24 January 2010 – Issue : 870
Rethinking our institutions
By Alexander B Coronakis
The last two weeks have seen a historical high of tensions between political groups in the European Parliament. Most notably, the Greens, Socialists, and ALDE clashed hard with the EPP Group over former Commissioner-designate Rumiana Jeleva.
We need to rethink our structures
Clearly the hearing process is not optimal. Any time one Commissioner-designate is about to be booted, the opposing party will prepare to fight back with collateral damage. We saw this last week with Socialist Maros Sefcovic, and Neelie Kroes of ALDE.
Once it is public knowledge, or even internal knowledge of the political groups that one candidate is in trouble, the cogs start turning- and at this point, the European Union citizens are at a loss.
The European Commission essentially represents the government of the European Union – and the acceptance or not of a candidate by the Parliament should be only on the merits of their ability and suitability, and not their political affiliation.
The solution for this problem is not obvious, but it relates to the linearity of the hearing process, and its structure.
National Commissioner Elections
Furthermore, when will we realize that the only way to strengthen the candidates for the positions of the European Commission is to hold national elections for these? Beyond the fact that appointments and elections carry different weight – elected candidates are also more independent than appointees.
Finally, if one Commissioner-elect is rejected by the European Parliament (all members of which should also be directly elected – without lists) then the person who got second place in the elections should go through hearing. If the top 3 candidates are rejected, then there should be a new vote, with the candidates who ran in the first vote not being allowed to run again.
What’s in a name?
And if we want to take the European Commissioners seriously, perhaps we need to think of a better name for the position and the institution.
Not that administrations and politicians don’t take the Commission seriously; but the citizenry of the European Union is a different matter. Because sadly, years go by, and they still don’t know enough to make a reasoned assessment of the Commission.
The title “Senator” might be a little too American, and perhaps reflect a different approach. “Minister” is of course more appropriate – but it doesn’t sound right. Looking at the thesaurus, there’s actually no word that fits; with too many words already utilized lower on the Commission’s organograms.
Perhaps a new word altogether?
A final word on Jeleva
And a final word on Jeleva. The EPP is unhappy because they are stuck with a vice-President of the party that they have to gracefully deal with; ALDE is unhappy because their vice-President Antonyia Parvanova bit off more then she could chew, expecting to not only get Jeleva out of the Commission but to finish her politically. She may have succeeded in part, but it backfired, and will have political repercussions (and who knows what else). The Socialists are unhappy because although Martin Schulz took a hard stance against Jeleva, at the endpoint, he seemed to be willing to compromise, as he did with the re-election of Jose Manuel Barroso which he initially firmly and vocally opposed.
Generally, there are no winners from this tragedy. The image of the EU has been harmed; once again, in the name of politics.
******
Hearing of Antonio Tajani, designate Vice-President of the Commission and Commissioner
for Industry and Entrepreneurship (Strasbourg, 18 January 2009).
Antonio Tajani Hearing Report
Antonio Tajani
Industry and entrepreneurship
Our rating:
The former Commissioner for transport, confident and stylish Italian Antonio Tajani came to Strasbourg ready on 18 January, ready to get to work. In a three hour hearing that ran overtime thanks to some time pieces malfunctioning and easiness with words looks set to be more than competent in his new shoes of Industry and entrepreneurship which will also include tourism and space.
The questions were wide and varied. Industry needs a shakeup he warned – it needs modernization and a shift in paradigm to continue to be competitive.
We should also not forget the history of European industry, the importance of the UK and Germany in the building of the riches of this continent.
The industrial system needs modernization, it needs it to be competitive and it needs to be developing into a greener system, not because this is good environmental policy but because this is a good economic policy for the future.
Copenhagen he said and the conference that took place there was not a failure, it was a first step, now the US and China are taking ecological and emissions targets seriously. As the world has to compete with China so too does Europe have to compete with it.
Following several questions on financing the Commissioner Designate focused steadily and strongly on SMEs – how he would be able to get more financing for them, how public procurement could be used to assist them , how credit facilities had to commence lending and that women in SME and entrepreneurship roles had to be encouraged. Another area the Commissioner Designate targeted strongly was transparency. Full transparency and streamlining of existing legal law and regulation, full transparency as far as industry and lobbying are concerned – where he openly invited all lobbyists in Brussels to sign up to the Lobbyists lists of the Commission and the Parliament and how important this was to be open and honest with the citizens of Europe.
Other modalities underlined were tourism and how that will play a great role in the next 5 years, he will be pushing for a connaisance of Europe regions wide – aiming to highlight nontraditional areas on the continent for tourism and non-traditional times thus spreading the tourism calendar and the work provided in those regions in this industry, over the year.
Space under his watchful guard would advance he pledged, first example being Galileo which would be in effect by 2014. Although having it's budgetary hiccups as it has done – need a further 90 million Euros more than planned – the project will be more than beneficial Tajani said.
Many MEPs wanted to make sure that Tajani would be ready to “fight” for them – MEP CHATZIMARKAKIS referenced boxing terms leading Tajani to lightly comment on his uncertainty as to whether the MEP wanted a Commissioner or a boxer – but as always he reminded of his weighty past, what he has already achieved and gave his assurances of being ready to battle for issues.
In fact he often turned to just how ready he was to be in this position, should he be confirmed, Innovation receiving his attention as to a field that needed further development and support as without innovation there was no growing industry, was also to be applied to this new Commission – new ideas, new modernization and a fundamental re-appraisal of norms so as to have a European legislative network where all laws are better applied.
Like many other Commissioners Designate in these hearings the past week Antonio Tajani also spoke of the further scope of the European Investment Bank and how it could come into play in terms of funding and micro enterprise. He promised to go to Luxembourg and talk to those responsible about how to utilize this bank further.
All in all a more than competent Tajani flew through his hearing. His dedication to “green economies through greening economies” sounds like a promising goal.
