Opinion

Eight parliaments wrote one law. Brussels should read it as a mandate

Eight national drafts against addictive design, written together, are one common mandate from eight democracies. The Commission's fragmentation warning protects delay, and delay is what the platforms want.

Parliamentarians in eight countries are drafting laws against the same practices, together. On 2 November 2026, Dutch MP Barbara Kathmann presented a bill against addictive design, drafted in coordination with parliamentarians in Germany, France, Belgium, Luxembourg, Austria, Italy and Portugal. That is Europe converging, not fragmenting. The Commission, which warns that diverging national drafts risk fragmenting the single market, reducing legal certainty and raising compliance costs, should withdraw that warning and read these eight drafts for what they are: one common mandate, delivered in writing by eight democracies at once. National initiatives like Germany's mandatory cancellation button, Kathmann points out, are quickly adopted at EU level. This one arrives already grown.

Look at what the parliaments actually wrote. Endless scrolling, autoplay videos and notifications luring users into payment systems would count as banned unfair commercial practices. A first violation brings a warning, a second a heavy fine, and a repeat means the platform goes dark. The rules cover not only social media but games, dating apps and chatbots. Kathmann prefers tackling harmful algorithms at European level. Her reason for acting nationally is simple: Brussels takes too long. Fine, we say. The Dutch government formally wants a harmonised European solution in the Digital Fairness Act that avoids fragmenting the single market, and has asked Brussels to revise the Consumer Protection Cooperation Regulation with European-level enforcement powers. The Hague is doing the Commission's work for it, in writing, at its request.

The point of the coordination, Kathmann says, is that a rule built by the eight cannot be lobbied away in Brussels. This is not eight member states drifting apart. If you want proof that national politics can move the whole union, there it is. The Commission spent July 2026 finding, in its own investigation, that autoplay and infinite scroll push users into compulsive use. It even told Meta to switch both off by default. So the eight are legislating what Brussels itself documented. And they are asking for one law, not eight. The Netherlands has formally asked the Commission to ban addictive design in the Digital Fairness Act, with dark-pattern rules and enforcement at European level. That is convergence. The Commission should treat it as exactly that.

The objection is real: a single market needs a single rule. Kathmann prefers to legislate at European level and says so, and Germany wants prohibitions on dark patterns and addictive design written into the EU-wide law as well. The objection, however, now serves delay. What the warning protects is delay, and the platforms benefit from delay more than from any patchwork.

The Digital Fairness Act is expected to be proposed on 11 November 2026. It will be negotiated in parallel to the EU Kids Act proposal, so the timing matters. Commissioner McGrath has called the Act the missing piece of the puzzle in the EU's digital rulebook. Here is the piece, already on the table. Kathmann and her counterparts across Europe built you the starting text. That warning has to go first. Keep the national bills in reserve only where the final European law falls short. Turn it into one European rule.