The European Parliament’s May 2026 plenary session, held from 18 to 21 May in Strasbourg, was marked by several significant votes on steel, foreign investment, victims’ rights, Slovakia and fatal workplace accidents. At first glance, the proceedings may seem remote: votes, resolutions, regulations, directives, and majorities that are sometimes overwhelming, sometimes more fragile. Yet behind this institutional machinery lies a very concrete question: what does the European Union actually decide, and what difference does it make to citizens?
Following our reviews of the January and February 2026 sessions, Europe à Contre-Courant continues its work of analysing the European Parliament. The aim is to track key votes, understand the political balance of power and, above all, assess what impact these decisions may or may not have on the lives of European citizens.
This plenary session of the European Parliament in May 2026 was dominated by one word: protect. Protecting European steel from global overproduction. Protecting strategic sectors from foreign investments deemed risky. Protecting victims of crime. Protecting the rule of law in Slovakia. Protecting workers from workplace accidents, occupational diseases, extreme heat and new forms of algorithmic management.
But another question looms large over this parliamentary week: does Europe truly protect its citizens, or does it prioritise protecting its markets, its economic borders and its broader geopolitical interests?
European steel: a resounding vote to defend a strategic industry
The most high-profile vote of this session undoubtedly concerned steel. The European Parliament approved a new regulation designed to protect the European steel market from global overproduction. The text replaces the current safeguard measures, which have been in place since 2018 and are due to expire on 30 June 2026.
It plans to cap duty-free steel imports at 18.3 million tonnes per year, a 47% reduction compared with the 2024 quotas. Above these quotas, customs duties would rise to 50%, up from 25% at present. The text was adopted by 606 votes in favour, 16 against and 39 abstentions. It must still be formally approved by the Council and is due to come into force on 1 July 2026.
On paper, this vote may seem technical. In reality, it is highly political. The steel sector is unlike any other. It affects industry, employment, infrastructure, the automotive sector, construction, and also defence. In a world marked by trade tensions, the war in Ukraine, competition from China and the resurgence of US protectionism, the European Union is adopting a more proactive stance.
The regulation also introduces a rule known as “melt and pour”, which involves enhanced traceability of steel based on where it is smelted and cast. The aim is to prevent circumvention through simple processing in a third country. The European Union therefore does not merely wish to limit import volumes; it also wants to gain a clearer understanding of the true origin of the steel entering its market.
The Renew Group’s rapporteur, Karin Karlsbro, defended a position based on industrial sovereignty, while also highlighting the case of Ukraine. In her view, Europe needs a strong, competitive steel industry based on fair competition. However, Ukraine must not be penalised by the new European measures at a time when its industry is under direct attack from Russia.
On the Social Democratic side, Brando Benifei also backed the text, pointing out that steel is essential to the European economy, security and green transition. The S&D Group points out that the steel industry employs around 300,000 people in Europe and that global overcapacity exceeds 600 million tonnes, nearly four times Europe’s annual production.
For European citizens, the effects of the vote in the European Parliament will not be immediate. No one’s life will change overnight on 1 July. But this kind of decision can have an impact on industrial employment, steel-producing regions and Europe’s ability to avoid total dependence on imports from outside the EU. It is therefore an indirect but strategic measure.
One limitation remains, however: protecting European steel does not in itself address how to protect workers in the industry, support the sector’s green transition, or ensure that this trade protection does not simply become a shield for large corporations. The real social challenge begins after the vote.
Foreign investment: the end of European naivety?
Another major vote concerned the screening of foreign investments. The European Parliament approved new rules making it mandatory to screen investments in sensitive sectors such as defence, semiconductors, artificial intelligence, critical raw materials and financial services. The text was adopted by 508 votes in favour, 64 against and 90 abstentions.
Once again, the immediate impact on the public will be minimal. This is not a measure that will be noticeable in everyday life. Yet it touches on a fundamental question: who controls Europe’s strategic sectors? Should ports, critical technologies, data, defence companies, semiconductors and artificial intelligence be left solely to market forces?
The rapporteur, Raphaël Glucksmann, summed up the spirit of the text by suggesting that Europe was closing a chapter of “European naivety”. It is a strong phrase, but it aptly captures the shift in the political climate. For years, the European Union has been a staunch advocate of open trade. Now, it is talking about sovereignty, economic security and managing dependencies.
This shift is significant. The European Parliament is no longer content merely to defend the single market. It is increasingly embracing the idea that certain sectors need to be protected, monitored and, in some cases, removed from the sole logic of free trade.
Victims’ rights: the most directly human text of the session
Among the decisions adopted during this session of the European Parliament in Strasbourg, the reform of victims’ rights is probably the one that most directly affects citizens. The European Parliament approved an update to the European framework for victim protection by 440 votes to 49, with 84 abstentions. The text provides, in particular, for better support during legal proceedings, legal aid for victims on low incomes, greater protection of privacy, the option to report certain offences online, and a European helpline on 116 006.
The text also sets out specific measures for victims of sexual violence, including access to sexual and reproductive healthcare, as well as better protection for child victims. Member States will be required to implement these new rules within two years of their formal adoption by the Council.
The detailed vote shows broad, though not entirely unanimous, support: 440 votes in favour, representing 77% of those voting, 49 against and 84 abstentions. In France, 63 out of 68 MEPs who voted were in favour, none voted against, and 5 abstained. Conversely, the Europe of Sovereign Nations group voted overwhelmingly against: 22 against and 2 abstentions among its 24 voters.
Co-rapporteur Lucia Yar, of the Renew Group, described the directive as a real step forward for victims, particularly the most vulnerable, victims of violence and children. Javier Zarzalejos, of the EPP, pointed out that around 70 million people fall victim to crime every year in the European Union. Lina Gálvez, speaking on behalf of the Social Democrats, welcomed a historic agreement, particularly regarding access to information and sexual and reproductive healthcare for victims of sexual violence.
This reform reveals another side of the European Union. Here, we are not just talking about industry, trade or sovereignty. We are talking about people who have been assaulted, victims of sexual violence, children, vulnerable people, and citizens facing the justice system who are often lost in lengthy, impersonal and difficult proceedings. This issue of fundamental rights also ties in with recent debates on conversion therapy within the European Union.
Here, Europe is setting out a framework; it will then be up to the Member States to implement and fund it. A directive without sufficient resources for the courts, victim support organisations and public services risks remaining largely theoretical.
Slovakia: the European Parliament takes a firmer stance on the rule of law
The session was also marked by a highly political vote on Slovakia. The European Parliament adopted a resolution calling on the European Commission to assess whether there is a clear risk of a serious breach of the Union’s values by the Slovak government. The text was adopted by 347 votes to 165, with 25 abstentions.
MEPs expressed concerns on a number of issues, including reforms to criminal law, the weakening of the fight against corruption, various forms of pressure on the media, attacks on civil society, fundamental rights, judicial independence, the protection of whistleblowers, and the allegedly problematic use of EU funds. They are calling on the Commission to use the tools at its disposal, including infringement proceedings and the rule of law conditionality mechanism.
This vote is not a law. It will therefore not bring about any immediate changes for Slovak or European citizens. But it does have political significance. It confirms that the European Parliament intends to keep up the pressure on governments accused of illiberal tendencies.
The political divide is more evident here. Unlike votes on steel or foreign investment, the vote on Slovakia reveals deeper divisions. As soon as the rule of law, fundamental rights, corruption or minorities are mentioned, majorities become less unanimous. Yet if a government can undermine the judiciary, the media, civil society organisations or fundamental rights without any real consequences, then the European democratic promise loses its strength.
Fatal workplace accidents: a resounding vote, the result of a long political struggle
The European Parliament also adopted a resolution calling for 8 August to be designated as a European Day in memory of victims of workplace accidents and occupational diseases. The resolution was adopted by 395 votes to 12, with 41 abstentions.
The breakdown of the vote shows very broad support: 88% of MEPs who took part in the vote voted in favour of the text. However, it should be noted that only 448 MEPs voted, while 269 did not take part in the vote. In France, support was almost unanimous among those who voted: 58 votes in favour, none against and one abstention.
The text begins with a sobering statistic. In 2023, the European Union recorded 3,298 fatal workplace accidents and approximately 2.8 million non-fatal accidents resulting in at least four days’ absence from work. The sectors most at risk remain, in particular, construction, transport, manufacturing and agriculture.
But this vote did not come out of the blue. For several months, La France Insoumise MEPs Anthony Smith and Marina Mesure, members of The Left group, have been campaigning in the European Parliament to tackle workplace deaths. Anthony Smith, a former labour inspector, announced back in November 2024 that he wanted to work with Marina Mesure and The Left to launch a European initiative aimed at establishing a “zero deaths at work” directive. Their objective: to strengthen prevention measures, the rights of victims and their families, the resources available to labour inspectors, occupational health services and employers’ accountability.
In an opinion piece published by Regards on 28 April 2025, Anthony Smith and Marina Mesure had already highlighted a reality that is largely overlooked in Europe, with more than 3,000 fatal workplace accidents recorded each year, while in France, three people die every day at work. They also highlighted employers’ impunity, the leniency of penalties, the lack of resources available to the labour inspectorate, and the isolation faced by victims’ families when dealing with legal proceedings.
Their political work has also taken the form of a 14-point roadmap aimed at achieving the goal of zero workplace deaths and ensuring a healthy and safe working environment for workers across Europe. This campaign is therefore not limited to a single day of remembrance; it seeks to ensure that workplace deaths are recognised as a social, political and judicial scandal, rather than as an inevitable fate.
The resolution adopted by Parliament also calls on the European Commission to assess the occupational risks associated with artificial intelligence and algorithmic management. MEPs are particularly concerned about workers on digital platforms, or those whose tasks, pace and performance are directed or assessed by AI tools. They highlight the risks of increased workloads, excessive surveillance and a lack of transparency in algorithmic decision-making.
Another key issue is extreme heat. Parliament is calling on the Commission to take greater account of the risks associated with heat stress, extreme weather events and air pollution. In a Europe facing increasingly severe summers and repeated heatwaves, this issue is becoming a key concern for construction workers, agricultural workers, delivery riders, drivers, street cleaners and other workers exposed to the elements.
Finally, the text emphasises the importance of labour inspections. MEPs are calling on Member States to strengthen health and safety inspections in the workplace, ensuring they are backed by permanent resources, sufficient staff and institutional independence. This is undoubtedly one of the most concrete points in the text: without inspectors, without oversight and without the necessary resources, the memory of the victims risks remaining a mere symbol with no real impact on businesses.
The official rapporteur for the text, Chiara Gemma, an Italian MEP from the ECR Group, advocated an approach combining remembrance and prevention. In her view, the memory of the victims must translate into a concrete commitment to preventing further tragedies. In a statement from the ECR Group, she also recalled the Bois du Cazier mining disaster in Marcinelle on 8 August 1956, in which 262 miners from several European countries lost their lives.
This vote is therefore significant in two respects. Institutionally, it shows that a social issue can still command broad support in the European Parliament, transcending political divides. Politically, however, it also highlights the importance of the groundwork carried out by MEPs such as Anthony Smith and Marina Mesure in bringing this issue to the forefront of the European debate.
However, there is a significant limitation here: this is a resolution, not a binding directive. In other words, the European Parliament is sending a strong political signal, but it does not immediately create new legal obligations for businesses or Member States.
On the issue of workplace deaths, the European Parliament has therefore managed to build a cross-party majority. But the real test will not simply be the vote on a European Day. It will be the EU’s ability to go further: to impose binding standards on work rates, heat, digital platforms, algorithmic management, labour inspections and employer liability.
European Parliament plenary session in May 2026: protecting Europe — but to what extent?
This plenary session of the European Parliament in May 2026 reflects a Europe in the midst of redefining itself. On the issue of economic sovereignty, there are broad majorities: the steel industry is being protected, foreign investment will be subject to greater scrutiny, and the idea of a Europe that is less naive in the face of global power dynamics is gaining increasing traction.
On victims’ rights, the European Parliament has adopted an important, practical and humane text; however, its effectiveness will ultimately depend on its transposition into national law and the resources allocated to the courts, support organisations and public services.
MEPs are speaking out more forcefully against illiberal tendencies in Slovakia, but what happens next will depend on the European Commission’s willingness to take real action.
When it comes to fatal workplace accidents, the political message is strong, but still non-binding: without inspectors, without standards, without penalties, and without serious consideration of extreme heat or algorithmic management, the memory of the victims risks remaining merely symbolic.
That is the paradox of this session: the European Union knows how to vote when it comes to defending its strategic sectors, yet it moves more slowly when it comes to bringing about tangible change in people’s lives. Protecting Europe, yes. But which Europe? The Europe of industries, economic borders and critical technologies? Or the Europe of victims, workers, those in precarious situations, minorities and fundamental rights?
This session does not provide a definitive answer, but it does offer a clue: the European Parliament wants a Europe that offers greater protection. The question now is whether this protection will actually reach ordinary citizens.
What are the EU’s new measures to protect European steel?
The European Parliament has approved a 47% reduction in duty-free steel import quotas, capping them at 18.3 million tonnes per year. Above this threshold, tariffs will rise from 25% to 50% from 1 July 2026, in order to counter global overproduction and better protect the European steel market.
What is the Victims’ Rights Directive adopted in May 2026?
It is an update to the European framework for victims’ rights, aimed at strengthening legal aid, support during judicial proceedings, and the protection of minors and victims of sexual violence. It also introduces a single European helpline number, 116 006, and the possibility of reporting certain offences online.
Why is the European Parliament stepping up its criticism of Slovakia?
MEPs have voted in favour of a resolution calling on the European Commission to assess the risk of the Slovak government seriously breaching EU values. The resolution highlights concerns over criminal law reforms, pressure on the media, attacks on civil society and the weakening of the fight against corruption.
What is the aim of the European Day in Memory of Victims of Accidents at Work?
Set for 8 August, in memory of the 1956 Marcinelle mining disaster, this day aims to honour victims of workplace accidents and occupational diseases while turning remembrance into a political commitment to prevention. It also reflects the campaign for a future “zero deaths at work” directive and calls for stronger action on risks linked to extreme heat, algorithmic management and workplace safety.
Are the decisions taken by the European Parliament during this session immediately enforceable?
No. The regulations on steel and foreign investment still need to be formally adopted by the Council. The directive on victims’ rights must be transposed by Member States within two years. The resolutions on Slovakia and workplace accidents are political statements and do not have immediate legal force.
Sources and references:
- European Parliament – “Steel overcapacity: MEPs approve new measures to protect the EU steel market”, press release published on 21 May 2026. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20260513IPR43305/steel-overcapacity-meps-approve-new-measures-to-protect-eu-steel-market
- European Parliament – “Protecting EU strategic sectors from risky foreign investments”, press release published on 21 May 2026: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20260513IPR43304/protecting-eu-strategic-sectors-from-risky-foreign-investments
- European Parliament – “Victims of crime: improved legal protection and support systems”, press release published on 21 May 2026: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20260513IPR43311/victims-of-crime-improved-legal-protection-and-support-systems
- European Parliament – “Slovakia: MEPs call for action to protect EU values and the EU budget”, press release published on 21 May 2026: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20260513IPR43308/slovakia-meps-demand-action-to-protect-eu-values-and-the-eu-budget
- European Parliament – “Parliament calls for an EU day to commemorate the victims of work-related accidents”, press release published on 21 May 2026. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20260513IPR43313/parliament-calls-for-eu-day-to-commemorate-the-victims-of-work-related-accidents
- How They Vote – Vote on the European Day in Memory of Victims of Accidents at Work, European Parliament vote, May 2026: https://howtheyvote.eu/votes/193345
- How They Vote – Vote on the rights of crime victims, European Parliament vote, May 2026: https://howtheyvote.eu/votes/192434
- S&D – “EU to better protect its steel sector from the devastating effects of global overcapacity”, press release published on 21 May 2026: https://www.socialistsanddemocrats.eu/newsroom/eu-better-protect-its-steel-sector-devastating-effects-global-overcapacity
- Renew Europe – “Slovakia’s democratic backsliding: Liberals and Democrats call for an investigation into the misuse of EU funds”, press release published on 20 May 2026: https://www.reneweuropegroup.eu/news/2026-05-20/slovakias-democratic-backsliding-liberals-and-democrats-urge-investigation-into-eu-funds-misuse
- ECR Group – “Europe must better protect workers and strengthen workplace safety”, press release published in May 2026: https://ecrgroup.eu/article/europe_must_better_protect_workers_and_strengthen_workplace_safety
- Views – Anthony Smith and Marina Mesure, “Dying at work: depending on whether you are powerful or destitute…”, opinion piece published on 28 April 2025: https://regards.fr/tribune-mourir-au-travail-selon-que-vous-serez-puissant-ou-miserable/
