The controversial Mercosur trade agreement was the subject of a direct debate on Wednesday morning between Green Party MEP Tilly Metz and René Winkin, director of the Federation of Luxembourg Industrialists (FEDIL).
The dispute centres on a recent European Parliament decision to refer the already-signed EU agreement with Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, and Paraguay to the European Court of Justice for legal review - a move heavily criticised by business groups in recent days.
“Nothing is being delayed at all, because it was clear from the outset that the trade component of Mercosur can provisionally enter into force”, said MEP Tilly Metz, defending the parliamentary action.
René Winkin of FEDIL represents the opposing view. He argued that critics are attempting to “kick the free trade deal [...] into the long grass once more”, sending a bad signal that the European Parliament has lost sight of the bigger picture. Business associations have argued that MEPs are failing to recognise the urgent geopolitical and economic signs of the times.
Winkin stressed the agreement’s potential benefits, stating that Mercosur would dismantle trade barriers and allow Europe to seek growth in South America – revenue he argues is needed to finance European social systems. He noted the text had been “extremely improved” in recent years due to external pressure and could generate new economic activities in Luxembourg.
Metz remains fundamentally opposed. She labelled the deal an “anachronistic” product of negotiations conducted in a “black box” with excessive political wrangling. The included protective measures, she argued, are mere “window dressing” as they would take effect far too late.
For the Green Party MEP, Mercosur creates only losers – in both Europe and South America – on economic, environmental, and social grounds. She characterised the current pressure to ratify the deal amid geopolitical tensions as a “panic reaction” she refuses to endorse.
The parliamentary decision will inevitably delay the final ratification vote. After 25 years of negotiation, however, MEP Tilly Metz argued that “a few months don’t matter now”. The referral to the European Court of Justice could extend the process by up to two years. Metz openly stated her hope that the agreement will not survive this legal scrutiny.
Winkin suggested the European Commission must now proceed with caution in its next steps to avoid further alienating Parliament. He declined to assess the specific risk of the court striking down the trade deal.
Commenting on the separate free trade agreement with India, signed on Tuesday by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and permanent Council President António Costa in New Delhi, Winkin expressed hope that this pact would now advance more swiftly.
Politically, the vote has sparked intense debate over whether the Greens, by supporting the resolution, effectively aligned with conservative and far-right groups – the very forces they have previously accused the European People’s Party (EPP) of courting.
Metz firmly rejected this comparison on Wednesday, stating they had “at no point approached the far-right.” She argued that a vote’s merit cannot be judged by who else supports it.
The controversy has caused significant internal tension, particularly among the German Greens, where prominent figures like Cem Özdemir and Jürgen Trittin publicly criticised their MEPs’ stance. In Luxembourg, Foreign Minister Xavier Bettel and the Christian Social People’s Party (CSV) have similarly accused the Greens of applying double standards.
