Three weeks earlier, the European Parliament had given its final green light to regulations aimed at phasing out diesel, petrol, and hybrid vehicles from 2035, marking a pivotal step in the bloc’s transportation policy. The remaining hurdle involved formal ratification by the EU institutions. Negotiations among the 27 member states culminated late in October with an agreement reached between Council negotiators and the European Parliament, followed by ratification two weeks later by the EU’s permanent representatives. While Poland voiced its opposition and Bulgaria chose to abstain, the deal advanced to the next stage. Conversations about lingering concerns highlighted a reluctance that persisted among certain capitals, with Italy and notably Germany signaling reservations. The plan to vote on the measure in the following week was postponed, and an exact date for the final decision remained undecided for the moment.
The deal’s fate hinged on a formal ratification by the EU Council of Ministers, initially planned for 7 March. At a meeting of the EU’s 27 ambassadors on that Friday, the Swedish Council Presidency confirmed that consensus had not yet formed to move the rule forward. The decision was postponed, and Coreper I, the body of permanent ambassadors, signaled that the matter would be revisited at a future Council gathering. The spokesperson for Sweden, Daniel Holmberg, explained that ambassadors would reconvene when conditions allowed for a decisive vote, but no date was supplied for the rescheduled decision.
Germany’s stance began to shift as the transport portfolio grappled with the timing of the vote. In recent days, the government’s position appeared to require careful navigation, with the automotive and energy portfolios weighing the implications of extending the life of internal combustion engines. The move to delay the vote followed discussions among Berlin’s partners to avoid a rejection that could complicate the broader policy package. It was also reported that the European Commission signaled Germany might abstain unless new allowances were granted for the use of certain fuels on vehicles with conventional combustion engines after 2035.
The minister responsible for transport, leading a coalition government that remained divided on the issue, described the fuels in question as green, hydrogen-derived options that could be burned in existing engines while purportedly delivering carbon neutrality. This view contrasted with the Greens’ faction, which supported the agreement negotiated and ratified at the end of the previous year. The debate over whether e-fuels and similar synthetic alternatives should be endorsed or restricted formed a core part of the political contest surrounding the 2035 deadline. As discussions continued, several member states weighed the potential impact on competition, consumer choices, and the region’s climate commitments, all of which fed into the ongoing deliberations within the EU’s decision-making councils.