Breaking news!!! ”Van Rompuy bites dog!!!”

At this moment the home page of the European Council is all about the spring EUCO meeting 1 to 2 March 2012, with further pages dedicated to the re-election of president Herman Van Rompuy, the first day of the spring European Council, the euro area leaders on Greece, the Treaty on stability, coordination and governance (TSCG aka the fiscal compact) signed, and day two of the EUCO meeting summed up.

These summaries have links to documents, speeches and webcasts, so technically the communication effort was handled neatly. Under Meetings, I would prefer for the conclusions and the euro statement to link to the page with all the available language versions regardless of the language the visitor happens to use. The link to the TSCG offers an example.


EUCO summary

For the reader pressed for time, the EUCO conclusions begin with a summary of the results:

The European Council discussed the implementation of the EU's economic strategy. This strategy pursues both continued fiscal consolidation and determined action to boost growth and jobs; sustainable growth and jobs cannot be built on deficits and excessive debt levels. The measures taken to stabilize the situation in the euro area are bearing fruit.

The European Council endorsed the five priorities for 2012 set out in the Commission's Annual Growth Survey. It looked at action that has to be taken at national level. Member States must make faster progress towards the targets of the Europe 2020 Strategy and step up efforts on the reforms taken up in the 2011 Country-Specific Recommendations. They are expected to indicate the measures they intend to take to that effect in their National Reform Programmes and their Stability or Convergence Programmes. The European Council also discussed action required at the EU level, pushing ahead with completing the Single Market in all its aspects, both internal and external, and boosting innovation and research.

In the margins of the European Council the participating Member States signed the Treaty on stability, coordination and governance in the EMU.

The European Council set the EU's priorities for the forthcoming G20 meeting and UN Rio+20 Conference, with a particular emphasis on growth-enhancing measures and reforms. It took stock of developments concerning the Arab Spring and set guidance for future EU action to support that process.

The European Council granted candidate status to Serbia.

It agreed that the Council should revert to the issue of Bulgaria and Romania's accession to the Schengen area in order to adopt its decision in September.

Finally, the European Council re-elected Herman Van Rompuy as its President.

Herman Van Rompuy

One of the concrete decisions was the reappointment (formally election) of the EUCO president for two and a half years.

I already noted that president Herman Van Rompuy promised no real change for EU citizens during his second term, during which he will chair the Euro Summit as well. (A post in Swedish on Grahnblawg too about this election of a sole candidate.)

In addition to the draft conclusions (not formally published) and press conference videos, Van Rompuy left a number of speeches and statements as reading for journalists and aficionados of EU politics: his acceptance speech, his statement after the first session of the European Council with the letter S in prominence, his speech at the signing of the of the Treaty on Stability, Coordination
and Governance in the Economic and Monetary Union (TSCG) by 25 of the 27 EU member states, and his positive end note at the conclusion of the summit, even risking a joke about his own (s)election (in French).


Van Rompuy bites dog?

Those who cry out for boldness and charisma are probably driven to despair before Van Rompuy opens his mouth, and they possibly fall asleep before hearing a word.

If ”Man bites dog” encapsulates news, there is little front page headline material to wring out of these addresses.

The structure is clear and the style restrained. In a low key they put chosen policies in perspective and explain the choices made. Their lack of hyperbole makes them more credible than many EU proclamations of yore. The messages seem to be the kind of gentle prodding national leaders want, or at least tolerate.

Are Van Rompuy's interventions and work effective? Can the outcomes be judged now or later?



Ralf Grahn
speaker on EU affairs, especially digital policy and law


P.S. Between the global issues and the national level, with a tenuous hold on democracy, the European Union institutions and the eurozone coteries shape our future. At the same time we see a European online public sphere emerging. Grahnlaw (ranked fourth among political blogs in Finland), Grahnblawg (in Swedish) and Eurooppaoikeus (in Finnish) are among the more than 900 euroblogs aggregated by multilingual Bloggingportal.eu. Are you following the debates which matter for your future? Is your blog already listed on Bloggingportal?

European Council and Euro Summit: Van Rompuy promises more of the same

Habemus what? White smoke rose from the Justus Lipsius building. Without a black ball, both a cabal of 27 and a coterie of 17 political leaders in Europe made it clear that they want more of the same.

Late and almost imperceptibly the selection of Herman Van Rompuy to chair the Euro Summit coterie and the European Council for the next two and a half years had been introduced into the meagre advance information from EUCO to the public.

The selection of Van Rompuy to chair both clubs from 1 June 2012 to 30 November 2014 has now been confirmed.

In his acceptance speech Van Rompuy reminded his backers that ”our duty is to preserve the trust of the citizens in the Union”.

It would have been even better, if he had remembered that we are citizens of the European Union (even if we still lack full political rights).

Can we hope for better governance and more openness? Van Rompuy's thank-you address seems to dash any hope of improvement: ”In my second mandate, I intend to remain true to my style and working methods.”

Despite this, Van Rompuys audaciously speaks about winning over the hearts and minds of the Europeans.

How about democratic reform of the European Union and its institutions? For Van Rompuy democracy becomes a value worth effort right beyond the external border of the EU:

Without exaggerating the means at our disposal, we must act united whenever our interests and our values -- in particular democratic values -- are at stake, in the first place in our neighbourhood. This is where our credibility starts.

In addition, president Van Rompuy reported about the discussions at the first EUCO session. True to his style and working methods, he still did not share the paper he had circulated to the heads of state or government on how to revive growth and employment.

Update 7 March 2012: Through Twitter the Council press office yesterday made an Issues Paper (29 February 2012) available to the public.

Ralf Grahn
speaker on EU affairs, especially digital policy and law

P.S. With a sometimes tenuous hold on democracy, between the global issues and the national level, the European Union institutions and the eurozone coteries shape our future. At the same time we see a European online public sphere emerging. Grahnlaw (ranked fourth among politcal blogs in Finland), Grahnblawg (in Swedish) and Eurooppaoikeus (in Finnish) are among the more than 900 euroblogs aggregated by multilingual Bloggingportal.eu. Is your blog already listed among them? Are you following the debates which matter for your future?

EU: Campaigning in presidential style

If not for the ambiguous word 'stunt', EurActiv's headline description ahead of the 5 to 11 September 2011 week in the European Union would been the dream of the campaign manager for the probable next president of the European Council: Van Rompuy takes lead in eurozone crisis stunt.

Herman Van Rompuy was (s)elected president of the European Council from 1 December 2009 for two and a half years, until 31 May 2012.

The term is renewable once. Van Rompuy seems to embrace the idea of a second term (RTE).

If we look at the agenda of Van Rompuy, he happens to meet members of his electoral college, 27 persons in all with a vote: the heads of state or government of the EU member states.

Very civilised campaigning, far from the 'hoi polloi'.


Update 6 September 2011 about 09:30 EET: I have noticed that Stanley Pignal on the FT Brussels blog discussed Van Rompuy's campaign in a blog post published yesterday. Recommended reading.



Ralf Grahn

European Council President: Irish support for Mary Robinson?

The name of Mary Robinson has struck a chord with proponents of EU founding values and gender equality, when discussing the future President of the European Council (if the Lisbon Treaty enters into force). Here are a few examples:



Jon Worth



O’Conall Street



Belfast and Beyond



The European Citizen


***



Today, EurActiv has an article on Mary Robinson as a candidate.


***

I think that the European leaders could do worse than to elect someone a growing number of Europeans would be proud of.

Perhaps even the Irish government could find the courage to endorse a world class ambassador for Ireland, rather than the failed European Tony Blair?


Ralf Grahn

Tony Blair wrong choice for Europe

“Tony Blair would be a good choice for Europe”, writes Charles Grant of the Centre for European Reform in the Financial Times (6 October 2009). Because the President of the European Council lacks formal powers, his influence will depend on his force of personality, powers of persuasion and contact book.

According to Grant, Blair has a track record as a successful politician, he would give the European Union credibility in other parts of the world, he is a great salesman and he could help the EU to deal with a new Conservative government from 2010.

***

World stage

The sad reality is that the European Union will still lack a real foreign and security policy when the Lisbon Treaty is in force, although the treaty improves the input and output mechanisms.

Nearly all of Grant’s arguments boil down to psychology. Are world powers going to be taken in by band-aid solutions, essentially built on “personality”? Are the players on the world stage that unsophisticated and unconcerned about real credentials?

The (s)election of Blair would be yet another example of the French paradox in EU politics: the will to attain “gloire” without the commensurate means.

Why choose a European Council President almost guaranteed to try to upstage the High Representative/Vice-President in international affairs, instead of promoting progress in the other policy areas covered by the European Council?

***

Britain

Why make a future choice as a gift to a Labour government, which seems to be on its way to retirement?

Would Blair would be a real help with the probable next Conservative government, when the Tories oppose his nomination?

If a Conservative government starts the process to repatriate powers, the United Kingdom may be heading for withdrawal before the first term of a European Council President is ended.

Why hand-pick a candidate the British public does not want?

***

Europe

The governments of the United Kingdom, Ireland and Italy have expressed support for Blair. The media have spread rumours about French support and weakening of German resistance.

Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands have set the stage for a more limited role, in line with the Lisbon Treaty provisions.

The selection of the President of the European Council is in the hands of 27 electors. There are no procedures in place for open nominations and competition. The European Parliament and EU citizens are outside the loop. The legitimacy of the appointee does not extend beyond the caucus of the heads of state or government.

The EU leaders cannot count on a favourable public opinion in Europe, if they select Blair. On the contrary, they can be sure of considerable opposition. Would it be wise to widen the chasm between themselves and the public by acting in an authoritarian manner?

In the long run it could be better to opt for a strategic mind and a steady pair of hands to facilitate the substance of the directions and priorities the European Union needs, if it wants to play a constructive role in the world and in the lives of its citizens.

Here are some of the worthy persons who have been mentioned:

Jan Peter Balkenende, Prime Minister of the Netherlands
François Fillon, Prime Minister of France
Felipe González, former Prime Minister of Spain
Jean-Claude Juncker, Prime Minister of Luxembourg
Paavo Lipponen, former Prime Minister of Finland
Chris Patten, former UK Government Minister, EU Commissioner for External Relations and last Governor of Hong Kong
Mary Robinson, former President of Ireland and former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights
Herman Van Rompuy. Prime Minister of Belgium

***

High Representative/Vice-President

The painstaking process of shaping convergent European views on foreign and security policy might be better served by giving the new High Representative/Vice-President the backing to serve without too much interference from an overzealous President of the European Council.

There has been speculation about at least the following few worthy names:

Carl Bildt, Foreign Minister of Sweden
Joschka Fischer, former Foreign Minister of Germany
Franco Frattini, Foreign Minister of Italy and former EU Commissioner
Bernard Kouchner, Foreign Minister of France
Olli Rehn, Commissioner in charge of EU enlargement
Frank Walter Steinmeier, outgoing German Foreign Minister


There are certainly other good names out there, but it is important that EU citizens start the discussion without waiting for the white smoke to rise from the European Council.



Ralf Grahn

USA & EU: Comparing Presidents

The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America, says the US Constitution (Article II.1).



Yesterdays blog post “No EU President” looked at the tasks of the President of the European Council: to chair, to facilitate and to handle representative duties.

(As a matter of fact, the Finnish and Swedish versions of the Lisbon Treaty use a term denoting “chairperson”, not “president”.)

The President of the European Council does not even have a vote (Article 235(1) TFEU), in the rare cases when qualified majority decisions are allowed.

Mostly the European Council decides by unanimity, which makes it difficult to reach any hard decision for the new chair to represent.

***

Even the most glamorous performer would stand on quicksand, because the EU member states want to keep their veto cards.

The President of the EU Commission at least holds the legitimacy of being approved by the European Parliament.


Ralf Grahn

No EU President

We have heard voices warning that blogging is dumbing down mankind, as opposed to real newspaper journalism.



They have not read British tabloids on EU affairs, as Nosemonkey and this blog have pointed out.




The European Citizen and Kosmopolito have given sound advice to journalists about what the new President of the European Council is and is not.

***

What if we actually have the contrary problem? What if some of the tabloids with the largest readerships are the ones not only indoctrinating the public, but systematically misrepresenting the facts to advance their own(ers’) agenda?

What if fairly modest blogs are the place to go for correct information and intelligent comment?

***

The Financial Times is an exception among British newspapers, but ...

Even the quality FT Brussels blog has asked readers to suggest the person to become “the European Union’s first full-time president”. The first comment was by Kosmopolito, who reminded readers of what the new job is about.

***

President of the European Council


Let us go back to the basics. This is what the Lisbon Treaty says about the new job:


Article 15(5) and (6) Treaty on European Union (TEU)


5. The European Council shall elect its President, by a qualified majority, for a term of two and a half years, renewable once. In the event of an impediment or serious misconduct, the European Council can end the President's term of office in accordance with the same procedure.

6. The President of the European Council:

(a) shall chair it and drive forward its work;

(b) shall ensure the preparation and continuity of the work of the European Council in cooperation with the President of the Commission, and on the basis of the work of the General Affairs Council;

(c) shall endeavour to facilitate cohesion and consensus within the European Council;

(d) shall present a report to the European Parliament after each of the meetings of the European Council.

The President of the European Council shall, at his level and in that capacity, ensure the external representation of the Union on issues concerning its common foreign and security policy, without prejudice to the powers of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.

The President of the European Council shall not hold a national office.

***

The fine print of the tasks of the new chair has not been published or decided officially, but as Eurocentric has pointed out, this is not an executive President.

When suggesting or discussing candidates, it is advisable to know the job description.


Ralf Grahn

EU capitals: Time to nominate candidates for President & High Representative

After the overwhelming Yes vote in the Irish Lisbon 2009 referendum, the democratic legitimacy of the Lisbon Treaty has been secured in all 27 EU member states. Only two signatures are missing.

It is time to get back to business, but first the institutions of the European Union must be put in working order.

On 1 November 2009 the old Commission will turn into a caretaker administration. Hopefully a new Commission, under the Lisbon Treaty rules, can take over soon. The European capitals should now publish their proposed candidates, if they have not done so. The new Commission should move towards parity between women and men.

President-elect José Manuel Barroso should keep the public informed about the proposals and the process.

***

Given the minimal size of the electoral college, the President of the European Council and the High Representative/Vice-President now require open nominations from the capitals to allow for a public debate.

Only those who have public government backing should be considered eligible. Give each country the right to propose one candidate for each post. They can be their own nationals or from another member state.

The process becomes a mockery of sound decision making in step with EU citizens, if it is conducted in secret and public discussion is based on leaks to the media.


Ralf Grahn

Why President Blair?

If Ireland has approved the EU Lisbon Treaty, discussion about the new President of the European Council starts in earnest.

Sweden’s Fredrik Reinfeldt, Carl Bildt and Cecilia Malmström can use the time between the last essential country approval and the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon for open and transparent nomination procedures.

British media have already trumpeted the election of Tony Blair referring to each other, but before rushing ahead there is need for rational and open discussion.

From a European perspective, let us look at the man, the country and the reactions.

***

The man

Tony Blair is remembered as a long serving Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and for at least one stirring speech on Europe.

Blair is also remembered for the non-ratification of the Constitutional Treaty, “red lines” and four major British opt-outs leading to a weaker Lisbon Treaty, and for greater loyalty towards the administration of George W. Bush than towards efforts to find a European position on Iraq.

***

The country

The Labour government of Gordon Brown is said to support Blair, but the government is on its last legs.

Britain has ratified the Lisbon Treaty, with four major opt-outs, and it is known as a grudging and minimalist member state in the European Union.

In a few months this relationship is set to turn from bad to worse. A new Conservative government will predictably take over. The Tories have already done their best to flee to the fringes of European politics. They have left the mainstream European People’s Party (old EPP-ED group) in the European Parliament, and they have formed the anti-integrationist European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) group together with other hard line nationalists.

Under David Cameron and William Hague, the Conservative Party has loudly promised its best efforts to wreck the Lisbon Treaty, offering under hand support to the headstrong Czech President Vaclav Klaus to oppose approval by the parliament of his own country.

The Tories reject the basic tenet of evolving integration, by promising negotiations to roll back existing EU competences.

Perversely, instead of leaving the European Union, they want to stay on the inside to play their veto card against the interests of Europe and EU citizens.

Despite Britain’s many assets, it is no longer in the interest of the European Union to keep the United Kingdom as a member. The grass roots of the Conservative Party are in favour of secession. For once the interests of Europe and anti-European Brits coincide.

An In or Out referendum would settle the matter, at least for a few decades. A more mature Britain could reapply in due time.

***

Reactions



According Times Online (3 October 2009) William Hague, the Conservative shadow secretary for foreign policy, sees Blair as the worst choice for Britain and the European Union.

If the (probable) next UK government does not want Blair, what do active Europeans think?

Just a few examples:



Read the petition and the comments on European Tribune’s Stop Blair!



Read the comments following Jean Quatremer’s blog post on Coulisses de Bruxelles, where the duo Tony Blair and Frank Walter Steinmeier was presented as a done deal.

***

The Swedish Presidency and the European leaders should consider the track records of potential candidates and listen to the opinions before they decide on the new President of the European Council.

It is difficult to see Tony Blair as a good choice for the European Union. As a European he has fallen short of expectations. His country is turning into a disaster for the European Union, if it stays, and the next government is dead set against him. Popular opinion would hardly welcome the choice of Blair.

To the European Council: Arrange open nominations and allow for a free discussion, including media debates, before you act!


Ralf Grahn

“EU President” Tony Blair?

Despite Charlemagne’s notebook, the UK government has done European public debate a service by backing Tony Blair for the post of President of the European Council.

Julien Frisch and The European Citizen are among the many who have contributed actively.


***

European credentials

What has Tony Blair’s done for the evolving core areas of EU action?

1) A European Union speaking with one voice in the world. Moves to achieve a coherent and consistent European common foreign and security policy (CFSP) and common security and defence policy (CSDP), away from solo flying by individual member states (including the UN Security Council, international orgnisations and relations with the USA). A proven commitment to a common European defence, in alliance with NATO, but not subservient to the United States.

2) The Schengen agreement abolishing border controls between the member states.

3) Adoption or at least the clear commitment to adopt the common currency (euro).

4) Justice and home affairs: Full participation in the area of freedom, security and justice.

5) The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights.

6) Driving force or brake during the treaty reform process of the European Union since the December 2000 European Council in Nice?


***

European vision

Even if the Lisbon Treaty enters into force, the pre-democratic European Union will continue to be a “hobbled giant”. Effective action and democratic legitimacy require profound reform, leading to a union based on its citizens.


***

Election procedure

Deals behind closed doors are possible only if the members of the European Council feel that EU citizens are not alienated enough from their project.

The British government has promoted an open debate. It is time for the Swedish Council Presidency to set the ground rules for open nominations and public debate on the top posts and between the candidates.


Ralf Grahn

Barroso officially nominated

When the European Council on 18 to 19 June 2009 put forward José Manuel Barroso as the intended nominee for the post of President of the Commission, this blog wondered why the heads of state or government did not make an official nomination, why the European Parliament should vote on an unofficial proposal and what the European leaders hoped to gain by delaying the nomination for a few weeks.

Typically, no reasons have been given, but today the Council has issued a press release on a written procedure:


“Council decides to nominate Mr. José Manuel Durão Barroso as the person it intends to appoint as President of the Commission for 2009-2014

Following the European Council on 18 and 19 June 2009, the Council, in the composition of Heads of State or Government, adopted today a decision nominating Mr. José Manuel Durão Barroso as the person the Council intends to appoint as President of the Commission for the period from 1 November 2009 to 31 October 2014.

The decision will be forwarded to the European Parliament.” (Brussels, 9 July 2009 11850/09) (Presse 212)


***
Sweden’s EU Minister Cecilia Malmström has commented in positive terms on her blog.



***

Meanwhile, the political groups in the European Parliament had told the Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt that the EP vote on Barroso will take place later than the July 2009 inaugural session.



Despite the timing, after the tripartite agreement between the political groups of the European People’s Party (EPP), the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats (PASD) and the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats (ALDE) the road seems to be clear for a reappointment of Barroso, as reported by Jean Quatremer on Coulisses de Bruxelles.



***

This will intensify the efforts by the national governments to propose members for the next Commission, if they have not done so, and to jockey for important posts for the next five years, although it is still unclear if the new Commission will be confirmed under Lisbon of Nice Treaty rules.


Ralf Grahn

Did the European Council nominate Barroso?

The European Council giveth and the European Council taketh away?

Yes, I have to admit that I find the antics of the European Council disturbing. The media have reported that José Manuel Barroso has been nominated as the intended President of the Commission, but read the Presidency Conclusions carefully:



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.”

***

Point 6 tells the same story as the media reports, but point 8 of the Presidency Conclusions makes the nomination conditional. There will be a formal nomination only at a later date.

How can the European Parliament (and the newly elected EP convenes and constitutes the political groups only on 14 July 2009) respond formally to an informal inquiry?

Are the heads of state or government going to formalise their nomination before the EP’s inaugural session, if the informal discussions with the EP indicate that a majority would be prepared to back Barroso?

Has the European Council scored an own goal, by being too clever by half? If not, what does it expect to gain during the coming three weeks?



Ralf Grahn

Instant Barroso ─ delayed Commission?

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

Barroso: Our opinion counts?

I owe this post to Jean Quatremer’s Coulisses de Bruxelles: Toi aussi hacke le site de la présidence tchèque de l’UE ! (17 June 2009)



Instead of convening to anoint José Manuel Barroso as chief of the European Commission, the European Council should study the outcome of the survey of the Czech Presidency of the Council of the European Union.

The Czech government asked, in three languages: Should José Manuel Barroso be re-appointed as President of the European Commission?

The results against Barroso (No-votes) were (per 8 June 2009, according to the web page; when I checked a little while ago):


• English 75%
• Czech 82%
• French 89%

Such polls are not especially reliable, but if the acting Council Presidency asks the citizens of the European Union, one would expect their opinion to be taken into account.

We live in a union where decisions are taken as openly as possible and as closely as possible to the citizen, don’t we?


Ralf Grahn

European Council recruitment: President and High Representative

The European Council has been tardy in preparing for the possible entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, so I decided to lend them a helping hand by publishing this job advertisement (at no expense to the EU).

***

Senior EU positions

Subject to the ratification and entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, the European Council is hiring highly qualified individuals for the following posts:

• President of the European Council, for a term of two and a half years, renewable once. Relevant experience: Prime Minister or comparable.
• High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and Vice-President of the Commission. Relevant experience: Foreign Minister or comparable.

To check the general job description and your eligibility, be a sport and read the Treaty of Lisbon (at least the relevant Articles).

Detailed responsibilities, authority, staff, salary and fringe benefits have yet to be worked out by your employers, 27 member states governments of the European Union, but understand that this is not a football transfer.

General profile

The European Council attaches particular importance to candidates' ability to grasp problems that are often complex and varied in nature, to react rapidly to changing circumstances, and to communicate effectively. Candidates are expected to show initiative and imagination and to be highly motivated. They should be able to work both independently and in a team and should be able to adjust to a multicultural working environment. They will also be expected to develop their professional skills throughout their career. Recruitment aims to secure for the European Council the services of officials of the highest standard of ability, efficiency and integrity, recruited on the
broadest possible geographical basis from among the citizens of the Member States of the European Union. [Adapted from the European Personnel Selection Office’s General rules governing open competitions; OJEU 26.2.2009 C 47 A/1]

When appointing the President of the European Council, the President of the Commission (almost sealed) and the High Representative, due account is taken of the need to respect the geographical and demographic diversity of the EU and its member states. [See Lisbon Treaty Declaration 6.]

If you are unsure about if political affinities and gender are seen as geographical or demographic diversity factors, or if you have other questions, the Swedish Presidency of the Council of the European Union is available for discreet inquiries from 1 July 2009.

Citizens of the European Union are requested not to meddle in the selection process, but are anyway to be ignored.

***

Is this your next career move?


Ralf Grahn

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

Barroso vs Verhofstadt: President of the EU Commission

News services report and Euroblogs discuss the next President of the European Commission. Here are a few examples:


• The European Citizen: Parliamentary Shifts and Whatnot



• Julien Frisch: Make Guy Verhofstadt the next European Commission President!



• Stephen Spillane: Deadlock in the new Parliament?



• Stephen Spillane: It finally gets interesting: Barroso vs Verhofstadt


• EurActiv: Support growing for Verhofstadt to replace Barroso



• EUobserver: Barroso urges EU states to appoint new commission president next week



• EUbusiness: France, Germany back EU’s Barroso ahead of summit




***

I will return with some facts and speculation on the Barroso vs Verhofstadt issue.



Ralf Grahn

European Union: Council meetings (V) Provisional agendas

In the context of Article 204 TEC (Article 237 TFEU) and based on the programming, the Council’s Rules of Procedure foresaw the establishment of indicative provisional agendas by the incoming Council Presidency for the next six months. When a Council meeting approaches, a provisional agenda is drawn up and communicated to the members of the Council, together with the relevant documents.

The main rule is that the provisional agenda and the relevant documents are sent to the governments at least 14 days before the Council meeting, as provided for in Article 3(1) and (2) of the Council’s Rules of Procedure.

***

A longer period of 21 days is envisioned, when the documents relate to:

• Visas, asylum, immigration and other policies related to free movement of persons (TEC Title IV of Part 3)
• Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters (TEU Title VI).


This is what footnote (1), statement (b), says:

(b) Re Article 3(1) and (2)

“The President will endeavour to ensure that, in principle, the provisional agenda for each meeting of the Council dealing with implementation of Title IV of Part 3 of the EC Treaty and Title VI of the EU Treaty and any documents relating to the items involved reach members of the Council at least 21 days before the beginning of the meeting.”


***


Article 3(1) and (2) Council’s Rules of Procedure




Article 3
Agenda

1. Taking into account the Council's 18-month programme, the President shall draw up the provisional agenda for each meeting. The agenda shall be sent to the other members of the Council and to the Commission at least 14 days before the beginning of the meeting.

2. The provisional agenda shall contain the items in respect of which a request for inclusion on the agenda, together with any documents relating thereto, has been received by the General Secretariat from a member of the Council or from the Commission at least 16 days before the beginning of that meeting. The provisional agenda shall also indicate by way of an asterisk the items on which the Presidency, a member of the Council or the Commission may request a vote. Such an indication shall be made once all the procedural requirements provided for by the Treaties have been complied with.

-----


***

In most cases the member states’ representations at the Council and the governments back home are familiar with the upcoming issues, but the strict rules are meant to pre-empt surprises.


Some exceptions are foreseen, as shown by footnote 1 with statement (c) to Article 3:


(c) Re Articles 1 and 3

“Without prejudice to Article 22(2) of the EU Treaty, which specifies that an extraordinary Council meeting may be convened at very short notice in cases requiring a rapid decision, the Council is aware of the need for matters relating to the common foreign and security policy to be dealt with swiftly and efficiently. The arrangements in Article 3 shall not prevent this need from being met.”



Ralf Grahn

Horst Köhler: Germany in Europe

Germany has reviewed its great transformation and paid tribute to its 60 year old written Constitution. In his speech, President Horst Köhler evoked the role of Germany in Europe, on the day before he was elected for a second term:


„Wir sind eine freie, geeinte Nation, und wir sind glücklich darüber. Dabei wissen wir: Ohne unsere Freunde in Europa, ohne die europäische Friedensordnung und den Gemeinsamen Markt hätten wir vieles nicht erreicht. Deshalb stehen wir zu unserer Verantwortung als Motor der europäischen Einigung. Deshalb liegt uns am Herzen, was aus Europa wird. Und deshalb sollten wir alle am 7. Juni zur Europawahl gehen und damit ein Zeichen setzen. Auch da entscheidet sich unsere Zukunft.“

***

The European Union is team play. You play for your team, not against it. You are given, but you give in return.

It does not make everything hunky-dory, but the basic aims and the feeling of responsibility are there.



Ralf Grahn

EU: Anyone But Barroso keeps growing

While the political parties at European level have been sitting on their hands ahead of the European elections, leaving the European People’s Party (EPP) with the only official candidate for the Commission Presidency, active European’s have been voicing their opinions against a repeat performance by José Manuel Barroso.

In yesterday’s post Anyone But Barroso and EU 2.0, we mentioned the Financial Times column by Wolfgang Münchau: Like a fish, Europe is rotting from its head.


Now we notice Commission Vice-President Margot Wallström interviewed by Swedish Europaportalen: Wallström ratar omval av Barroso (Wallström rejects re-election of Barroso).



In line with her PES affiliation and feminist leanings, Wallström proposes former Commissioner Anna Diamantopoulou from Greece.


***

As usual, Jon Worth backs Pascal Lamy, but the Director-General of the WTO has just been confirmed for a new four year term.




***

Among EPP grass roots I have yet to register the first spontaneous exclamation of joy on account of the nomination of Barroso, despite backing from the Congress.

***


The EU heads of state or government deliberately cut out EU citizens from having a say. They have managed to alienate citizens from their union, but have they made a good or even a popular choice?


Ralf Grahn


P.S. Anyone But Barroso website