MCC Brussels Podcast

In this episode, why has air conditioning suddenly become a political dividing line in Europe? Will Ireland’s EU presidency push Brussels further into NGO funding, speech regulation and woke priorities? And is the crisis at Volkswagen a warning of what the Green Deal is doing to Europe’s industrial base?
Host Jacob Reynolds is joined by Richard Schenk and James Holland, a parliamentary adviser and long-time Brussels observer, to discuss the week’s biggest political stories from inside the EU bubble.
First, the panel turns to Europe’s increasingly absurd air-conditioning debate. As temperatures rise across the continent, the simple question of whether people should be able to cool their homes, hospitals and workplaces has somehow become a culture-war issue. Richard Schenk argues that the obsession with net zero is crowding out practical solutions for the elderly, the sick and those who have to work through the heat. James Holland warns against Brussels using the crisis as yet another excuse to regulate what should be decided nationally and locally.
The second topic is Ireland’s presidency of the Council of the European Union. Ireland has long been seen in Brussels as the model pupil, rarely inclined to pick fights with the Commission. But with major budget negotiations ahead, the panel asks whether Dublin will defend its farmers and tax advantages, or simply help steer through more funding for NGOs, media projects and democracy programmes that too often reinforce Brussels’ own worldview.
Finally, the episode turns to Europe’s car industry. With fresh alarm over Volkswagen and the wider German economy, the panel examines how the EU’s hostility to combustion engines, high energy costs and green dogma are putting one of Europe’s most important industries under pressure. James Holland explains how Brussels regulation often rewards big players while crushing smaller suppliers, while Richard Schenk argues that Europe has trapped itself in a one-track electric-vehicle strategy just as competitors pursue a broader industrial approach.

In this episode: Is the Democracy Shield really about protecting elections from foreign interference, or about policing dissent at home? Ten years after Brexit, did the EU learn from Britain’s revolt, or double down on the federalist habits that caused it? And why is Brussels talking to the Taliban - realpolitik at last, or geopolitical naivety dressed up as diplomacy?

Host Jacob Reynolds is joined by Frank Furedi, MCC Brussels’ executive director, and Dr Philipp Siegert, our deputy research director, to discuss free speech, sovereignty, Brexit, migration, and the increasingly brittle politics of the Brussels establishment.

 First, the panel turns to the EU’s Democracy Shield, after a European Parliament committee backed proposals to strengthen the bloc’s powers over disinformation, media, elections and so-called internal threats. Philipp Siegert argues that the danger lies in moving from protecting democratic processes to managing political outcomes. Frank Furedi warns that the language of democratic protection is being used to justify a new kind of censorship - one that presents itself as the very opposite of censorship.

 The second topic is Brexit, ten years after the vote that shook Britain and Brussels alike. Frank argues that 2016 marked a turning point in European politics, exposing the weakness of legacy parties and giving new force to questions of sovereignty, patriotism and democratic self-government. The panel asks whether the EU learnt anything from Brexit, or whether its real lesson was to prevent voters from ever doing something similar again.

Finally, the episode turns to Brussels hosting Taliban representatives for talks on returning Afghan migrants. The panel discusses the need for realpolitik in foreign affairs, but also the risks of giving international legitimacy to a regime that remains deeply hostile to European values and interests

Follow MCC Brussels on social media:
https://twitter.com/MCC_Brussels
https://facebook.com/MCCBrussels
https://linkedin.com/company/mcc-brussels/

website:
https://brussels.mcc.hu

In this episode: is Péter Magyar restoring Hungarian democracy, or using constitutional power to remove his main rival? Does the export controls and shutdown of Anthropic’s Mythos model show how desperately far behind the EU is on cutting-edge technology?  And has the EU Transparency Register become a neutral accountability tool, or a bureaucratic weapon against dissenting voices in Brussels?
Host Jacob Reynolds is joined by Richard Schenk and Javier Villamor, Brussels-based EU/NATO correspondent for The European Conservative.
First, the panel turns to Hungary, where the new Tisza government has pushed through a retroactive two-term limit on prime ministers. Supporters call it a democratic safeguard after years of Fidesz rule. Critics see it as Lex Orbán: a constitutional manoeuvre designed to keep Viktor Orbán from returning to power, while also putting pressure on institutions linked to the previous government.
The second topic is artificial intelligence. The row over Anthropic’s Mythos model raises a brutal question for Europe: what happens when the most powerful AI systems are controlled elsewhere? Jacob, Richard and Javier discuss whether the EU has spent the past three years regulating a technology it does not lead, and whether Europe’s real problem is not just investment, but energy, chips, talent, scale and regulatory culture.
Finally, the episode turns to MCC Brussels itself, after its suspension from the EU Transparency Register. The panel asks whether this is merely a technical dispute over registration rules, or part of a broader pattern in which Brussels uses procedure, paperwork and access rules to police the boundaries of acceptable debate.

In this MCC Brussels Deep Dive, John O’Brien speaks to Professor Samuele Furfari, one of Europe’s most experienced voices on energy policy.
Furfari spent decades inside the European Commission working on energy and sustainable development. His warning is blunt: Europe’s energy crisis did not begin with the war in Ukraine. It began when EU policymakers abandoned the old priority of cheap, abundant and secure energy, and replaced it with a decarbonisation-first agenda.
For decades, European energy policy understood a basic truth: prosperity depends on power. Industry, jobs, living standards and national security all require reliable and affordable energy. But according to Furfari, Brussels has increasingly treated energy not as the foundation of growth, but as a problem to be reduced, regulated and morally denounced.
John and Professor Furfari discuss how this mentality took hold, why Europe has become so vulnerable, and whether the EU has learnt the wrong lesson from the energy shocks of recent years.
This is a conversation about more than bills. It is about prosperity, sovereignty, industry and whether Europe still has the seriousness to keep the lights on.

In this episode, is Belgium becoming a warning sign for the rest of Europe? Has the EU’s obsession with digital regulation made Europeans technologically weaker? And are American conservatives right to call out Europe’s migration crisis, or is Europe being talked down to again?
Host Jacob Reynolds is joined by MCC’s Richard Schenk and Lennert Van Hauwermeiren from the Flemish Institute for Policy and Strategy to discuss migration, state authority, digital control and the growing tensions between Europe and America.
First, the panel turns to Belgium, where riots in Brussels, unrest on the coast, migrant-smuggling routes and concerns about policing raise a blunt question: can the Belgian state still enforce the law? Lennert argues that Europe’s liberal elites have become reluctant to use legitimate force, while Richard places Belgium’s problems in the wider context of political fragmentation, identity politics and the weakening of state authority.
The second topic is the EU’s latest push for “digital sovereignty”. As Apple’s new Siri features are held back in the EU, the panel asks whether Brussels is building a serious tech future or simply regulating Europe into irrelevance. Richard and Lennert discuss the AI Act, the Digital Markets Act, the Digital Services Act and the EU’s habit of confusing control with innovation.
Finally, the episode turns to Pete Hegseth’s D-Day speech and his criticism of Europe’s migration policy. The panel considers whether American conservatives are right to raise the alarm, whether European countries need their own solutions, and why Europe must separate shared civilisation questions from national interests.