European Parliament rejects proposal to encourage consideration of Basic Income

In a February 2017 vote on recommendations to address the effects of automation, the European Parliament rejected a proposal to recommend consideration of basic income.

As previously reported in Basic Income News, the Committee on Legal Affairs of the European Parliament prepared a draft report with recommendations concerning the regulation of artificial intelligence and robotics as well as their economic and societal effects.

Among numerous other recommendations to the European Commission, the draft stated that “in the light of the possible effects on the labour market of robotics and AI a general basic income should be seriously considered” and that it invited all Member States of the European Union to do so. Maddy Delvaux, the Socialist Member of the European Parliament (MEP) from Luxembourg who authored the report, has stated that she personally supports a universal basic income. The report, however, merely proposed to raise the idea for consideration without endorsing it.

The European Parliament voted on the Committee on Legal Affairs’ report on February 16, 2017. This vote determined the recommendations that would be delivered to the European Commission with respect to technology policy.

The recommendation to “seriously consider” basic income was rejected for inclusion in the final report, with 328 MEPs voting against the recommendation, 286 MEPs voting in favor, and eight abstaining from the vote.

Daniel Feher, Vice-Chair of Unconditional Basic Income Europe (UBIE), was disappointed by the result, but sees a silver lining:

It’s a shame that the conservative and liberal parties seem to be afraid of an open-minded debate on basic income. On the positive side, we’re thankful MEP Mady Delvaux raised the issue, and provoked the first serious discussion of basic income at the European Parliament. The EP’s Legal Affairs Committee, in charge of this report, also supported universal basic income in the draft text. Since the vote was taken by roll call, we know who supported the proposal, and this gives us a much stronger basis for lobbying in the future. We will keep pushing the basic income debate for sure!

Other controversial recommendations put up for consideration included a tax on work performed by robots, which was also voted down (302 to 288, with 22 abstentions).

According to, “A majority of MEPs preferred to focus at this stage on the issue of liability, one of the main elements included in the report, instead of discussing the introduction of controversial taxes. Instead of the universal basic income, legislators spoke in favour of support programmes to facilitate the transition to new jobs.”


Jorge Valero, “Parliament plenary rejects universal basic income,”; Feb 16, 2017 (updated Feb 22, 2017).

Reviewed by Genevieve Shanahan

Photo: European Parliament Plenary Chamber, CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 diamond geezer

About Kate McFarland

Kate McFarland has written 512 articles.

Former lead writer and editor of Basic Income News.

The views expressed in this Op-Ed piece are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent the view of Basic Income News or BIEN. BIEN and Basic Income News do not endorse any particular policy, but Basic Income News welcomes discussion from all points of view in its Op-Ed section.


  • consideration is mispelled btw Kate 🙂

  • Ann Vogel

    45% in favor of the recommendation should also be honored as a strong statement on the widening interest in Europe in universal basic income.

  • Boris

    My sense is – and I don’t know whether such an argument was forwarded by the proponents of Basic Income – that it would allow for a minimum security, whereby people who are out of work could constructively search for. an optimal occupation, including their own business, thereby benefitting themselves, as well as the society, instead of desperately taking any job, if such is at all available,, without healthy expectations for the future.

  • R Jones

    Fewer and fewer consumers capable of buying new products. Fewer retail stores generating profits to stay in business. Layoffs still continue so the unemployed are just revolving on the treadmill with no way out. The homeless numbers are growing, families are splitting, and the investors are grabbing homes for 30% under value waiting to catch the next family that falls on hard times. Many of these former homeowners once were financially stable and were friends and family, but even they can’t stop these profit seekers. The value of money is abstract and out of touch with reality. Few will speak up but it seems, only our leaders on the pedestal can make these decisions on what humanity is worth. In their dimension either way, for or against, profits and maintaining their positions must be the outcome. Humanity as a whole is much bigger than the few minds of policy making that demand loyalty and administration of the entire world population and how we manage life. It seems either the world economy will crash or a more correct form of income dispersion must be put in place now to save us all.

  • Valko Petrov

    It would be inerested to know how the votes are distributed over the separate political parties in the parliement. Similar information would be indicative for the future development of the BIEN movement.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.