The Socialists and Democrats are soul-searching.
A shifting balance of power in the European Parliament has undercut the political group’s influence, exposing a rift over how far it should compromise to remain relevant.
Stripped of its traditional role as a parliamentary kingmaker amid the rise of the far-right, the S&D is rethinking its strategy — with tensions flaring over whether to prioritise pragmatism or principle.
In a sign of testy times, Socialist leaders are weighing whether to impose stricter discipline — an unprecedented move that reflects how deep the group’s struggles run.
As the European Parliament confronts major challenges — from a fraught relationship with Washington to boosting security and jump-starting the bloc’s economy — where the Socialists land in the tug-of-war between principles and realpolitik may have far-reaching consequences for the continent.
Changing maths
For the first time in European Parliament history, two vote-winning majorities are possible, both anchored by the centre-right European People’s Party: one a centrist, pro-European bloc, which includes the S&D and liberal Renew Europe; the other a right-leaning alliance embracing the far-right.
The reality of that calculation hit home last year through a chain of events that has sparked political instability. An ideological rift over the Commission’s “simplification” agenda — which aims to roll back regulation in a bid to boost the bloc’s competitiveness — has upended the centrist coalition.
In an October 2025 plenary vote, an estimated quarter of S&D MEPs — primarily from the French, Austrian and Dutch delegations — broke ranks to oppose a compromise on updated corporate due diligence rules backed by their own leadership.
When so many members are not aligned, “it is no longer a discipline problem, it is a problem of political line,” French S&D MEP Christophe Clergeau told Contexte.
The rupture deepened a month later when the EPP relied on far-right votes to push the file through, sidelining its traditional centrist partners and effectively shattering the informal cordon sanitaire — a shift that pushed the Parliament’s balance of power to the right.
For the S&D, that move marked a turning point.
“It was a moment of clarity,” said MEP René Repasi, the head of the German S&D delegation. “We now know that the EPP does not attach value to the fact that we work together in the centre. It’s a majority like any other.”
Cracking the whip?
S&D leadership is considering creating a new whip-style mechanism to “coordinate and enforce members’ attendance and participation during key debates and votes,” said Andrea Maceiras, spokesperson of group leader Iratxe García. The tool would also “monitor attendance and engagement, [and] ensure proper accountability.”
The Socialist group, long accustomed to relying on members’ shared principles, has traditionally exercised a looser hand over its MEPs than the EPP. The latter moves quickly to sanction unruly members by stripping them of rapporteur roles, limiting their speaking time in plenary, or barring them from closed-door meetings.
Ramping up internal control to steady the ship was one idea that emerged following a December retreat in Antwerp with García, her vice-presidents, and the heads of the national delegations.
However, several S&D officials Contexte spoke to poured cold water on the idea, describing it as a leadership fantasy that would not function in practice.
While agreeing that greater party cohesion is useful, most doubted a strict whip system would materialise. The ideological differences in the group cannot be solved through a firmer hand, they argued. The issue is sensitive, reflected by Socialist lawmakers’ unease of candidly speaking about this.
National divisions
One of the S&D’s core challenges is that its internal fault lines run largely along national lines — particularly over how closely to work with the EPP.
The French and Dutch delegations blame the EPP for legitimising the far-right — including France’s resurgent Rassemblement National — and want the S&D to take a tougher stance against the Parliament’s biggest group.
German, Spanish and Italian delegations, in contrast, favour a pragmatic approach, backing the EPP when interests align and shifting into opposition when they do not.
Romanian MEPs, similarly, are comfortable with pro-industry positions, preferring to move towards right-leaning partners on simplification legislation than tack left.
Despite resistance from parts of the group, the S&D leadership has favoured keeping the door open to the Christian Democrats.
“We will continue extending a hand to the EPP, but we do it out of European responsibility,” said S&D President García, speaking at a plenary session in late November.
Socialist Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez is partly behind the group’s conciliatory approach, according to two S&D sources granted anonymity to speak freely.
One of only three socialist leaders in the European Council, Sanchez is allegedly keen to avoid the group being seen as a destabilising force by blocking legislation — a move that would draw ire from his conservative colleagues.
S&D staffers in favour of the continued cooperation with the EPP warn that breaking with the EPP would only strengthen the far-right at the centre-left’s expense.
“The consequence of [a] confrontational approach is less influence,” said an official from Spain’s S&D delegation.
Still, some warn compromise has limits. The group has “certain principles we do not bargain on,” Maltese S&D Vice-President Alex Agius Saliba told Contexte. German MEP René Repasi echoed the concern, cautioning against abandoning red lines simply to secure a centrist majority.
What those red lines are and how they are used in negotiations is unclear for some lawmakers. “Everything is done on the sly,” said one S&D MEP from a Western European country, criticizing the leadership’s management.
The uncertainty is also unsettling the group’s centrist ally, Renew Europe. “It’s hard to understand the S&D’s strategy,” said a senior Renew official. “One day they’re opposing the EPP, and the next they’re with them.”
EPP officials approached by Contexte declined to comment on their relationship with the S&D.
Finding new leverage
The next litmus test for the S&D’s cohesion will be the upcoming stream of simplification bills — stretching across various sectors and once more testing the group’s principles — which the Parliament will have to negotiate.
In practice, this is likely to mean a selective partnership with the EPP. “Only on topics where the EPP needs us,” said French lawmaker Jean-Marc Germain. “On the rest the S&D will be in opposition.”
The proposed 2028-2034 EU budget is emerging as a key leverage point. With far-right groups typically hostile to EU spending, centrists retain influence — and socialists are looking to use it to push for a larger budget and a greater EU share of tax revenues.
Similarly, the 21 January move to freeze Parliament’s work on the EU–US trade deal exposed no cracks among centrists, underlining how external pressure can still unite them.
If the Socialists fail to rein in the right-wing coalition, some are floating a fallback: use the power of another EU institution: the European Council.
“In the past, it was rather Parliament that was more progressive,” said Repasi. “Now the Council may be the institution of reason.”
Socialists hold key positions in enough coalition governments across the EU — from Germany, Spain, Denmark — to create “a blocking minority,” the German lawmaker said. “That blocking minority can always say that we accept no deal in trilogue where Parliament can only vote with the far right.”
Edited by Anca Gurzu