN, The Netherlands — “You don’t see me lash out against other parties that often.” Henri Bontenbal, leader of the center-right Dutch Christian Democratic Appeal, has just finished a two-hour event at the High Tech Campus in Eindhoven when reporters asked why he avoids sparring with far-right leader Geert Wilders ahead of this month’s national elections. Bontenbal, a former energy consultant and a relative newcomer to politics, is sitting on the stage where he has nerdily lectured an audience about the importance of collaboration and trust in the political realm. “Other parties occasionally give us a slap,” he admits. “But we continue to tell our own story.”  Bontenbal entered the political arena in an era defined by characters such as Wilders and Donald Trump. It’s also a time when politicians continuously attack each other and make outlandish claims in a snackable format on social media. But Bontenbal has taken a different approach. “Bontenbal is in many views the anti-populist,” wrote Simon Van Teutem, a Dutch columnist at news site The Correspondent, in a September profile. The approach is fitting for the 42-year-old, raised as one of eight in a Protestant family in Rotterdam, who takes pride in sharing that he still reads the Bible daily. After two chaotic years, Bontenbal’s message of decency, stability and trust is suddenly resonating with voters.  Dutch voters head back to the polling booths on Oct. 29, after the last government fell barely a year into office. The CDA is neck and neck for second in the polls alongside a joint Socialist-Greens ticket, at around 24 seats, behind Wilders’ far-right PVV at 31 seats. That’s set to make the party one of the election’s big winners and Bontenbal a potential kingmaker in government negotiations. Bontenbal’s political career began unexpectedly in 2021, when he became a temporary member of parliament, filling in for the illustrious former politician Pieter Omtzigt. In the November 2023 elections, CDA’s support crumbled to five seats shortly after Bontenbal had taken over — in part because of the success of Omtzigt’s new rival party. Back then, Bontenbal’s leadership of the center-right seemed doomed. Fast forward two years and the mood in Eindhoven, a breeding ground for top companies including ASML and Philips, is bright. The venue in the Netherlands’ “smartest square km” is packed for an event in honor of a local candidate. But Bontenbal — known to voters as Henri — is top of the ticket. Beer mats read “Henri, one more round?” On the tables are copies of his new book, It Really Can Be Different. On stage in Eindhoven, Botenbal lists four priorities for the election, “which we all know are top of the list”: housing shortages, how to handle asylum seekers, the country’s nitrogen crisis and investments in the economy of the future.  He also doubles down on the Netherlands’ longing for political calm, as the country nears the third election in under five years. He champions “stability,” “decency,” and “trust” and wears being boring as a badge of pride.  Addressing a venue packed with entrepreneurs, he promises them a “reliable government” and a long-term investment agenda. “If I speak to entrepreneurs, the first they ask for is not to lower taxes, but what they ask for is: can you please keep things stable in the next few years?” Bontenbal’s spiel is geared toward welcoming the centrist Christian Democratic voters back, as much through style as substance. “The country is longing for a stable government,” he told a candidates’ TV debate Thursday — adding that while Wilders is “the best megaphone for dissatisfaction and anger,” he feels that politicians can do better. “Politics is not a theatre, not a circus,” Bontenbal told the talk show RTL Tonight recently after an analyst said that TV viewers had perceived him as decent yet boring in the first televised debate.  “I’m not ordered to be the funniest or to make the craziest remarks,” Bontenbal added. Being boring is a quality, the analyst agreed.

LONDON — Angela Rayner left the corridors of power under a cloud. On Wednesday, she finally inched out from the shadows. Keir Starmer’s ex-deputy PM and deputy Labour leader gave a personal statement from the House of Commons backbenches after resigning last month.  In her first public comments, Rayner said she would continue to “bring determination, commitment and my socialist values” to parliament. Rayner stepped down as the PM’s second in command after failing to pay the correct amount of tax — known as stamp duty — on the purchase of a second property. In the immediate aftermath of her exit, she retreated from the public eye by skipping Labour’s conference in Liverpool, giving no interviews and posting just two tweets. Her silence after years in the political trenches was notable.  The MP for Ashton-under-Lyne was undoubtedly bruised by quitting such a high-profile role. “The last few weeks have been incredibly tough on my family with my personal life so much in the public eye,” Rayner admitted. “All of us in public life know all too well the toll of the intense scrutiny we face places on our loved ones.” Her speech signals a tentative first attempt to influence from the outside — though it could be a hard journey ahead. “My title may have changed, but the strength and the character of the people of my constituency have not.” CRITICAL FRIEND  Since entering parliament in 2015, Rayner has virtually only known life on the front benches. She was appointed shadow education secretary in 2016, following mass resignations from hard-left Leader Jeremy Corbyn’s Shadow Cabinet, where she remained until Starmer took charge in 2020. “I knew that Angela would make quite an impression in parliament and so she did,” said former Environment Minister Daniel Zeichner, who became an MP at the same time as Rayner. One former colleague, granted anonymity to speak candidly, said Rayner was “a company politician and has literally not had any time away from frontline politics in over nine years.” “I don’t think anyone would ever accuse her of bending in the wind, whoever the leader was,” said a second former minister. “People are frightened of Angela Rayner because she’s the genuine politician,” argued one left-wing Labour MP. “She wears her heart on her sleeve. She sees things the way that she sees them. She doesn’t sugarcoat issues.” Some see an obvious berth for Rayner as a voice on the soft left of the governing party. Both leadership contenders battling to replace Rayner — Lucy Powell and Bridget Phillipson — have called for the two-child benefit cap, which limits some social security payments for families with more than two kids, to be lifted. The ex-deputy PM could play an influential role should she choose to join that cause.  “If Angela came to the fore, she would bring that support from other members of the PLP [Parliamentary Labour Party] who perhaps would be wavering,” the MP above said. “That would be extremely, extremely important.”  “I’m really looking forward to hearing what she has to say with her new voice,” said MP Rachael Maskell, who was suspended from Labour over her own rebellion on welfare reform. “Where our paths cross, she’ll be a huge asset,” Maskell said.  Rayner has spoken movingly about her son’s lifelong disabilities and juggling a blended family. “If there is one good thing that can come out of this, I hope that other families in this situation may now be aware of that and avoid getting into the position that I am now in,” said Rayner. “You need to have stability for your kids and maintain all parental relationships,” said another Labour MP about balancing politics with familial responsibilities. “It’s a bloody nightmare!” Labour looks set to reform support for young people with learning difficulties and disabilities. Rayner’s personal experience could help make her a leading voice, should she choose to step forward. LONG WALK BACK  The first former colleague quoted above said it was likely to have been a “really difficult” transition for Rayner to move to the backbenches, but that the former deputy had been able to “see what she had missed — family, friends — and savor that for a while.” Some hope Rayner’s dramatic exit won’t overshadow her abilities for long. Her working-class background was seen as a rare antidote in Labour’s ranks to Nigel Farage’s populist Reform UK, which consistently leads the government in the opinion polls.  “She’s got a very good common touch which cuts through to people,” said Zeichner, arguing her “life story is clearly of interest way beyond the normal political discourse.”  He added, “I would be surprised if she doesn’t find her way back to the top of politics.”  The left-wing Labour MP quoted above concurred, calling her “too popular just to basically wither away on the vine.”  The second former minister quoted above suggested Rayner could be a good corrective to “one small clique … running the whole show” at the top of government — and said many MP colleagues would still like to see her as party leader at some point in the future. However, that consensus was not universal. Rayner “made a big mistake which she ought to have avoided,” decried a second left-wing Labour MP. “She needs to be out of the front line for the foreseeable future.” Ultimately, there’s no guarantee a top-table return will happen, regardless of Rayner’s ambition. Tory MP Andrew Mitchell endured a decade in the wilderness between resigning as chief whip in 2012 and making a comeback in a senior Foreign Office job in 2022. “It’s true that in politics you should never say never about almost anything,” he reflected. “Always remember that the two irreducible qualities required for success are boundless energy and a skin as thick as a rhinoceros!” “Backbench or frontbench, elected office is not about us, but about our chance to change the lives of others,” Rayner concluded. “From wherever I sit on these benches, I will fight with everything I have to do exactly that.” Esther Webber contributed to this report.

The European Central Bank’s staff union is taking the bank to court, accusing ECB management of trying to silence and intimidate its representatives in violation of the principles of European democracy. The case, lodged with the European Court of Justice on Oct. 13, marks the latest escalation in a battle between union representatives and management, where relations have deteriorated since Christine Lagarde took over as ECB president in 2019. The action contests a series of letters the bank addressed to the International and European Public Services Organization (IPSO) union and one of its senior representatives “restricting staff and union representatives from speaking publicly about workplace concerns, such as favoritism and the ‘culture of fear’ at the ECB,” the union said in a statement. These letters constitute “an unlawful interference” with basic freedoms guaranteed by the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights, the union said. “Freedom of expression and association are not privileges; they are the foundation of the European project.” An ECB spokesperson said the bank does not comment on court cases, but that it “is firmly committed to the freedom of expression and the rule of law, operating within a clear employment framework that is closely aligned with EU Staff Regulations and is subject to European Court of Justice scrutiny.” The first letter, signed by the ECB’s Chief Services Officer Myriam Moufakkir, came in response to an interview given by union spokesperson Carlos Bowles to Germany’s Boersen-Zeitung daily paper, published May 7. In it, Bowles had warned that a culture of fear may contribute to self-censorship, groupthink and poor policy decisions. The interview came at a time when the ECB’s failure to anticipate the worst bout of inflation in half a century had provoked widespread and public soul-searching by policymakers. It also followed a union survey in which around two-thirds of respondents said being in the good graces of powerful figures was the key to career advancement at the ECB, rather than job performance.   IPSO IS A FOUR-LETTER WORD According to the IPSO union, Moufakkir responded with a letter stressing that staff and union representatives must not make public claims of a “culture of fear” within the institution or its possible effects on ECB operations — including its forecasting work, which had come under especially intense scrutiny. It also accused Bowles of breaching his duty of loyalty under the ECB’s internal code of conduct, and instructed him to refrain from public statements that could “damage the ECB’s reputation.” A later letter by Moufakkir, addressed to IPSO dated Aug. 1 and seen by POLITICO, spells out the thinking. In it she stresses that the right of “staff representatives … to address the media without prior approval … applies exclusively to ‘matters falling within their mandate’. It does not apply to the ECB’s conduct of monetary policy, including its response to inflation.” In his interview, Bowles made no reference to current or future policy but rather to a work environment that he said fostered groupthink. Lagarde herself had warned against such risks, denouncing economists the previous year in Davos as a “tribal clique” and arguing that a diversity of views leads to better outcomes. Bowles had made similar statements to the media before, such as in an interview with the Handelsblatt daily paper published in January 2016, without eliciting any reaction from the bank’s management. Contacted by POLITICO for this story, the ECB said it had “stringent measures to ensure analytical work meets the highest standards of academic rigor and objectivity, which are essential to the ECB’s mandate of price stability and banking supervision.” Moufakkir suggested that Bowles’ comments undermine trust in the ECB and that this trust is crucial if the ECB is to deliver on its mandate. “Freedom of expression, which constitutes a fundamental right, does not override the duty of loyalty to which all ECB staff are bound,” she argued. Bowles rejected that framing, arguing in a letter to Moufakkir that he had a “professional obligation” to address such issues and their impact on the ECB’s capacity to fulfil its mission. PAPER TRAIL The trouble, according to the union, is that Moufakkir addressed the first two letters to an individual union representative (Bowles) who was speaking on its behalf, effectively undermining the union’s collective voice.  In her email, the union said, Moufakkir also “heavily misrepresented” Bowles’s comments and accused him of misconduct without affording him a hearing. In her letter from Aug. 1, Moufakkir maintained that her original letter to Bowles “was not a formal decision” to be recorded in his personal file, but rather a “reminder and clarification of applicable rules.”  “Its purpose was not to intimidate or silence Mr Bowles but to highlight to him the importance of prudence and external communications about ECB matters,” she wrote. The union said it sees this framing as an effort by the ECB to shield itself from judicial review: the letter addressed to Bowles was marked ECB-CONFIDENTIAL and Personal, conveying the impression of an official document. According to a person familiar with the matter, a special appeal launched by Bowles to the executive board to retract Moufakkir’s instruction has since been dismissed — without addressing its substance — because the letters had no binding legal effect and were therefore inadmissible. That has now prompted the union to turn to the ECJ; a response to a second appeal by Bowles remains outstanding. The union said that what it perceived as attempts by the ECB to silence union representatives have succeeded: Previously scheduled media interviews have been “cancelled due to fear of retaliation.” When contacted for comment, Bowles declined, citing the same reason. WHAT COMES NEXT? The ECB will have two months to submit its defense to the court. As an EU institution, the ECB is neither subject to German labor laws nor to similar rules in other EU member states and instead enjoys extensive scope to set and interpret its own rules. Out of 91 employment-related court cases since the bank’s inception, the ECB has won 71. Regardless of the legal implications, the union warned that the ECB’s approach undermines its institutional integrity and damages its credibility.  “Silencing staff representatives or whistleblowers prevents legitimate issues from being addressed and erodes trust in the institution,” it said. “Reputation cannot be protected by censorship — it must be earned through sound governance, transparency and open dialogue.” It sees the letter as part of a broader pattern in which the ECB has sought to restrict trade union activity and control staff representation, including planned changes to a representation framework that would limit the participation of union members in the ECB staff committee. IPSO is the sole trade union recognized by the ECB and holds seven out of the nine seats on the ECB’s staff committee, which is elected by all ECB staff. The ECB, for its part, has rejected much of the criticism emerging from survey organized by the union and the staff committee, which showed widespread distrust of leadership, surging burnout levels, and complaints about favoritism. The ECB has called the surveys methodologically flawed and unreliable.

In a court in southeast England, a man in his forties awaits trial over an assault that allegedly took place in September 2024. The trial won’t get underway until September 2026 — at the earliest. In the meantime, as a condition of his bail, the judge has ordered the defendant to sleep at home, meaning he will miss out on nights with one of his children from a previous relationship. The man has refused to plead, telling the judge he doesn’t agree with the court’s jurisdiction — even though he originally chose it. The defendant could have been tried at a Magistrates’ Court — the lowest criminal court in England and Wales — where a panel of volunteer justices might have dealt with the case in an hour. Instead, he gambled on a full trial in the Crown Court, where 12 members of the public, often less prone to convict than magistrates, will decide his fate. It’s a tradeoff future defendants may not have the opportunity to make, as England’s once-lauded court system creaks at the seams. A growing backlog of cases has prompted the United Kingdom’s Labour government to search for radical ways to make English justice more efficient. Among the recommendations being considered are new restrictions on jury trials. Since 2019, the average length of time between a case arriving at the Crown Court and being completed has rocketed 70 percent, to 239 days. Across England and Wales some 80,000 cases are awaiting trial, with some now starting to be scheduled as far away as December 2029. The case backlog is expected to hit around 105,000 by spring 2029, according to official forecasts —even with extra funding to put judges on the bench for longer and the rollout of temporary “Nightingale courts,” created to handle the cases that racked up after the Covid lockdowns. The accused wait, and so must their victims. Mary Prior, a senior barrister who until September was chair of the Criminal Bar Association, warns that the consequences of the pileup go beyond justice being delayed, or even denied. A broken justice machine can lead to a broken society. Prior says furious members of the public could attempt to take the law into their own hands, citing the 2024 riots across Britain after three girls were murdered in Southport: “Riots arise because people don’t think the law is working for them.” The government has turned to retired judge Brian Leveson to fix the crisis. Among a list of ideas, he proposes letting magistrates hand down sentences of up to two years — double the current limit — which would divert many serious cases away from the Crown Court. He also suggests reducing some sentences to fit under that new cap. Meanwhile, Leveson suggests creating a new mid-tier court, where a judge and two magistrates would oversee trials with expected sentences of up to three years. The government has turned to retired judge Brian Leveson to fix the crisis. | Peter Macdiarmid/Getty Images The measures combined would slash the role of juries. The Labour government is expected to sign off on the plans in the coming months. But insiders warn the changes could undermine fairness for defendants — and won’t make a real dent in the backlog unless ministers find the money to undo decades of cuts and neglect. “The whole system is both figuratively and literally crumbling and falling around our ears,” says Law Society President Richard Atkinson. He lamented the system’s crippling inefficiencies and the dire condition of the buildings. “It is a truly horrendous picture.” Indeed, time appears to slow down in the courts. There is no such thing as punctuality. Nobody questions a 15-minute pause in proceedings stretching into 30 minutes or an hour. Cases often get going late in the morning and break for the night in the mid-afternoon.  Despite the need to reduce the case backlog, more than a fifth of courtrooms sit vacant each day due to organizational, maintenance and personnel issues. Jurors and dock officers fall asleep in public view. Hold-ups and mistakes that leave victims and defendants waiting extra weeks or months for justice are the accepted norm. One ambitious starter, observing court at the beginning of her Crown Prosecution Service career, says the system is rife with “mismanagement,” sighing: “By the end of day two, I thought: Now I understand the backlogs.” One ambitious starter, observing court at the beginning of her Crown Prosecution Service career, says the system is rife with “mismanagement.” | Andy Rain/EPA POLITICO spent a week visiting England’s Crown Courts, speaking to dozens of barristers, judges, clerks, probation staff, defendants and their families, to understand how a best-in-class justice machine came to be broken, and whether it can be fixed. WONDERING WHEN JUSTICE MIGHT BEGIN A defense barrister lets out a deep sigh as she contemplates another wasted day at Isleworth Crown Court in west London. The defendant in her morning hearing, an attempted strangulation case, failed to show up — she thinks because he was never told about the court date — and the defendant in her afternoon hearing is nowhere to be found either.  (The names of the defendants mentioned in this piece have been withheld to comply with U.K. law aimed at not prejudicing trial verdicts.) The defense barrister, who asked to remain anonymous to speak freely about the court system, had worked late preparing for the hearings. Both were listed, as usual, mere hours before their scheduled start times. She gets paid for her court appearances after each case concludes — an indefinite point in the future. But she doesn’t get paid for the prep, which could be 30 hours for a serious case. And the fee for failed hearings is lower, despite the wasted time on paperwork and travel.  “It’s a slog,” she laments, staring at the patches of duct tape holding the stained carpets together in the corridor. “It’s relentless. The caseloads are insane.” Days when none of her hearings go ahead are far too frequent, and becoming more regular. Sometimes the prison transport contractors fail to bring defendants. | Tolga Akmen/EPA Sometimes the prison transport contractors fail to bring defendants; sometimes the probation service forgets to tell a bailed defendant they are due in court; sometimes a document or a staff member is missing; sometimes evidence is not up to scratch or has not been shared with the relevant legal teams; sometimes the prisons haven’t granted the barrister access to meet their clients; sometimes a video link isn’t working; sometimes a translator who speaks the wrong language has been sent; sometimes there are building maintenance issues. The list goes on. The government argues new tech will fix the administrative bottlenecks, but those in the trenches are more skeptical. “Our overlords claim AI is going to solve all our problems, but we just want a fucking printer that works,” one usher snorted.   Tech can’t fix crumbling buildings. In 2016, ceilings in Maidstone dripped toilet water onto jurors and barristers during a rape trial. Just this summer, floodwater cascaded down the walls of the most high-profile criminal court in Britain.  As the defense barrister wonders whether her second case will go ahead, a clerk wanders the long, windowless Isleworth corridor, clutching a clipboard. The case in her courtroom was meant to start 30 minutes earlier, but the police officer running it has gone AWOL. A screen flickers with the title of a case in another court, but the information is wrong; that trial wrapped up last week. In court 3, the trial didn’t get going until 3 p.m. because the defense barrister was late. The case in her courtroom was meant to start 30 minutes earlier, but the police officer running it has gone AWOL. | Neil Hall/EPA Finally, just as the court considers giving up on the hearing and closing for the afternoon, the barrister’s second defendant appears, making excuses about sickness and a problem with the trains. The 18-year-old saunters in wearing a grey tracksuit and clutching a plastic bag with a couple of drinks inside. He’s been charged with assault against a police officer and pleads not guilty.  The judge schedules his case for March 2029 — four years after the alleged offense. “This is my first time in adult court,” he says after the hearing. “When this is done, I’ll be, like, 22. It just seems like no one really cares.” Other defendants that morning also got trial dates for 2028 and 2029. “I’m very sorry about that,” Judge Edward Connell told one about the long wait. TOUGH ON CRIME, SOFT ON THE CONSEQUENCES OF CRIME Under the Leveson reform proposals, the 18-year-old’s case would be heard in the magistrates’ court. Before 2018, it would also have been heard in the magistrates’ court. But the politicians got involved. A proposal passed by the Conservative government that year made assaults on emergency workers a specific offense and triable in the Crown Court. In 2022, the possible prison sentence was doubled from one year to two, again increasing the chance of cases being sent to the higher court as the government flexed its “tough on crime” muscles. In 2022, the possible prison sentence was doubled from one year to two, again increasing the chance of cases being sent to the higher court as the government flexed its “tough on crime” muscles. | Andy Rain/EPA Nevertheless, sentences for hitting or spitting at a police officer rarely top the 6-month prison sentence magistrates could impose before November 2024 — never mind the new 12-month threshold the government increased it to that month in a bid to reduce pressure on the Crown Court. Almost all assault cases of this nature now go to juries, clogging the machine. Earlier this year, the backlog of police assault cases got so bad that prosecutors changed their guidelines to basically ignore the 2018 law. “We’re chasing our tail around all sorts of offences that have become political,” one barrister says. It’s not uncommon for politicians to try to look tough on crime without considering the consequences, says the Conservative former Justice Secretary Alex Chalk. There are few restraints on a “big ego” in the Home Office wanting to “burnish their own political credentials” regardless of the added pressure on the courts, he says.  A tougher stance against sexual offenses and increased efforts to ensure rape cases make it to court have further contributed to the pileup. But the move to take what are often complicated cases more seriously has not been matched with funding for the courts to deal with them, and that squeeze has made matters worse. It’s not uncommon for politicians to try to look tough on crime without considering the consequences, says the Conservative former Justice Secretary Alex Chalk. | Tolga Akmen/EPA Mary Prior, the former chair of the Criminal Bar Association, was in summer prosecuting a child sexual assault case. The two victims gave evidence under a 1999 rule allowing cross-examinations to be filmed long before a trial might start. The rule was designed to make the ordeal less traumatic for kids, but has led to unintended consequences. Once the sensitive evidence is gathered, any impetus to ensure a quick trial evaporates. The case Prior was prosecuting was postponed four times before going ahead in 2025 at Leicester Crown Court — three and a half years after the victims first went to the police. One victim completed school, then further education in the interim, and self-harmed each time the case was put off. The accused has now been found guilty. “I don’t think it’s that long away where a father of a child who’s been abused, who has been waiting three or four years for a trial, just goes and takes the law into their own hands,” says Prior. ‘BREAKING POINT’ The list of factors contributing to the pileup runs long. Advances in forensics and the use of smartphone data have made cases more complex, while some 20,000 police officers were cut then replaced with new recruits less experienced in handling and preparing evidence for trial. And then there are the funding cuts: Between 2010 and 2018, the Conservatives slashed spending on the courts by 20 percent in real terms. More than half of court buildings were closed down over the same period. Staff numbers are now down 20 percent on 2010 levels.  Chalk, who after leaving politics returned full-time as a barrister, argues it was “a mistake to cut funding from what was already an underfunded department.” It’s little surprise the system has struggled to attract and retain probation staff, solicitors and barristers — all of which compounds the existing delays. “Everybody is working close to breaking point,” says a barrister in the robing room at Leicester Crown Court, in the English Midlands, where case binders are piled high on the tables and a notice encourages staff to use the in-house cafeteria — despite its having closed down months ago. “These days I tend to give up on deadlines, because I want to have a life.” In 2022, barristers went on an extended strike over cuts to their wages — further increasing the backlog. Few in the system think reducing jury trials will solve the problems. Most people POLITICO spoke to argued the Leveson reforms sounded like a poor fix for chronic underfunding and risked more wrongful convictions in serious cases, since magistrates and judges are more prone to determine guilt. The defense barrister whose clients did not show up says cutting juries will not create more barristers, staff and courtrooms — “it’s just going to be less fair for defendants.” A sitting judge at Snaresbrook Crown Court in east London says removing juries from important cases “is wrong and not the solution.” A probation officer says justice must be “fair and transparent, and getting rid of juries reduces both.” In 2022, barristers went on an extended strike over cuts to their wages — further increasing the backlog. | Mike Kemp/In Pictures via Getty Images Another barrister says: “If the jury system goes, I go. It’s the reason I do the job.” “We are investing in a record amount of court sitting days and increasing funding for maintenance of our crumbling court buildings,” Sarah Sackman, minister for courts and legal services, told POLITICO. “But we cannot spend our way out of the mess we inherited. That’s why we’ve asked Sir Brian Leveson to propose bold and ambitious measures, so we can do whatever it takes to create a system fit for the 21st century and deliver swifter justice for victims.” POST-TRIAL TRIBULATIONS In a Crown Court southwest of London, a 21-year-old defendant glances over the glass of the dock at his mum, who is wearing a black t-shirt and a black skirt patterned with white flowers. The victim he was convicted of assaulting is also wearing flowers for the occasion — big red poppies on a black dress, over fishnet tights.  The trial is finished, and both have come to hear what his sentence will be. But the judge, Claire Harden-Frost, has questions. “I’m missing quite a lot of information that would assist me, from a prosecution point of view,” she tells the court. It’s little surprise the system has struggled to attract and retain probation staff, solicitors and barristers — all of which compounds the existing delays. | Andy Rain/EPA The prosecution barrister was drafted onto the sentencing at the last minute. She didn’t work on the trial and was not given all the relevant paperwork before the hearing.  Harden-Frost looks up at the clock above the courtroom door. She gives the prosecution barrister an hour to do her best, but in the end has no choice but to postpone the sentencing for another six weeks — the earliest date she and both barristers are available. The 21-year-old’s gran sighs: “I’m very disappointed the prosecution was not better organized, because it’s playing with people’s lives.”

Dutch far-right leader Geert Wilders has put his campaign on hold “until further notice” after being informed that he was among several politicians in the crosshairs of a suspected terrorist group. Wilders, whose Party for Freedom is currently leading in the polls ahead of a snap parliamentary elections set for Oct. 29, said on X Friday evening that the Dutch anti-terror agency NCTV had told him that he had “been named as a target” by a group planning several attacks on politicians including Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever. “This is not the first time this has happened to me … but every time it happens, it shocks me enormously,” Wilders wrote on X. “I have a bad feeling about this and am therefore suspending all my campaign activities until further notice.” Belgian authorities are holding two suspects in connection with a suspected attack on De Wever. Investigators on Thursday said they were probing evidence of plans to use a drone to detonate a potential explosive device for a “jihadist-inspired terrorist attack,” as well as bomb components made with a 3D printer. The foiled plot comes as Europe scrambles to formulate a response to an increasing drone threat in its skies. In the last month, swarms of so-called unmanned aerial vehicles have violated Belgian, Polish, Romanian, Danish and Norwegian airspace. Outgoing Dutch Prime Minister Dick Schoof said it was “completely unacceptable” that Wilders was forced to stop campaigning, with the far-right candidate opting to skip a key radio debate by Dutch state broadcaster NOS late Friday. “I am confident that all security organizations and services involved will work closely together and do everything in their power to ensure that the campaigns and elections proceed safely,” Schoof wrote on X. “This is of the utmost importance for our democracy.” Wilders has been subject to numerous threats in his political career stretching back two decades, including by Al-Qaeda militants in 2020 and a former Pakistani cricketer, who was handed a 12-year prison sentence in absentia for incitement to murder in 2023.