During the debate, outgoing DP MEP Charles Goerens expressed concerns over the potential alliances of ADR in the European Parliament, citing the presence of “post-fascists like Italy’s Meloni, Hungary’s Orbán, or the Polish Kaczyński brothers” within the “European Conservatives and Reformists” parliamentary group. He emphasised the importance of upholding the rule of law, particularly on social issues, anticipating challenges with such alliances. In response, Fernand Kartheiser of the adr stressed the party’s intention to offer “a different perspective” in representing Luxembourg’s interests in Europe.
The debate also highlighted differences in values between the two candidates. Charles Goerens and his party prioritise respect for the rule of law, a stance shared by the current Luxembourg parties represented in the European Parliament (Christian Social People’s Party – CSV, Luxembourg Socialist Workers’ Party – LSAP, DP, and Green Party). However, Goerens expressed concerns that ADR’s potential alliances might compromise these values. In contrast, Kartheiser criticised the existing parties, accusing them of undermining individual freedoms, particularly citing the ban on internal combustion engines and the Digital Services Act as examples. Kartheiser views the Digital Services Act as a form of “censorship” restricting online speech, whereas Goerens defended the Act as a necessary measure to regulate online content and prevent the circulation of harmful material.
In the debate, migration emerged as a contentious issue, with Charles Goerens criticising the fact that members of the European Conservatives and Reformists group, which an adr MEP could join if elected, have spoken outright about “remigration.” Criticising the group’s stance, Goerens highlighted the alarming suggestion of repatriating millions of individuals, stating “In Germany alone, 30 million people would have to be deported.” Fernand Kartheiser, however, rejected comparisons with far-right parties, such as the Alternative for Germany (AfD), emphasising the need to address the challenges posed by “significant economic migration” into Europe since 2015. The adr seeks to address this issue through the establishment of an “effective system” to curb illegal migration while “upholding dignity.”
The principle of unanimity, particularly regarding tax matters, sparked debate during the discussion. Unanimity remains a cornerstone of European policy in various areas, meaning that each member state has a right of veto. Goerens is advocating for its partial lifting, arguing that it often hinders decision-making and progress within the European Union. The right of veto is “not a miracle cure,” Goerens stated, arguing that it needs to be “supplemented by other measures.” Charles Goerens’ party, the DP, disagrees, however, and even voted in favour of an adr motion calling for unanimity to be retained as a principle in the Chamber of Deputies last week.
Fernand Kartheiser agrees with Minister for Foreign Affairs Xavier Bettel, who told our colleagues from RTL Radio in a recent interview that if this principle were lifted, “a steamroller would sweep through the Luxembourg financial centre.” Kartheiser stressed the importance of safeguarding Luxembourg’s interests, particularly in financial matters, suggesting that lifting the unanimity principle could have detrimental effects on the country’s financial sector.
