World
EU Parliament leaders recall term's highs and lows at last sitting
As Members of the European Parliament gathered in Strasbourg for the last plenary session before June’s elections, Euronews asked the presidents of major political groups to reflect on the highs and lows of the past five-year mandate.
Manfred Weber – European People’s Party (EPP)
Asked to recall the mandate’s biggest success, the chairman of the centre-right EPP group harked back to the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic.
“The biggest achievement for sure was to restart the European economic engine after the corona crisis. The Recovery Resilience Fund was for sure the most important decision in this mandate,” he explained, recalling the EU’s record-smashing €723.8 billion temporary recovery instrument.
Weber also named measures taken to curb climate change among his biggest highlights, despite his EPP party coming under fire for a recent backlash against the Green Deal, the bloc’s landmark set of laws to curb rising global temperatures.
Unsurprisingly, the Parliament’s biggest failure according to Weber was its decision not to uphold the so-called Spitzenkandidaten process, whereby each party fields a lead candidate to bid for the Commission presidency. Weber himself was pushed aside by EU leaders in his bid to preside over the EU’s powerful executive arm back in 2019, which led to Ursula von der Leyen being parachuted into the role despite not officially running.
“We (the parliament) did a big mistake not supporting the Spitzenkandidaten idea, the idea to have a democratic Europe where people know before they go to the elections who the candidate will be,” he explained, censuring his coalition partners for not backing the idea.
Iratxe García Pérez – Socialists and Democrats (S&D)
For the socialists’ president, the term is too full of successes to select one: “It’s been a very intense, exceptional and extraordinary legislature,” she said, listing Brexit, the post-pandemic recovery and the EU response to the war in Ukraine as major achievements.
“We’ve been able to answer all those challenges while maintaining (focus on) Europe’s priorities: spurring on the green agenda, the rule of law and all the policies needed to maintain the European social pillar.”
She also hailed the first EU law to combat violence against women, approved on Wednesday, as a momentous achievement, despite its failure to include any provisions on rape after pushback from member states.
When asked about the mandate’s low points, García Pérez denounced the bloc’s failure to conclude the embattled Nature Restoration Law, the EU’s plan to reverse biodiversity loss in at least 20% of the EU’s land and sea by the end of the decade. The bill is currently on the brink of collapse as member states withdraw support.
Philippe Lamberts – The Greens
The Greens group’s co-president, who bid an emotional farewell to the hemicycle on Wednesday after 15 years as an MEP, told Euronews he was most proud of the parliament’s achievements in shaping the Green Deal, which he said were “the first steps only in the transition of the EU in trying to meet (…) our share in meeting the planetary boundaries.”
“It’s far from complete, despite what many say,” he added, in a clear nod to the right-leaning groups in the parliament.
The first of two failures from Lamberts’ point of view were the new fiscal rules, designed to return to tighter fiscal controls following laxer rules post-pandemic, which were rubber-stamped this week. He described the new norms as a “fiscal straitjacket” that will make the Green Deal and supporting Ukraine “financially impossible.”
He also spurned the asylum and migration pact, the sweeping overhaul of the EU’s migration and asylum policy, which he believes “will not solve anything” and is “just making a joke of the European values.”
Nicola Procaccini – European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR)
The co-president of the right-wing conservative ECR group hailed the parliament’s response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as one of the mandate’s biggest successes.
“At that moment, the European Union understood the danger,” he explained, hailing the 13 package of sanctions against Russia and the bloc’s unprecedented donations of economic and military aid.
He added that had the EU not unwaveringly backed the people of Ukraine, the bloc would have risked triggering a chain of events that could have “set fire to the whole of Europe.”
For Procaccini, developing the Green Deal “without interacting with the people” it impacts was the parliament’s greatest error. In their manifesto agreed Tuesday, his ECR group vowed to turn the Green Deal “on its head.”
Marco Zanni – Identity and Democracy (ID)
For the parliament’s far-right group, the biggest win of the mandate was having brought its priorities to the agenda of the parliament, despite being a “minority group,” its president told Euronews.
ADVERTISEMENTZanni named immigration, the “protection” of farmers and a more “pragmatic approach” to the Green Deal as some of the issues it had brought to the table.
“In short, we have managed to modify the agenda of the parliament,” he claimed.
He said that there were “many issues and failures” in the parliament’s work, but named the chamber’s long-standing “cordon sanitaire,” the firewall designed to ward off the far-right from wielding much influence, as its biggest downfall.
“It is a pity that there are still some here who believe that some (parties) should be excluded just because they have different ideas,” Zanni said.
World
FACT FOCUS: Norway brought its own food to the World Cup. But not because it distrusts US products
As Norway excels in its first World Cup appearance since 1998, false claims about what the team is eating are also grabbing attention online.
The allegations focus on the quality of American food — more specifically, that the Norwegians distrust it so much that they brought food from home to avoid eating it. Norway’s team is based in Greensboro, North Carolina, for the duration of the 2026 tournament, which is being co-hosted by the U.S., Canada and Mexico.
It’s true that the team shipped certain products from Norway for the World Cup, but the reason has nothing to do with concerns about quality.
Norway fans perform a rowing ritual prior to the World Cup Group I soccer match between Senegal and Norway in East Rutherford, N.J., near New York, Monday, June 22, 2026. (AP Photo/Yuki Iwamura)
Here’s a closer look at the facts.
CLAIM: The Norwegian men’s national soccer team brought its own food to the 2026 World Cup because it doesn’t trust the quality of food in the U.S.
THE FACTS: This is false. The team brought some products from Norway to maintain consistency in players’ diets and provide a taste of home, according to its head chef Aron Espeland. Other ingredients have been sourced locally. Nutrition experts say that such a practice is common among elite athletes who play internationally.
“When athletes are competing at the highest level, consistency is important,” Espeland said. “The players are used to certain products and flavors, and familiar foods can contribute both to nutrition and overall well-being during a demanding competition.”
He continued: “Overall, the experience of cooking for the team in the U.S. has been excellent. We have had access to high-quality local ingredients, and our approach has been to combine those with a selection of Norwegian products that help create continuity and a sense of home for the players during the tournament.”
Many of the claims spreading online say the team brought in 1,000 kilograms (2,200 pounds) of food from Norway for the World Cup. Espeland confirmed that the amount is actually about 580 kilograms (1,276 pounds). That consists of 300 kilograms (660 pounds) of Norwegian salmon and trout, 100 kilograms (220 pounds) of halibut, 80 kilograms (176 pounds) of Norwegian brown cheese, and 100 kilograms (220 pounds) of Jarlsberg cheese.
The team, whose support staff includes three chefs, did not bring oranges from Norway, despite social media posts claiming otherwise. Espeland said that players are served freshly squeezed orange juice every morning, made from oranges sourced locally in the U.S.
Plenty of other teams travel with their own chef and have taken their own food to past World Cups. For example, Argentina and Uruguay each brought thousands of pounds of meat to Qatar in 2022. The U.S. squad traveled to Brazil in 2014 with oatmeal, Cheerios, peanut butter and A1 Steak Sauce.
Such practices are not unusual for elite athletes who compete in different countries, according to experts. The reasons include maintaining routine and consistency, reducing risk of adverse reactions, providing cultural familiarity and accommodating personal preferences.
Norway’s players pose before the World Cup Group I soccer match between Iraq and Norway in Foxborough, Mass., near Boston, Tuesday, June 16, 2026. (AP Photo/Charles Krupa)
“Interpreting this practice as a lack of trust in the host nation’s food system misunderstands the purpose of high-performance nutrition,” said Rafaela G. Feresin, an associate professor of nutrition at Georgia State University. “The goal is not to evaluate local food quality; it is to eliminate unnecessary variability during competition. Bringing a chef and familiar ingredients to a major tournament is standard, performance-driven logistics.”
Amy Goodson, a sports dietitian who has worked with professional teams including the Dallas Cowboys and the Texas Rangers, explained that bringing food to international competitions is more about “control, consistency, and performance” rather than distrust.
“Nutrition is a performance variable at the World Cup level,” she said. “These athletes train, travel, and compete with elite intensity, often multiple times in a short window, while managing weather and time zone changes. What they eat directly impacts energy availability, hydration status, recovery, immune function, and even decision-making on the field. When margins are razor thin, fueling consistency becomes critical.” ___
Find AP Fact Checks here: https://apnews.com/APFactCheck.
Trump congratulates Colombia presidential candidate
Trump congratulated Abelardo De La Espriella, known by many as ‘El Tigre,’ following an initial ballot count. While not officially called, the narrow lead signals a potential rightward shift for Colombia. (Reuters.)
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Progressive candidate Iván Cepeda on Wednesday conceded Colombia’s presidential election to conservative outsider Abelardo de la Espriella, who was endorsed by President Donald Trump.
The concession came days after Cepeda initially refused to acknowledge defeat following preliminary results that showed de la Espriella as the apparent winner.
“At this stage of the vote count, I have decided to accept the result emerging from that process, which indicates that Abelardo de la Espriella is the new President of the Republic,” Cepeda said in an address to the nation.
“I do so as an act of democratic responsibility.”
TRUMP SAYS COLOMBIA’S ‘EL TIGRE’ WILL BE A ‘GREAT PRESIDENT’ AS SOCIALIST OPPONENT LAUNCHES LEGAL CHALLENGE
Ivan Cepeda speaks during a campaign rally in Cali, Colombia, on June 6, 2026. (AFP via Getty Images)
De la Espriella, a businessman and lawyer who had never previously run for office, known to his supporters as “El Tigre,” defeated Senate member Iván Cepeda by one percentage point in a remarkably close election, according to officials.
“The vote count shows an extraordinarily narrow margin between the two options vying for the trust of the Colombian people,” he said. “Less than 1% of the vote separates the candidacies that participated in this contest.”
Despite his concession, Cepeda made serious allegations that de la Espriella’s victory was influenced by “foreign interference” by the United States and the use of artificial intelligence to manipulate voters.
“During this process, we denounced the open and improper foreign interference in Colombia’s internal affairs—particularly the interventions by the United States government, and specifically the interventions by President Donald Trump in support of Abelardo de la Espriella’s candidacy,” he said.
He further accused the opposing campaign of widespread vote-buying and unethical tactics that he said undermined the legitimacy of the election results.
ANTI-CARTEL HARDLINER CHANNELS TRUMP IN BID TO END COLOMBIA’S LEFTIST ERA IN PIVOTAL ELECTION
Abelardo de la Espriella delivers a speech to supporters during a campaign rally in Palmira, near Cali, Colombia on May 14, 2026. (Joaquin Sarmiento/AFP via Getty Images)
President-elect de la Espriella will begin his four-year term in August.
“Starting August 7, we will work with determination to consolidate a common agenda that strengthens the security, freedom, and prosperity of our nations,” de la Espriella in a post on X.
The result will effectively end outgoing President Gustavo Petro’s leftist influence on the state and the policies Cepeda had pledged to continue if he won the election.
Colombia’s President Gustavo Petro, left, and President Donald Trump are shown in separate photographs. (Mauro Pimentel/AFP via Getty Images; Francis Chung/Politico/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
A core pillar of Petro’s signature agenda was his “total peace” strategy, aimed at opening negotiations with remaining guerrilla forces, drug cartels, and armed paramilitary groups in an effort to end Colombia’s decades long internal conflict.
In contrast, de la Espriella has pledged a more hardline approach, including a militarized crackdown on criminal organizations, proposals to build mega-prisons, expand fossil fuel fracking, and revive the controversial practice of aerial glyphosate spraying to eradicate coca crops.
The president-elect, who holds dual Colombian and U.S. citizenship, has also said he plans to add Colombia to the Trump-dubbed “Shield of the Americas,” a proposed coalition aimed at coordinating efforts against criminal groups in Latin America.
Published on
Ten years after the UK voted to exit the European Union, the debate over Brexit’s legacy is far from over. MEPs Barry Andrews (Renew Europe) and Sander Smit (European Conservatives & Reformists) go head-to-head on whether Brexit has strengthened or weakened Europe—and whether Britain could or should one day return to the bloc.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
For Irish MEP Barry Andrews, the answer is clear. He argues that leaving the EU was a mistake and a “total disaster” for the UK, pointing to years of political instability and economic challenges since the referendum. He also contends that Brexit has ultimately strengthened support for the European project, stating that “there is nobody looking to leave the European Union anymore.”
Dutch MEP Sander Smit takes a different view, saying the EU still misses “the UK’s crucial voice for fiscal and financial discipline” and warning against a more centralised Europe. “Our future lies in a stronger partnership,” he says. “Let the UK and EU countries move beyond the past and work together as natural, sovereign allies.”
The Ring is hosted by Méabh Mc Mahon, produced by Luis Albertos Altarejos and Amaia Echevarria, and edited by Vassilis Glynos.
You can contact us at: thering@euronews.com
-
North Carolina7 minutes agoGreat horned owl kills 1 of NC Wildlife’s famous barn owlets: officials
-
North Dakota10 minutes agoNCAA Set to Change Unpopular Football Rule Just in Time for North Dakota State’s FBS Jump
-
Ohio15 minutes agoOhio lawsuit alleges new NCAA rule unfairly denies high school Class of ’22 athletes a 5th season
-
Oklahoma22 minutes agoFire Crews respond to commercial fire in SW Oklahoma City Wednesday afternoon
-
Oregon25 minutes agoLiu makes two! 2nd red panda joins Oregon Zoo family
-
Pennsylvania30 minutes agoPa. measles cases jump, spread to Northumberland County
-
South-Carolina35 minutes agoSouth Carolina governor’s race set as Wilson, Johnson turn to general election
-
Rhode Island37 minutes agoMore complaints against former RI private school coach accused of exploiting underage girl – The Boston Globe
