Germany news: AfD's Weidel calls for major EU reforms

Alice Weidel said the EU was in severe need of reform. She presented three pillars: subsidiarity, responsibility, and sovereignty. Together, they would move more authority away from EU institutions and back toward member states. The proposal matters because it would change how the bloc makes decisions and applies common rules.

Weidel wants decisions made at the lowest practical level. She says national parliaments, rather than the European level, should handle sovereign matters. She also objects to the European Commission’s legislative initiative and questions the primacy of EU law and shared fiscal rules. On borders, she wants sovereign states to act if EU external-border protection fails.

Her proposal could make national governments more powerful. It could also weaken common EU policies, affect fiscal coordination, and create an option to leave Schengen. The article does not describe every legal step required, but Weidel called for a veto right to opt out of what she called EU chaos.

Subsidiarity is the principle that power should sit as close to the grassroots as possible. Decisions should be taken by the smallest authority capable of handling them effectively. Weidel wants this principle to guide the EU because she believes distant institutions should not control matters that national or local governments can manage.

Her example is political decision-making. She argues that sovereign-state questions should be decided in national parliaments, not at the European level. She also criticizes the European Commission, which she describes as unelected, for having the right to propose legislation. In her view, that interferes with checks and balances.

The article notes that national governments already control most core policy areas, including foreign affairs, defense, health, education, and much finance policy. Weidel’s approach would push the principle further. It could reduce EU-level authority, especially in fiscal policy and the application of EU law, while increasing national control.

Members of the European Parliament are currently chosen through direct elections by voters in EU member states. This gives citizens a direct role in selecting the representatives who sit in the Parliament. The article’s key point is that Weidel wants European parliamentarians to no longer be directly elected.

Her alternative is tied to her broader demand for national sovereignty. She says decision-making on the sovereign level should occur in national parliaments, where national leaders are elected. The article does not specify exactly how European parliamentarians would be selected under her proposal, so it does not establish a detailed replacement system.

This change would be significant. It could make national parliaments more central while reducing the European Parliament’s direct democratic link with voters. It would also fit Weidel’s criticism of EU-level authority and her belief that sovereign states, rather than European institutions, should control major decisions.

The European Union has 27 member countries. The article itself does not provide that figure. It does show that power is divided rather than held entirely by Brussels or entirely by national capitals. Member states keep authority over many important areas, while EU institutions exercise powers that countries have agreed to share.

The article lists foreign and defense policy, health, education, and much finance policy as areas normally decided by national governments. EU-level responsibilities include the European Commission’s role in proposing legislation, the broader EU legal framework, and shared fiscal arrangements. The European Central Bank and EU border agency Frontex also appear in the discussion.

This division creates the dispute Weidel raised. She says sovereign states should regain more control, especially over fiscal policy, EU law, and borders. The current system combines national decision-making with common rules. Her reforms would shift that balance toward member states, potentially making EU-wide coordination less uniform.

The European Commission is the EU institution that proposes legislation and helps administer common EU policies. The article emphasizes that it is not directly elected, while holding a legislative right of initiative. In other words, it can formally start the process for new EU laws, even though voters do not directly elect the Commission as a legislature.

Weidel objects to that combination. She argues that an unelected body should not have such a powerful role in setting the EU’s legislative agenda. She says this creates a major disturbance of checks and balances and weakens democratic decision-making. Her broader answer is to place sovereign decisions in national parliaments.

The Commission’s initiative does not mean it alone makes EU laws. Under the established EU system, other institutions take part in adopting legislation. Still, Weidel’s criticism targets who gets to begin the process. Her reform would reduce the Commission’s agenda-setting role and strengthen national control over EU policy.

If adopted, Weidel’s reforms would make the EU less centralized. National governments could gain more authority over fiscal policy, the reach of EU law, and border protection. Common rules might become easier for states to reject or bypass, especially where Weidel says the EU has failed to follow its own debt and monetary responsibilities.

For example, she wants sovereign states to protect their national borders if the EU cannot protect the bloc’s external borders. She also says a state should be able to leave Schengen if the open-border system fails. On fiscal matters, her criticism focuses on sovereign debt and whether the European Central Bank can guarantee it.

The immediate result could be more national flexibility but less uniformity across the EU. Fiscal coordination could weaken, EU law could face stronger national resistance, and internal border checks could return. These are possible consequences of her proposals, not outcomes reported as already implemented. The article does not provide a legal implementation plan.

Sovereignty means a state has ultimate authority over its territory, laws, government, and major public decisions. Weidel uses the term to argue that national governments should control sovereign matters. She says decisions at that level should be made in national parliaments, where elected national leaders are accountable.

EU countries share sovereignty by agreeing to common rules and institutions in selected areas. The article describes national governments as responsible for foreign affairs, defense, health, education, and much finance policy. It also notes shared arrangements involving fiscal policy, EU law, the European Central Bank, and Schengen. Countries remain separate states while participating in those arrangements.

This system creates a balance between independence and cooperation. Weidel believes the balance has moved too far toward EU institutions. Her reforms would emphasize national sovereignty, including stronger border powers and possible opt-outs. The article presents this as a political proposal, not as an adopted change to the EU’s structure.