EUROPEAN UNION: Parliament forces Commission rethink

Analysis

The current situation arose from two sets of sources:

1. Ideological/partisan differences.The immediate cause of the problem was the hearing on October 5 of Rocco Buttiglione, the proposed Italian commissioner for the Justice, Freedom and Security portfolio, before the European Parliament (EP) Committee for Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs. In response to the Catholic conservative views expressed by Buttiglione, the Committee formally rejected -- by a narrow majority -- his nomination both for the specific portfolio and as Commission vice-president. Many on the Left, in both the EP and wider civil society, were offended by Buttiglione's views, and doubted whether a commissioner holding such opinions would pursue a pro-civil liberties, anti-discrimination agenda in office.

   This was the first time that an EP committee had formally rejected a proposed commissioner, and the row may also reflect a rise in partisanship. After the June EP elections, the victorious European People's Party (EPP) insisted that EU leaders choose a new Commission president from their political group, in line with the draft constitutional treaty. Certainly, the appointment of Commission President-designate Jose Manuel Duaro Barroso (whose domestic background is in an EPP member party) was also the result of wider considerations. However, Barroso's appointment is being interpreted in certain quarters as having injected considerations of partisanship, rather than only professional competence and member state convenience, into the selection of the Commission, opening the way for political treatment of other potential commissioners.

2. Parliament assertiveness.Once the Civil Liberties Committee had formally rejected Buttiglione, the issue became the EP's role in the Commission investiture process, and more broadly in the inter-institutional balance of power. Many parliamentarians felt that there must be some change to Buttiglione's role if the parliamentary hearings were to have any credibility. However, it is difficult for the EP to enforce the results of its committee hearings, because it cannot take binding plenary votes on individual commissioners, only the proposed Commission as a whole (see EUROPEAN UNION: New Commission faces huge challenge - August 16, 2004). A provision for individual confirmation votes was included in the draft EU constitutional treaty from the Convention, but subsequently removed by EU leaders. Those MEPs determined to see some consequence from the committee hearings therefore felt that EU leaders had left them little option but to vote against the whole Commission in the vote scheduled for yesterday.

Barroso challenge.This left Barroso caught between the EP and the member states:

• He had to try to make concessions to the EP sufficient to win its approval for his Commission, without going back to the member states and asking for a replacement for Buttiglione, at least.
• Despite making two sets of concession -- involving promises on greater civil rights/anti-discrimination action and the sharing of some of Buttiglione's responsibilities within the Commission -- Barroso failed to find such a compromise in time for yesterday's vote, and it became clear that he would probably lose. Only the EPP was solidly behind the proposed Commission.

In the EP, the argument raised fundamental issues of the legislature's role in promoting the 'European interest' -- by supporting the Commission and avoiding an institutional crisis, or by insisting on its rights as the only directly elected EU body.

Next steps.Barroso will remain Commission president-designate, having been separately confirmed by the EP in July. However, he cannot take office as scheduled on November 1 without the full Commission. Until a complete line-up is approved, the outgoing Commission under Romano Prodi will remain as a caretaker administration. The scale of the Commission reshuffle required will determine how long the current situation takes to resolve.

Procedurally, Barroso's easiest way out of the situation would be to replace Buttiglione with another Italian commissioner in the same portfolio and leave the rest of his proposed Commission in place. This may not be possible:

• Buttiglione may refuse to stand down or Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi to replace him. He was named as Italy's commissioner to meet delicate political needs within Berlusconi's governing coalition. If Buttiglione stays in the Commission, he must at least be moved to a different portfolio to win EP approval, necessitating a wider reshuffle. However, Rome is probably more likely to withdraw Buttiglione if other changes to the Commission are made.
• MEPs may seize their opportunity to demand more changes to the Commission in return for their support. While no other proposed commissioner was formally rejected by an EP committee, and several won cross-party plaudits, some others were criticised, notably Neelie Kroes (Netherlands, Competition) and Laszlo Kovacs (Hungary, Energy). Furthermore, if given the option, a new Latvian government (following the collapse today of the current government) may choose to replace the country's commissioner, Ingrid Udre, whose nomination also raised some objections.

Immediate consequences.The most immediate consequence of the current situation will be disruption to the EU's work in the coming weeks:

• Many outgoing Commissioners had been expecting to start new jobs from November 1 and were preparing to leave Brussels. Many of their personal staff have already left. This will make it difficult for a caretaker administration to function.
• The EP must find time for at least one set of new committee hearings and an extra plenary debate and vote. Two full-scale EP plenary sessions are scheduled before the end of the year, in mid-November and mid-December, with a two-day 'mini-session' due in early December.
• EU heads of state and government must return to an issue they had thought was resolved, limiting their time for discussion of other key matters. The issue is likely to overshadow the constitutional treaty signing ceremony tomorrow. EU leaders are next due to meet again on November 5.

Longer-term effects.The conflict is also likely to have longer-term effects:

1. Barroso standing.Barroso largely won plaudits for the way in which he balanced member state interests in putting together his original Commission. However, his political judgement has appeared less sure as regards the EP. The way in which he made successive failed concessions and then withdrew his Commission yesterday has involved loss of face. Nonetheless, having bowed to EP pressure, Barroso's relations with the legislature, at least, are likely to be better than they would have been had he gone for a vote and either lost, or won on a narrow, partisan majority.
2. Parliament role.The current situation has strengthened the case for binding EP votes on individual commissioners-designate. As there is no such provision in the proposed EU constitutional treaty, this presages EP pressure for further institutional reform, whether or not the constitution is ratified. More broadly, the EP has made another gain in the EU's inter-institutional battle. Both member states and Commission president-designates are likely to take its views more seriously in the appointments of future Commissions.
3. Constitution ratification.Supporters of the EU who will be campaigning for ratification of the constitutional treaty will be able to point to the current demonstration of EP power to counter charges that the EU is undemocratic. On the other hand, the treatment of Buttiglione could boost conservative Catholic opposition to the constitution and the EU in some Catholic countries such as Poland.