Connect with us

World

2024: Top 10 defining moments in the European Parliament

Published

on

2024: Top 10 defining moments in the European Parliament

From crucial votes on nature and migration, to powerful speeches and hard debates: the year saw drama and upheaval in the Eurochamber

ADVERTISEMENT

2024 was a year of change for the European Parliament, shaken up by the elections in July.

Beyond the vote, which significantly modified its composition and balance of powers, here are some moments to remember from this year.

1. Farmers’ protests reach Parliament

The beginning of 2025 was marked by massive protests of farmers across Europe, from Germany and France to Poland and Spain. 

Among their targets were the EU’s commercial deal with Mercosur countries – at that time negotiations were still ongoing – and some European environmental policies affecting the agrifood sector.

On 1 February, a thousand farmers from several countries arrived in Brussels. After a night procession on their tractors, they occupied the square in front of the European Parliament for an entire day, burning hay, spreading manure and damaging the square. 

Advertisement

2. ‘Stop being boring to defeat Putin’

One of the most powerful and evocative interventions in the European Parliament was Yulia Navalnaya’s in February. She took the floor in the hemicycle in Strasbourg days after her husband, Alexei Navalny, died under suspicious circumstances while imprisoned in Russia.

Navalnaya paid tribute to the opposition leader’s courage and attacked Russia’s president Vladimir Putin, receiving a general standing ovation from MEPs.

“If you really want to defeat Putin, you have to become an innovator. You have to stop being boring,” Navalnaya told MEPs.

“You cannot defeat him by thinking he is a man of principle who has morals and rules. He is not like that. And Alexei realised that a long time ago. You are not dealing with a politician but with a bloody monster.”

3. The final battle on Nature Restoration Law

The Nature Restoration Law, a proposal to gradually rehabilitate the EU’s land and sea areas degraded by climate change and human activity was one of the most contentious issues in the European Parliament in the final part of the legislature.

Advertisement

European People’s Party (EPP) began a full-throttle campaign to bring down the law, arguing it would imperil food production, increase retail prices and devastate the traditional livelihoods of farmers. 

EPP talking points were backed by right-wing forces, but fully contested by progressive MEPs, environmental organisations, legal scholars and even multinationals, who said restoring nature was indispensable to maintain a prosperous economy and sustainable supply chains.

The EPP even pressed on with a controversial social media push, going as far as claiming the legislation would turn the city of Rovaniemi, where Santa Claus lives, into a forest. 

In February, the Parliament eventually approved a watered-down version of the law with 329 votes in favour and 275 against. It entails the restoration of at least 20% of the EU’s land and sea areas by 2030, and of all ecosystems in need by 2050.

4. The long-sought vote on the major migration policy reform

In April 2024, the European Parliament approved the wide-reaching reform of the European Union’s migration and asylum policy almost four years after the European Commission had proposed it.

Advertisement
ADVERTISEMENT

The “Pact on migration and asylum” was supported by the three major Parliament groups: European People’s Party (EPP), Socialists and Democrats (S&D), and Renew Europe, albeit with some dissidents. 

The right-wing parties, the Greens/EFA and the Left group voted against. The latter even protested outside Parliament before the vote, staging a “funeral for the right to asylum” that it claimed the new rules would usher in.

New rules foresee a solidarity mechanism to share the burdens of welcoming asylum seekers, through a redistribution among the member states which can be replaced with financial contributions. But they also entail stricter border controls and faster procedures for examining asylum requests and carrying out the repatriation of migrants. The Pact will be fully in force from mid-2026.

5. The Parliament backs abortion as an EU fundamental right

Even symbolic votes could cause hard clashes in the European Parliament. In April, the Chamber approved a resolution to include the right to abortion in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

ADVERTISEMENT

As the topic is very divisive, the Parliament split. The resolution was approved with 336 votes in favour, 163 against, and 39 abstentions. The right-wing groups Identity and Democracy and European Conservatives and Reformists voted against, as did the majority of the centre-right conservative European People’s Party, the largest group of the Parliament.

However, the vote did not have a binding effect. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU requires the unanimous agreement of all member states to be changed. The rules for terminating pregnancy also fall within health legislation, which is the exclusive competence of EU countries.

6. The final rush before the European elections

Members of the European Parliament often run to the last available moment to approve important pieces of legislation. In its last session before the elections, the EP held 89 votes on legislative files, plus seven non-legislative resolutions, marking a record for the entire legislature.

Advertisement

Among them, there were the right-to-repair directive, a regulation to prohibit products made with forced labour on the Union market, new rules for digital platform workers, a bill on packaging reduction, and the first-ever European law against gender-based violence.

ADVERTISEMENT

7. The ‘Venezuela majority’ in Europe

After the vote, the new European Parliament soon revealed its changed balance of powers, even if in a mostly symbolic vote. In September, the Strasbourg hemicycle voted to recognise Venezuela’s exiled presidential candidate Edmundo González Urrutia as the “legitimate and democratically elected president”.

The resolution, which carried no legal weight, was backed by the centre-right European People’s Party (EPP), the right-wing nationalist European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) and the newly formed far-right Patriots for Europe, marking the first time in the new legislature that mainstream conservatives joined ranks with the more right-wing groups.

This alliance was renamed the “Venezuela majority”, following the subject of the vote, and resurfaced during the decision to award González and Venezuela’s opposition leader María Corina Machado the Parliament’s Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought.

8. Von der Leyen vs Orbán: showdown in the Parliament

The first October plenary session saw a fiery debate pitching European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen against Hungary’s prime minister Viktor Orbán, who took the stage in the European Parliament a few months after a controversial visit to Moscow made while Hungary occupied the rotating presidency of the Council of the EU.

ADVERTISEMENT

The war in Ukraine was one of the bones of contention, with the Hungarian leader claiming that the EU had adopted a mistaken policy on the war and the Commission president launching a personal attack on him without mentioning his name: “There are still some who blame this war not on the invader but on the invaded.”

9. The unpopular approval of the European Commission

At the end of November, the European Parliament definitively approved the College of Commissioners led by Ursula von der Leyen. But while the vote on the Commission’s President herself in July was a success for von der Leyen, she could barely celebrate the approval of the College. 

Advertisement

In November, only 370 MEPs voted in favour, representing 54% of all votes cast and 51% of the total number of members, 719. 

Several defections came from among the centre-right European People’s Party, the centre-left Socialists and Democrats and the liberal Renew Europe, lowering support for the Commission, which was “saved” by the votes of part of the European Conservatives and Reformists and the Greens/EFA group. 

ADVERTISEMENT

Indeed, for one reason or another, only one in two lawmakers has endorsed the new College of Commissioners.

10. Weirdness and oddities in the Eurochamber

2024 also witnessed some surreal moments during the debates in the Parliament: a dog barking in the hemicycle, an Irish MEP insulting an Italian football club, and a Slovak MEP releasing a dove as a gesture of peace.

Advertisement

World

Colin Farrell Says Tom Cruise ‘Was Not Happy’ on ‘Minority Report’ Set After Farrell Drank Before Filming and Needed to Do 46 Takes of One Scene: ‘It Went Terrible’

Published

on

Colin Farrell Says Tom Cruise ‘Was Not Happy’ on ‘Minority Report’ Set After Farrell Drank Before Filming and Needed to Do 46 Takes of One Scene: ‘It Went Terrible’

Colin Farrell revealed to Stephen Colbert on “The Late Show” that Tom Cruise “was not happy” with him during the making of Steven Spielberg’s “Minority Report.” Farrell was in the midst of his substance abuse struggles during production and went out partying the night before his birthday, which happened to be a filming day.

“I had one of the worst days I’ve ever had on a film set [on ‘Minority Report’],” Farrell admitted. “It was my birthday on May 31, and we were shooting, and I begged production — who did I think I was? — of a $120 million film if they [could] not have me working on my birthday. So of course my pickup was 6 a.m. on May 31, and I got up to all sorts of nonsense the night before. And I remember getting into bed, and as soon as I turned off the light the phone rang and it was the driver, [who] said, ‘It’s 10 past 6.’ And I went, ‘Oh, shit.’” 

Farrell was disheveled when he showed up on the “Minority Report” set, so much so that assistant director David H. Venghaus Jr. stopped him and said: “You can’t go to the set like this.’”

“And I went, ‘Just get me six Pacifico Cervezas and a packet of 20 [Marlboro] Red,’” Farrell said. “Now, listen, it’s not cool because two years later I went to rehab, right? But it worked in the moment. All the holy people that we look to on how to live a life would say the present is all that counts.”

Farrell “had a couple of beers” and went to set and “it was terrible,” he said. “I will never forget the line I had that I couldn’t get out. It was, ‘I’m sure you’ve all grasped the fundamental paradox of pre-crime methodology.’ That was the line that started the scene. I remember [the crew] coming up and saying, ‘Do you want to go out and take a breath of fresh air?’ And I remember thinking, ‘If I go out and take a breath of fresh air, then I’ll be under more pressure when I come back in to be better.’ And I went, ‘No, we’ll just go through it.’”

Advertisement

“We did 46 takes,” Farrell revealed. “Tom wasn’t very happy with me. Tom, who I love, was not very happy!”

Loosely based on Philip K. Dick’s 1956 novella, “Minority Report” is set in a future where police apprehend criminals by using psychics who give them foreknowledge of the impending crime. Cruise’s police chief is framed for a crime he did not commit, forcing him on the run. Farrell plays the police agent assigned with bringing Cruise’s character in. The movie was a critical favorite and grossed a strong $358 million worldwide.

Watch Farrell’s full interview on “The Late Show” in the video below.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

World

Hegseth says military conducted another strike on boat carrying alleged narco-terrorists

Published

on

Hegseth says military conducted another strike on boat carrying alleged narco-terrorists

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth announced the U.S. military on Wednesday struck another boat carrying people he claims were narco-terrorists.

The strikes were carried out in the Eastern Pacific region at the direction of President Donald Trump, killing four men on board, according to Hegseth.

The military “carried out a lethal kinetic strike on yet another narco-trafficking vessel operated by a Designated Terrorist Organization (DTO) in the Eastern Pacific,” Hegseth wrote on X.

“This vessel, like all the others, was known by our intelligence to be involved in illicit narcotics smuggling, was transiting along a known narco-trafficking route, and carrying narcotics,” he said. “Four male narco-terrorists were aboard the vessel — and killed — during the strike, which was conducted in international waters. No U.S. forces were harmed in this strike.”

Advertisement

US STRIKES ANOTHER ALLEGED DRUG-TRAFFICKING BOAT NEAR VENEZUELA, KILLING 4

  (Secretary of War Pete Hegseth via X)

“The Western Hemisphere is no longer a safe haven for narco-terrorists bringing drugs to our shores to poison Americans,” Hegseth added. “The Department of War will continue to hunt them down and eliminate them wherever they operate.”

This is the 14th strike on suspected drug boats carried out since September. A total of 61 have reportedly been killed while three survived, including at least two who were later repatriated to their home countries.

The Pentagon has refused to release the identities of those killed or evidence of drugs on board.

Advertisement

US DEPLOYS FORD CARRIER STRIKE GROUP TO COMBAT NARCO-TERROR IN WESTERN HEMISPHERE

Pete Hegseth addresses generals at Quantico.

Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth announced the U.S. military struck another boat carrying who he claims were narco-terrorists. (Kevin Lamarque/Reuters)

The Trump administration has been scrutinized in recent weeks over the strikes, including by Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who raised concerns about killing people without due process and the possibility of killing innocent people.

Paul has cited Coast Guard statistics that show a significant percentage of boats boarded for suspicion of drug trafficking are innocent.

The senator has also argued that if the administration plans to engage in a war with Venezuela after it has targeted boats it claims are transporting drugs for the Venezuela-linked Tren de Aragua gang, it must seek a declaration of war from Congress.

Pentagon

The Pentagon has refused to release the identities of those killed or evidence of drugs on board. (Reuters)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Advertisement

Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee also penned a letter Wednesday demanding to review the legal justification behind the series of boat strikes they say appear to violate several laws.

“Drug trafficking is a terrible crime that has had devastating impacts on American families and communities and should be prosecuted. Nonetheless, the President’s actions to hold alleged drug traffickers accountable must still conform with the law,” the letter states.

Continue Reading

World

RFK Jr walks back Trump administration’s claims linking Tylenol and autism

Published

on

RFK Jr walks back Trump administration’s claims linking Tylenol and autism

Kennedy, a top health official, urges ‘cautious approach’ after Trump baselessly claimed taking Tylenol is linked autism in children.

United States Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr has partially walked back his warning that taking Tylenol during pregnancy is directly linked to autism in children.

In a news conference on Wednesday, Kennedy struck a more moderate tone than he generally has in his past public appearances.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

“The causative association between Tylenol given in pregnancy and the perinatal periods is not sufficient to say it definitely causes autism,” Kennedy told reporters. “But it’s very suggestive.”

“There should be a cautious approach to it,” he added. “ That’s why our message to patients, to mothers, to people who are pregnant and to the mothers of young children is: Consult your physician.”

Advertisement

Wednesday’s statement is closer in line with the guidance of reputable health agencies.

While some studies have raised the possibility of a link between Tylenol and autism, there have been no conclusive findings. Pregnant women are advised to consult a doctor before taking the medication.

The World Health Organization reiterated the point in September, noting that “no consistent association has been established” between the medication and autism, despite “extensive research”.

But claims to the contrary have already prompted efforts to limit the availability of Tylenol, a popular brand of acetaminophen, a fever- and pain-reducing medication.

On Tuesday, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton launched a lawsuit accusing Johnson & Johnson and Kenvue, the companies behind the over-the-counter pain reliever, of deceptive practices.

Advertisement

In doing so, he reiterated misinformation shared by President Donald Trump and government officials like Kennedy.

“By holding Big Pharma accountable for poisoning our people, we will help Make America Healthy Again,” Paxton said in a statement, giving a nod to Kennedy’s MAHA slogan.

The suit alleges that Johnson & Johnson and Kenvue violated Texas consumer protection laws by having “deceptively marketed Tylenol as the only safe painkiller for pregnant women”.

It was the latest instance of scientific misinformation being perpetuated by top officials. Both Trump and Kennedy have repeatedly spread scientific misinformation throughout their political careers.

Trump linked autism and the painkiller during a news conference in September, without providing reputable scientific findings to back the claim.

Advertisement

“[Using] acetaminophen – is that OK? – which is basically, commonly known as Tylenol, during pregnancy can be associated with a very increased risk of autism,” Trump said on September 22. “So taking Tylenol is not good. I’ll say it. It’s not good.”

Kennedy has offered his own sweeping statements about Tylenol and its alleged risks, despite having no professional medical background.

“Anyone who takes this stuff during pregnancy, unless they have to, is irresponsible,” he said in a cabinet meeting on October 9.

Kennedy also mischaracterised studies on male circumcision earlier this month. He falsely said the studies showed an increase in autism among children who were “circumcised early”.

“It’s highly likely because they’re given Tylenol,” he added.

Advertisement

Kenvue stressed in a statement on Tuesday that acetaminophen is the safest pain reliever option for pregnant women, noting that high fevers and pain are potential risks to pregnancies if left untreated.

“We stand firmly with the global medical community that acknowledges the safety of acetaminophen and believe we will continue to be successful in litigation as these claims lack legal merit and scientific support,” Kenvue said.

Continue Reading

Trending