The European Council moved quickly after the European elections to name José Manuel Durão Barroso as the person it intends to appoint as President of the Commission. According to Article 214(2) of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC), the nomination shall be approved by the European Parliament.
But the formal nomination of the chastened Barroso will be confirmed later, subject to discussions with the European Parliament.
***
EP approval
The nomination has now been placed in the in-tray of the new European Parliament, which convenes to its inaugural session on 14 July 2009. According to the Treaty of Nice, a majority of the votes is enough, but under the Treaty of Lisbon a majority of the component members is required (376).
The Group of the European People’s Party (EPP) cannot secure the approval of Barroso on its own, so it needs support from other political groups.
Ahead of and formally at its first session, the European Parliament has to make up its mind on procedural issues and possibly on the approval.
If there is a majority for Barroso, the EP may decide to approve the nomination during the first few days, which is what the Czech and Swedish Council Presidencies have been tasked to find out. But the European Parliament will hardly take a decision without a formal nomination from the Council, in the composition of heads of state or government (by written procedure).
The office of the President of the Commission is the most important nomination the EP is allowed to approve or reject. The European Parliament can hardly dispense with some sort of public hearing of the nominee. It is possible that a majority argues that both Barroso and the rest of the Commission are in office until 31 October 2009, and that they should all be approved at the same time and according to the same procedure (possibly the Lisbon Treaty).
Despite unanimous backing by heads of state or government, Barroso is far from universally acclaimed, and the Greens, parts of the socialists and some other MEPs can hardly fail to capitalise on his relative unpopularity. In other words, some will most probably vote to slow down the procedure and against approval.
***
New Commission
We know that there is going to be a President of the Commission, although it is not absolutely clear under which treaty the ‘election’ procedure is going to be brought to an end.
With regard to the rest of the Commission, there are material differences depending on the treaty in force at the time and the decisions to be taken by the European Council.
If the Lisbon Treaty enters into force, the European Council has promised to disregard its system of rotation between the member states and to opt for an exceptional decision, requiring unanimity. The Commission would continue to have one national from each member state.
If the Nice Treaty remains in force, the Commission has to be reduced.
But is there a compelling reason to separate the appointment of the Commission President and the Commission as a body?
***
Presidency Conclusions
European Council 18 to 19 June 2009 – Presidency Conclusions (Council document 11225/09 CONCL 2)
“Nomination of the President of the Commission
6. The Heads of State or Government agreed unanimously on the name of Mr. José Manuel DURÃO BARROSO as the person they intend to nominate as President of the European Commission for the period 2009-2014.
7. The Prime Minister of the Czech Republic and the Prime Minister of Sweden, as the present and the incoming Presidents of the European Council, will have discussions with the European Parliament in order to determine whether the Parliament is in a position to approve that nomination at its July plenary session.
8. In the light of these discussions, the Council, in the composition of Heads of State or Government, will, on the basis of Article 214(2), 1st subparagraph, of the EC Treaty, formalise its decision on the nomination of the person it intends to appoint as President of the Commission.
9. The process of nomination of the other persons who will be appointed as members of the Commission can only be initiated when the legal basis for the nomination procedure has become clear.”
***
Even if the financial crisis and economic downturn is used as a reason, how convincing is it to have a President in place, without the new Commissioners?
Ralf Grahn
Showing posts with label 214 TEC. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 214 TEC. Show all posts
Saturday, 20 June 2009
Friday, 12 June 2009
EU Commission President: Facts and speculation Barroso vs Verhofstadt
If the European Council 18 to 19 June 2009 nominates José Manuel Barroso, by a qualified majority, to become President of the Commission, the matter appears before the newly elected European Parliament for approval.
Under the Treaty of Nice, still in force, the approval requires a simple majority (Article 214 of the Treaty establishing the European Community; TEC).
The political groups in the European are not fully formed yet, but with 264 MEPs the biggest group, the European People’s Party (EPP) is still far from a majority for Barroso.
The official Election results are somewhat behind the events with regard to the groups, but offer the main facts.
Rainbow coalition?
In principle, a rainbow coalition of the Left, ASDE (ex PES), the Greens and ALDE (Liberals) would now have 347 votes, after the Italian Partito Democratico joined the renamed Socialist Group.
This is fairly close to a majority of the representatives (369), but it still looks like a chimera, even if Barroso is seen as a weak choice by swathes of politicians and public opinion.
Many socialist and liberal MEPs belong to national parties led by heads of governments behind a re-election of Barroso.
British, Spanish and Portuguese PES representatives were among these long before the European elections. Only the Democrats part of ALDE has indicated that it will vote against Barroso. Other groups and individual MEPs might fall into line with the nomination by the European Council, possibly unanimous.
Without clear indications to the contrary, there is no pot of gold at the end of this rainbow, although a secret ballot offers MEPs with reservations about Barroso the chance to defy their national party leaders by voting for Guy Verhofstadt.
EPP plus?
The ‘European Conservatives’ of the UK Tories, the Polish Law and Justice Party (PiS) and the Czech ODS have 49 MEPs at the moment, but we are still waiting for the announcements on further recruitment among the remaining 76 MEPs (provisionally classified as Others, UEN, IND/DEM).
In theory, these presently unsorted MEPs could boost the EPP vote to 389, and it is possible that many among the 125 nationalists, anti-federalists and others prefer Barroso as the lesser evil.
However, some of them are rejectionists at heart, with scant inclination to vote constructively. For Barroso and the heads of state or government it would be an embarrassment to have the Commission President carried into office on the votes of ultra-nationalists, xenophobes and fascists.
Therefore, expect the members of the European Council to lean on MEPs to pre-empt a rainbow coalition.
Ralf Grahn
Under the Treaty of Nice, still in force, the approval requires a simple majority (Article 214 of the Treaty establishing the European Community; TEC).
The political groups in the European are not fully formed yet, but with 264 MEPs the biggest group, the European People’s Party (EPP) is still far from a majority for Barroso.
The official Election results are somewhat behind the events with regard to the groups, but offer the main facts.
Rainbow coalition?
In principle, a rainbow coalition of the Left, ASDE (ex PES), the Greens and ALDE (Liberals) would now have 347 votes, after the Italian Partito Democratico joined the renamed Socialist Group.
This is fairly close to a majority of the representatives (369), but it still looks like a chimera, even if Barroso is seen as a weak choice by swathes of politicians and public opinion.
Many socialist and liberal MEPs belong to national parties led by heads of governments behind a re-election of Barroso.
British, Spanish and Portuguese PES representatives were among these long before the European elections. Only the Democrats part of ALDE has indicated that it will vote against Barroso. Other groups and individual MEPs might fall into line with the nomination by the European Council, possibly unanimous.
Without clear indications to the contrary, there is no pot of gold at the end of this rainbow, although a secret ballot offers MEPs with reservations about Barroso the chance to defy their national party leaders by voting for Guy Verhofstadt.
EPP plus?
The ‘European Conservatives’ of the UK Tories, the Polish Law and Justice Party (PiS) and the Czech ODS have 49 MEPs at the moment, but we are still waiting for the announcements on further recruitment among the remaining 76 MEPs (provisionally classified as Others, UEN, IND/DEM).
In theory, these presently unsorted MEPs could boost the EPP vote to 389, and it is possible that many among the 125 nationalists, anti-federalists and others prefer Barroso as the lesser evil.
However, some of them are rejectionists at heart, with scant inclination to vote constructively. For Barroso and the heads of state or government it would be an embarrassment to have the Commission President carried into office on the votes of ultra-nationalists, xenophobes and fascists.
Therefore, expect the members of the European Council to lean on MEPs to pre-empt a rainbow coalition.
Ralf Grahn
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)