BRUSSELS — The European Parliament’s political groups are more polarized than they’ve ever been. But they all agree on one thing: The debates are insufferably dull — and it’s time to change that.

Parliament President Roberta Metsola asked political group chairs before the summer recess to brainstorm ways to make the hemicycle’s debates — often empty, tedious and scripted — more engaging.

It’s part of a long-standing effort to spice up how MEPs do politics in the house. In January, the Parliament tried to start forcing lawmakers to at least show up from the start of debates, by not telling them when they will be called on to speak at the podium.

POLITICO got its hands on the groups’ suggestions — which range from more unscripted interventions and new debate formats to turning up the heat on the EU executive.

We read them so you don’t have to, but here are the letters in full, by the far-right European of Sovereign Nations, right-wing European Conservatives and Reformists, liberal Renew, center-left Socialists and Democrats, the left-wing Greens and The Left. The center-right European People’s Party and far-right Patriots for Europe did not send any suggestions.

“The elements proposed will now be assessed and possible measures to be tested will be made for a new discussion” in a future meeting of political group leaders, the Parliament’s press service said.

Getting to really grill the Commission

All groups agree that commissioners get let off the hook too easily.

To put an end to that, the ECR proposes a “ping-pong” Q&A format, allowing MEPs to directly question commissioners — instead of just delivering statements drafted in advance. “This segment should be flexible enough to be added to the agenda at short notice, enabling the Parliament to respond rapidly to unforeseen or emerging events of political or geopolitical importance.”

The group wants to improve the tools available for MEPs beyond “purely declarative speeches” to scrutinize the commissioners’ actions — an idea shared by Renew and the S&D, both of which want to have regular quizzing of commissioners.

One idea from the ESN group, led by Alternative for Germany, is to extend the blue card system — a tool for MEPs to be able to reply to another MEP’s speech ad hoc and ask a question — to commissioners too.

The Left and S&D are also proposing that, following the College of Commissioners meeting in Strasbourg — when the 27 commissioners take decisions together — they then come to the Parliament to present the outcome, and give MEPs the chance to challenge it publicly.

Spicing up debating formats

All groups also agree that the blue card system should be allowed to be used more often by lawmakers.

The ECR is proposing a new debate format called “right-left” in which political groups with opposite views on big policy issues — such as the Green Deal and migration — “challenge each other’s positions directly.”

The Greens similarly want “controversial topics” to be prioritized when scheduling debates, and are also proposing a new debate format in which one MEP in charge of a file or topic is grilled for 60 minutes. “After short opening statements, members can respond and rebut directly, allowing for genuine dialogue,” the proposal reads.

Several groups are calling on the Parliament to schedule the debates right before voting on the topic or file, either at the plenary or committee level — with some even asking to schedule key debates during voting sessions.

Fewer empty seats

To boost attendance, many groups asked Metsola to ban side events during plenary week. Ushers should also sit MEPs attending the debate in the front rows, instead of their usual allocated seat, to make it more lively, the letters say.

Another idea is to reduce the number of debates to focus lawmakers’ attention on those that really matter — in particular getting rid of the many debates on foreign affairs, on which, as the S&D pointed out, the Parliament has limited authority.

All letters stopped short, however, of proposing an incentives and sanctions regime for MEPs to actually show up.

‘The EPP believes it’s important to improve attendance and we reflect on the possibilities,” said the party’s chief whip, Jeroen Lenaers, when asked why they ignored Metsola’s request for suggestions. The Patriots did not respond to POLITICO’s request for comment.