The Barroso stutter

Sorry readers, but did you see today's speech by Commission President Barroso, the one he held in front of the European Parliament informing ahead of the European Council meeting tomorrow?

I tried to read it, but there is hardly any argumentative structure in the speech.

It is like he got out of bed and was immediately asked to give comments on what he thinks the world should look like. And then he started speaking while dressing up, thinking about van Rompuy, Merkel and the birthday present for his wife.

Just a short extract:

"We have to advance on several fronts at once. So this is the most important lesson from this crisis. In fact, first with the problem of the monetary union the result should not be going back on our monetary union, the result should be going further in economic union.

This is the important point, we need a real effort for an economic union in Europe. And that is why there is this holistic approach combining several instruments. Of course, fiscal consolidation and structural reform, but structural reform for growth and that is why the Europe 2020 strategy places at the heart of it the elements of growth, intelligent, sustainable, inclusive growth.

But this is not the whole program. The program is about growth, but also in terms of structural reforms, in terms of financial reforms and in terms of the new economic governance for Europe. Yesterday I had the occasion during the question hour to discuss this issue of the economic governance.

I will not come now in detail, but I will just say our commitment to use this opportunity to reinforce the economic governance at European level."

The language is mazy and the content is dizzy, this can hardly be called a speech, nothing I would expect from the leader of the European Commission and one of the key figures in EU politics.

There are two options: Either Barroso has a speechwriter whom he needs to fire or he doesn't have a speechwriter and he should find one very quickly...

The Commission web editors demand more web 2.0

Dick Nieuwenhuis has posted an open letter that 50 internet editors of the European Commission have sent to Commission President Barroso demanding more web 2.0 with the Commission.

The editors demand both, a better use of new technologies on the European institution websites and and a more open attitude of the institutions towards new social media, including the encouragement of EU staff to be actively involved within these new media.

Although I think that the document itself still reads very institutional and could have been a little more concise, I applaud the online editors for taking this bold step, something you don't see very often from government officials.

And I do support the demands of the editors, not least because their demand is not about themselves but it is about the question how the European institutions will be able to reach out to the public in the second decade of the 21st century.

The question is, whether the institutions want to take the lead in quality discussions on European politics, or whether they want to watch, lagging behind the stream of time for 10 years or more, bureaucratically and impersonal, distant and unheard.

Mr Barroso, please don't just "take note" of this letter, but make yourself a bold statement on a reform of the European institutional communication, which will be positive for the institutions and in the interest of all of us, European citizens and the wider public!

Involvement of national parliaments under Lisbon: Barroso letter

A week ago, Barroso has sent out a letter explaining how the national parliaments will be involved under the Lisbon Treaty.

To remember: Under the Protocol 2 of the Lisbon Treaty, national parliaments have gained explicit scrutiny rights in EU law-making. Parliaments have to receive documents in time and may react within 8 weeks if they see their rights unduly limited by the EU level, including the possibility to refuse legislation:

Where reasoned opinions on a draft legislative act's non-compliance with the principle of subsidiarity represent at least one third of all the votes [every country has two votes; in bicameral systems these are shared; JF] allocated to the national Parliaments [...] the draft must be reviewed.

The Barroso letter now explains how the procedure will look like in practice:

• National Parliaments will receive Commission documents the day they are sent out to the EP and the Council.

• Draft legislation will always be accompanied with a letter ("lettre de saisine") that will point to the subsidy control rights of the national parliaments (NPs) and the procedure according to Protocol 2 of the Lisbon Treaty.

• At the end of the week, the Commission sends out a list of all documents sent in that week. NPs have three working days to complain if they missed one, which, if true, may prolong the 8 week deadline for the parliaments concerned.

• August (as summer recess month) will not be counted for the 8 week deadline.

• NPs are asked to distinguish clearly between substantive comments and comments regarding subsidiarity rights when they comment on legislation.

• The blocking threshold of one third will be effective even when the reasons for rejecting a proposal by different NPs will be different.

• The opinions of NPs will be published on the Commission website.

• If a proposal is rejected by the NPs, the Commission will decide whether to amend or to withdraw the legislation.

• Pending proposals from pre-Lisbon times are not covered by the procedure.

It will be really interesting to see how this works in practice, but the procedure as proposed looks very promising, and I am looking forward seeing the dynamics this may bring in the future.

The new European Commission: Opinions on Joaquín Almunia

As I have announced when the new Commission was presented by Barroso, we should take a look at the new (and old) Commissioners to see their qualifications for the job.

Via the German-language Kartellblog I was made aware of a collection of law-firm opinions on the future Commissioner for Competition, Joaquín Almunia, so far Commissioner for Economic and Monetary Affairs, opinions that are astonishingly positive and paint a picture of a competent person - despite his left-wing political background.

This sounds rather authoritative to me, but a look through blog reactions on Almunia over the last two weeks shows that these either very general or rather superficial, so I am not sure that this is the full picture.

For those who want to get a live impression of Almunia, I have found a one-hour English language interview where he speaks about his work in the Commission and on EU economic policies:



But I'd be glad if some of you have further opinions on Joaquín Almunia, his qualification for the new portfolio, and his task of being a vice-president of the Commission.

Barroso II: Questions to the new Commissioners

When I blogged the list of new Commissioners designate, I said that we and MEPs now have to look at "who is not qualified for [the] portfolio, who has conflicts of interest and who has shown in the past that there should be doubts on whether s/he is the right person" to work in the new Commission or in the particular portfolio.

Brussels Sunshine has started to take a look at the candidates from a lobby and transparency point of view.

And serious doubts are voiced regarding Janez Potočnik, now Commissioner for Science and Research, and designated Commissioner for Environment. He is said to have favoured big business in his present portfolio and should therefore be asked whether he will continue in this direction in his new job, too.

A different strategy is pursued by the most important German blog netzpolitik.org.

Ralf Bendrath, blogger at Netzpolitik and assistant to new Green MEP Jan Philipp Albrecht, is asking readers to bring up questions for the new Commissioners who will work in or influence the field of internet and new communication technologies. These questions shall then be asked in the hearings in January.

The list of candidates they see as relevant is:

• Michel Barnier: Internal Market and Services;
• Neelie Kroes: Digital Agenda;
• Viviane Reding: Justice, Fundamental Rights and Citizenship;
• Cecilia Malmström: Home Affairs;
• John Dalli: Health and Consumer Policy;
• Maire Geoghegan-Quinn: Research and Innovation;
• Androulla Vassilou: Education, Culture, Multilingualism and Youth.

Questions raised so far include important issues like SWIFT, ACTA, net neutrality and the use Open Access in public science - and I expect to list to grow longer over the next days.

I think both approaches, the critical one by Brussels Sunshine and the participative one at netzpolitik.org are excellent examples on how we can make sure that Commission hearings in January will not be about minor "argy-bargy", but about substantive issues on which the Commissioners will have to take a stand if they want to be nominated for the Barroso II Commission.

The new European Commission: Names and portfolios of Barroso II

In a press conference, Barroso just announced the names and portfolios of the new Commission.

Me and some others have tweeted from the press conference under the hashtag #barroso2, so if you want to re-read our comments and live quotes from Barroso you just need to click on the link

And here is the full list I took from the Commission press release:

• Joaquín ALMUNIA: Competition. Vice-President of the Commission.
• László ANDOR: Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion.
• Baroness Catherine ASHTON: High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security and Vice-President of the Commission.
• Michel BARNIER: Internal Market and Services.
• Dacian CIOLOS: Agriculture and Rural Development.
• John DALLI: Health and Consumer Policy.
• Maria DAMANAKI: Maritime Affairs and Fisheries.
• Karel DE GUCHT: Trade.
• Štefan FÜLE: Enlargement and European Neighbourhood Policy. *
• Johannes HAHN: Regional Policy.
• Connie HEDEGAARD: Climate Action.
• Maire GEOGHEGAN-QUINN: Research and Innovation.
• Rumiana JELEVA: International Cooperation, Humanitarian Aid and Crisis Response. *
• Siim KALLAS: Transport. Vice-President of the Commission.
• Neelie KROES: Digital Agenda. Vice-President of the Commission.
• Janusz LEWANDOWSKI: Budget and Financial Programming.
• Cecilia MALMSTRÖM: Home Affairs.
• Günter OETTINGER: Energy.
• Andris PIEBALGS: Development.*
• Janez POTOČNIK: Environment.
• Viviane REDING: Justice, Fundamental Rights and Citizenship. Vice-President of the Commission.
• Olli REHN: Economic and Monetary Affairs.
• Maro ŠEFČOVIČ: Vice-President of the Commission for Inter-Institutional Relations and Administration.
• Algirdas ŠEMETA: Taxation and Customs Union, Audit and Anti-Fraud.
• Antonio TAJANI: Industry and Entrepreneurship. Vice-President of the Commission.
• Androulla VASSILIOU: Education, Culture, Multilingualism and Youth.

I will try to follow up on the names and the policy areas as soon as possible but don't have the time now.

In any case, Barroso is confident all Commissioners will be accepted by the European Parliament - and it is now our work and the work of the EP to show who is not qualified for their portfolio, who has conflicts of interest and who has shown in the past that there should be doubts on whether s/he is the right person to be a European Commissioner for five years.

The "new" European Parliament?

Yesterday, Barroso presented himself in the European Parliament, answering questions from Members of this, our common Parliament, and several blogs have reported about it: here, here, here, here.

Barroso even got coverage on the EP's feed on Twitter, and a summary on the EP website. But did anyone really notice? Did the "new" Parliament make anything out of this change? Did MEPs comment publically, use new technologies to communicate about this event? I didn't notice much.

And isn't this "event" a good example that not much has changed, that MEPs, new or old in the newly elected parliament, did not use the new start to adapt to 21st century communication?

Isn't this kind of public critique by MEPs on the working methods within the Parliament or this kind of active communication on Twitter still the exception, although we would expect our representatives to use the means that our time provides to talk directly to and with citizens (or at least to an interested public)?

Didn't MEPs hire people with communication skills, don't they get enough internal and external expertise to get their work to a new level, making the European Parliament a "communication parliament" instead of just being a "working parliament" hiding its expertise in the Brussels bubble?

Do people like MEP Alvaro who speak at fancy public affairs events but who just follow 18 people on Twitter actually contribute to changing the European Parliament or aren't they just talking about it?

I do not see a new European Parliament, no matter whether it has the first "Facebook president", I see the old Parliament with some new people - what do you see?

Ask Barroso about his European vision!

The year 2009 is slowly approaching its end, and I haven't heard any major European politician speak about her/his European vision, her/his European dream for the future of the EU.

All year, we have been discussing about important persons, about treaties, about national politics during European elections.

But at no moment we had any ideational leadership, there was no one of profile sharing a vision of how the EU should be in the future - if you exclude Jean Quatremer's scenarios that look so negative or technocratic that I don't even want to talk about them.

Tomorrow, MEPs will have the chance to question Barroso, for the first time ever, in a plenary session of the European Parliament.

This would be the moment to ask him about where he sees the Union in 10 years, it would be the moment to get him out of his suit of armour made of boringness and ambiguity. It would be the moment to make him say something of value, of importance, for the first time since he is in office, at least for the first time I would remember.

This is what I actually want to hear from him: Where does he want us to be? Is he willing to lead - or is he planning to stand behind the fence and just to look at the other children playing on the street? Will the Union get back to a European dream that is worth the term, and is the Commission able to deliver this spirit?

Bureaucracy or brilliance, past or future, narrow-mindedness or a Europe of open spirits?

Probably MEPs will instead ask him about little policy details, about Lisbon, about the Stockholm programme, about enlargement and they won't get anything but diplomatic answers, nothing that is close to a vision of our Europe - a human Europe - nothing that is anywhere near to what the Union needs if it still wants to be a guiding concept for a whole continent and its 800 million people, of which 500 million are already citizens of the EU.

But if anyone has a light moment tomorrow, if anyone has the courage to leave the paths that are paved by old habits and political games, just ask Mr. Barroso about his vision - and if he has nothing to say, then let him go and hide forever in his snail shell!

What European Council President does Barroso actually want?

It is not the first time that Barroso speaks differently to different audiences.

While in the European Parliament he left the impression that he wants a weak European Council President as defined by the Lisbon Treaty, in a discussion at the Friends of Europe today he is pledging for a strong European Council President as fellow Twitterer pstrempel reports live from the event here and here.

So what does Barroso actually want - and does he know himself?

The Barrosocracy

53% is the magic figure, 382 warm votes for the man running the European Union - a firm YES to the Barrosocracy.

Few of you reading this blog will have missed this moment today. A collective cry went through the Eurotwittersphere, and Stephen (spiller2) could not have been more right when he said:

"[Y]ou know your obessed with EU politics when your entire twitter stream is telling you the result of the Barroso vote!"

José Manuel Barroso has been re-elected, and received the absolute majority of votes of all members of the European Parliament, which had made him the Commission President even under the more rigid rules of Lisbon Treaty that has not yet entered into force.

Some are still saying that the 53% make him the weakest president in the history of the Commission, but for once I don't want to blow into this same horn. This 53% is nothing but a clear sign of the politicisation of the European Union and the European Parliament, which makes Barroso the president under the strongest European Parliament ever.

This tight vote shows that the election of Barroso was not the most obvious thing in the world - although the result was better than expected - but that with another result in the European Parliament elections his election could have been prevented.

I was among the supporters of Anyone but Barroso! and I stand to this opinion, because I am still convinced that his lack of charisma and his inability to stand against the negative forces of the member states were amongst the reasons that made that the European Union did not advance much over the last 5 years.

But now I can only wish luck and strength to Mr. Barroso, who has been proposed by 27 democratically elected governments and approved by an absolute majority of directly elected European parliamentarians, and is thus one of the most democratically legitimised political figures in the world.

After he got elected today, Barroso said that he wants to work more closely with the European Parliament to make the Union a "European parliamentary democracy".

If this is his firm intention, he deserves every support from us - even from those running against him until now - and if he really wants this help from our side he will get it for sure.

But we will hold him responsible for these words over every minute of his term - hopeful that after five more years we might be able to say that second five years of the Barrosocracy were far better than the first.

On the same topic: E.g. Publius, Coulisses de Bruxelles, Gulf Stream Blues, Cecilia Malmström, euenvironmentblog, La Oreja de Europa, Silvana Koch-Mehrin, The Lobby, FT Brussels Blog, Cédric Puisney, Marie Ramot, Francesco Molica, Brussels Blogger, EU Referendum, European Union Law, Global Europe, ResEuropa, Charlemagne, Eva en Europa, Glennis Willmott, Grahnlaw, Public Affairs 2.0, Hökmark, Europe Sociale, Petra Sorge, Europabloggen, Eurocrat, eurosocialist, El mundo desencajado, L'Europe en Blogs, Géopolitique, Jochen Bittner.

Europe in blogs - Euroblogs (8) - Barroso Special

---

BEWARE: Bashing the blundering Barroso because of his blatant behaviour is bogus, yet biased backtalk builds up the brilliant and bright but bruised brains of those baffled backbenchers broadly betoken "bloggers"!

---

As you can see from the opening alliteration, this "Europe in blogs - Euroblogs" is something special, dedicated to a marvellous mind who - as I have reported - is begging on 40+ pages to get re-elected by the European Parliament.

And although some are already looking beyond Barroso's re-election and towards the other new Commissioners, like Marko from an Estonian perspective or Jan and Jon, who summarise the speculations about who will remain or become EU Commissioner in the next term, let's take a look at what the blogosphere has to say about JMB and his ambitious programme:

In a more reflected note, Renaldas sees the presentation of the Barroso programme as an important precedent in the history of the European Parliament, showing the increased confidence of the Parliament. In a less reflected note, Gawain shares his visualised thoughts on the content of Barroso's presentation.

For Rafael, Barroso is suffering from what he calls the Napoleon syndrom, searching for eternal power, while for MEP James Elles the 40 pages document is written from a worm's perspective.

For now and forever, this image of a worm with Barroso's face wearing a tricorn will stay in my brain...

But looking at this Napoleonic worm in the EU Zoo, it seems like the economic proposals coming from Barroso are nothing but old wine in new bottles - yet, if the old wine is the only wine, then it is still the best wine as MEP Katrin Saks concludes.

However, using old wine to get re-elected in September will make the manoeuvre difficult (but not impossible), says Durarte, while The Croydonian feels that the style of Barroso's prose leaves a great deal to be desired, maybe because he drinks too much.

In a more sober style, Stefano writes an open letter to Swedish Prime Minister Reinfeldt asking not to re-elect Barroso, but the Swedish minister for European affairs answers with "NO!", because she thinks that Barroso's programme is long but easy to agree on.

Now I was thinking about how to link from prose and style to content, but thankfully Finnegan counted Barroso's buzzwords, and Mathew presented them in a more stylish way, so that I don't have to invent a bridge on my own. What we learn from what both guys did: You need computer programs to understand Barroso.

This opinion is definitely shared by the people at Google where they also count words to find that Barroso has no idea about innovation. And Jean would have probably been very happy if innovation was the only blind spot of Barroso, not accompanied by 100 other failures that he lists in the latest post of his series "Campaign Journalism in the 21st Century".

When it comes to content, Judith is convinced that Barroso is too vague on climate issues. But why care about content, if one finds, like Conor, that there is not much content at all?

Finally, thinking about the consequences of the non-election of Barroso, Anna reminds that without a strong Commission president, the EU would be weakened at the Copenhagen Climate Conference in December, while for Stefan Barroso was anyway a weak president - so we will be weak in any case...

And before finishing: If you want a more eloquent "Europe in blogs" on the Barroso story - especially one in a much more beautiful language - I recommend the latest "L'Europe en blogs" where you will learn that Jesus returns!

That's it for now; "Europe in blogs - Euroblogs" will return soon with an objective and unbiased look at Europe and the European blogosphere.

PS.: I would have liked to link much more blog posts, but nobody cares about Barroso out there. This is all I found - if you found more, tell me!

The Barroso Identity & The Barroso Ultimatum

José Manuel Barroso has spent his summer waiting for his staff members to write his government programme (PDF) for the next five years*.



The result is 40 pages long, and I spent a good 50 minutes train ride yesterday to go through it.

To make it short: It's not worth reading.

I know that from somebody who hasn't shown a great deal of support for Barroso over the last year this conclusion may sound expectable. But I was ready to read the document without prejudices. And so I started. And so I tried hard. But the document is so much Barroso-like that it hurts.

• First, it has no clear structure.

• Second, it assembles all the nice-sounding topics (representative examples: innovation, participation, communication, environment, security) without filling them with content and without prioritising any of them.

• Third, it sounds like ass-licking whenever he speaks about the Parliament - while everyone knows that when your head is already in the ass of one person (the Council) you cannot simultaneously lick the ass of somebody else.

• Four, he presents himself as the candidate of change while defending his own achievements (which he actually doesn't list).

• Five, Barroso defends the way decisions are taken in the EU while calling for more transparency - which is not possible because more transparency would end the classical back-room worst-case compromises we regularly get presented as great decisions.

• Six, he tells us he has a passion for Europe, but this identity of his never translates into his behaviour.

• Seven, he notes that the document is not exhaustive, but how can you write a 40 page government programme that encompasses all major policy topics without being exhaustive - does this mean Barroso is unable to focus his thoughts on 40 pages?

• Eight, he wants solid action instead of rhetoric, but his text is nothing but the latter.

• Nine, the only truly firm statement throughout the text is his support of the single market - which I support - but I suppose that this is not what the Left in the European Parliament wants to hear.

Isn't that funny: Barroso spends 40 pages on writing about nothing and everything in a fuzzy language to win all sides, but the most clear policy statement is one that one side of the Parliament might find a little too aggressive...

In fact, I could go even more into details and especially wording, but it would mean spending time writing about nothing. As Barroso did. But while he is highly paid to do so, I am not.

One thing is for sure: No decision of a political group will be based on this document. If the political groups (Socialists & Democrats, ALDE) will vote for Barroso, they will vote for him out of pure power considerations, because they know that this will secure their influence on other posts or on certain policy areas.

Thus, the ultimatum for Barroso has begun, and we will see whether he has enough to offer to S&D and ALDE to secure his re-election on 16 September - but his government programme will end in the litter box of history!

* - Just to avoid confusion: I don't think that JMB has written the whole document on his own, but that a lot has been written by his staff. Yet, I do not have any proof!

---

Quotes from the document

"This is not the time for business as usual or for routine – what we need is a transformational agenda."

"[T]he European culture in decision-making at all levels, the Community method", which he calls "decisive to use Europe's assets to achieve the best results for citizens".

"Setting the priorities for Europe in a ten year horizon"

"This strategy for the "EU 2020" will comprise a more convergent and coordinated approach for the reform of Europe's economies through investment in new sources of growth. This means boosting research, development and innovation.This means upgrading of skills as the basis for more employment. This means more competitiveness and less administrative burden to strengthen our industrial base, a modern service sector and a thriving rural economy. This means closing the "missing links" in the internal market to realize its full potential. This means action against climate change and for energy security to make our economies and societies sustainable. This means deploying the networks of the future, be it broadband or a new European supergrid for electricity and gas. And this means securing sound public finances."

"I have a passion for Europe....It is based on the values of peace, freedom, justice and solidarity, and it must mean advancing people's Europe."

"To accomplish this, we need a more political Europe. This requires a special partnership of the two European institutions "par excellence" – the Commission and the European Parliament. We hold a joint responsibility for the common European good: it is when we work together, when we have a clear consensus on our vision for Europe, that we can best realise our ambitions for the transformational agenda that the Europe of tomorrow demands of us."

"This document does not aim at being exhaustive."

"I will redouble my efforts to do everything possible to make an ambitious Europe happen."

"I want the European policy agenda to be built much more clearly around the rights and the needs of Europeans."

"I have always preferred, and I will always prefer, solid achievements over empty rhetoric."

"1. Restarting economic growth today and ensuring long-term sustainability and competitiveness for the future.
2. Fighting unemployment and reinforcing our social cohesion.
3. Turning the challenge of a sustainable Europe to our competitive advantage.
4. Ensuring the security of Europeans.
5. Reinforcing EU citizenship and participation."

"5. Reinforcing EU citizenship and participation.
Revitalising the link between the peoples of Europe and the EU will make it both more legitimate and more effective. Empowering citizens to be involved in decisions affecting their lives, including by ensuring transparency on how they are taken, will help to achieve these aims. This means that the rights of European citizens must have real effect: citizens today should not find that they still face obstacles when they move across borders within the EU."

"This Commission has also launched an important review of the common fisheries policy. On the basis of the consultations which are now underway, the next Commission should set out how European fisheries policy can be placed on a sustainable footing."

"The recent crisis showed that there remains a strong short-term temptation to roll back the single market when times are hard. There were attempts to use the crisis as a pretext to attack the single market. The Commission will remain an implacable defender of the single market as a cornerstone of the Treaties, and will do everything in its power to defend it as the best guarantee of long-term prosperity. The experience of the past year has shown once again that the single market is the rock on which European growth is built. But it also needs to be updated to suit the demands of tomorrow's economy."

"This Commission has instigated a revolution in the way policies are made at EU level, with public consultations and impact assessment now the norm for new legislative proposals and a major simplification of existing Community law now underway. By 2012 the next Commission will deliver on our commitment to reduce administrative burden by 25%. But I want to go further. We need to match this huge investment in ex ante assessment with an equivalent effort in ex post evaluation – to ensure that our proposals really do deliver what they promise and to enable us to revise and correct them where they fail to work as expected. All of these initiatives are designed to focus EU action on the essentials, removing bureaucratic processes and unnecessary centralisation."

"I will also seek ways of helping the European Parliament to exercise its scrutiny rights over the full range of politically important decisions."

"Last but not least, the people's Europe is also about the accountability and openness of the EU institutions. Dialogue with the citizens and the different actors in civil society, a hallmark of the current Commission, will continue to be of critical importance People have a right to accessible information. The Commission will redouble its efforts to have a real Commission presence
communicating on the ground in the Member States and in the regions, in partnership with the European Parliament, listening to citizens and dealing first hand with their questions and concerns. I will also examine ways and means to intensify the dialogue between the Commission and the media. But we should be under no illusions: the gap in awareness of the EU can only be closed in full partnership with national and regional authorities. We must break out of the negative trap where politicians are quick to take the credit for the positive achievements of Europe, and quick to blame "Brussels" or "Strasbourg" for everything they don't like. We need a more mature dialogue with our citizens on decisions that affect their daily lives."

"The appointment of a new High Representative who is at the same time Vice President of the Commission in charge of External Relations is a major innovation which carries an enormous potential. The same is true for the future European External Action Service which would bring together resources from the Commission, the Council Secretariat and Member States to help leverage the best results from our external action. This will be a break with the past and I am determined to make it work effectively."

"[E]nlargement has been a huge source of strength for the Union, and for the promotion of peace and stability in our continent. At the same time, enlargement can only take place when both the EU itself and the candidate country are ready to take on the responsibilities that come with it. And enlargement is not an infinite process. For those neighbours that will not become members of the EU, we need to develop credible and attractive alternatives that satisfy the aspirations of these countries as well as the EU's. The next Commission will take forward the Union for the Mediterranean and the Eastern Partnership to develop a neighbourhood policy that meets the challenges we and our neighbours face."

"The EU budget must focus on activities which produce genuine European added value [...]; move towards an approach based on solidarity, burden-sharing and equity which is comprehensive and shared by all [...]; stability of the financial framework needs to be counterbalanced by a far greater degree of flexibility so as to enable the Union to respond effectively to new challenges and needs."

"Only the Commission has the authority, the administrative capacity and the technical expertise to make proposals that take the interests of all Member States and all citizens into account, and the long term view needed to tackle the big issues we face today. Only the Commission has the authority and the independence to ensure the equal treatment of all Member States in the enforcement of treaty obligations and legislation."

"The authority of the President is of critical importance to guarantee collegiality, coherence and the Commission's special role in the European system. It is now recognised that the current College, the first of the enlarged EU of 27, has been able to bring together different portfolio interests effectively, to tackle crosscutting, integrated policies like migration, energy and climate change."

"OLAF should be given full independence outside the Commission"

European Council on 18 & 19 June 2009: Presidency Conclusions

The June 2009 European Council has ended, and the Presidency Conclusions have been published.

The only positive word I can highlight:

"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."

Apart from this little word "intend", this decision is a catastrophe for the European Union, as mentioned so many times before.

Taking a look at the rest of the conclusions, it is remarkable that among the quite intensive coverage of the financial crisis and possible measures to counter its effects, the financial situation in Latvia has been particularly highlighted (para. 13) - that is not a good sign.

Interesting is also the following sentence:

"32. The European Council welcomes the intention of the incoming Presidency to develop, in close cooperation with the Commission, a work programme to ensure that there is sufficient time for internal EU coordination and decision-making prior to important international meetings which will prepare the December Copenhagen Conference."

Does that mean that usually the presidency does not provide work plans that allow "sufficient time" for internal co-ordination?

And regarding the special declaration made for Ireland in the Annexes to the Conclusions one can only say that this is nothing but a clarification of the present Lisbon Treaty, that, no matter whether it has legal effects or not, will not change anything.

However, this Declaration is a confession of 27 heads of state and governments that the Lisbon Treaty is so unclear that it needs a special explanation so that the Treaty text can be put forward for a second vote in Ireland.

It is also an expression of the failure of the Irish government to explain the Treaty to its citizens and a sign of weekness of this government if it needs the backing for 26 member states to give these almost self-evident explanations enough political weight.

For the rest, the conclusions are not very interesting, and again written in a catastrophic bureaucratic way. I hope the Swedish Council presidency will have people that are able to formulate such texts more citizen-friendly!

Why Tony Barber gets it wrong (on Barroso and on European democracy)

In a new article, Tony Barber of the Financial Times' "Brussels Blog" argues that the centre-left parties now rallying against Barroso have no right to do so.

He says that since they failed to nominate a candidate against Barroso before the elections, they now should hide in their basements and let things go.

I basically agree with his criticism of the failure of the other parties to nominate their own candidate(s) against EPP-baby Barroso before the elections, but Tony gets it wrong when he concludes from this failure that they don't have the right to oppose Barroso now.

To the contrary: The European democracy needs visible opposition, at any time, and especially from forces within the European Parliament. Only if voters see that their vote actually mattered, that "their" parties oppose a candidate of another party, they are able to understand that a political choice during EP elections actually has an influence on EU politics.

Barroso might still be elected, because it remains questionable whether the non-EPP groups would be able to gather a majority around an own candidate like Verhofstadt.

But if the rising opposition against Barroso - who, by the way, was not an EPP candidate when the party ran for the last European elections - is able to show that he is not unquestionable, that he needs to defend himself instead of being passed without democratic scrutiny, this would already be a success of the European Parliament as the guardian of citizens' influence on the European level.

Tony Barber's vision seems to be that of a technocratic European Union, one where political competition may only take place in an election campaign, which is absolutely wrong - so please, Liberals, Greens, Socialists, and independents, rally against Barroso as much as you can!

Read also: Barros vs. Barroso by JEF Europe & Stop Barroso - Too little too late by Kosmopolit

NO! to Barroso becoming the European Council's secretary

Jean Quatremer has definitely made the quote of the day regarding the future of Barroso and the European Commission in a wonderful article titled "L'équation Barroso":

"En l’obligeant à s’exprimer devant eux, Angela Merkel et Nicolas Sarkozy veulent clairement marquer la subordination de la Commission au Conseil européen qui devient ainsi officiellement son secrétariat."

For those not familiar with the beautiful French language, here the translation:

"By forcing him [Barroso, JF] to declare himself in front of them, Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy are clearly highlighting the subordination of the Commission to the European Council, which will thus officially make it its secretariat."

Merkel and Sarkozy demanding a program from José Manuel Barroso means that they consider him responsible to the European Council (and to them), not to the European Parliament or to the EU citizens.

If the EP accepts Barroso, it will accept this situation and it will consequently have to work with a Commission openly being an appendix to the member states and the Council. And if it does so, it will lose power, relevance, and credibility.

MEPs have to make clear at their first session that they neither want such kind of a Commission nor such a Commission president - they have to make sure that the balance of the European institutions is not undermined by egomaniacs at the top of European member states and shifted towards more intransparency and less accountability!

So I fully share the assessment of Jean Quatremer - and also his final question:

Will our directly elected parliamentarians have the guts to stand against the European Council? - If yes, this would be a great day for the European democracy!

Make Guy Verhofstadt the next European Commission president!

Via Stephen and EurActiv I became aware of the fact that discussions about replacing Barroso with Guy Verhofstadt are remaining alive, even after the EPP victory at the recent EP elections.

To make things clear: Guy Verhofstadt would by far be a better Commission President than Barroso!

First, he has more profile as a convinced European than Barroso, having proposed the creation of the United States of Europe and having been endorsed by European federalists.

And second, he has made himself a name in Europe as the leader of his country, as a visible statesman who is more than just a compromise candidate as Barroso was when proposed in 2004 and which he remains until today.

We need a person that can inspire Europe, a person that has the personality to stand against the overly powerful, intransparent Council, a convinced European who is electable but more than just a political trade-off.

As a member of ELDR/ALDE and if supported by the PES and the Greens, he would have a stronger voter basis than Barroso who is only endorsed by the EPP. The question will be how the many others on the far left (GUE/NGL), on the right (e.g. the newly formed group around the British Tories) and the many so far unaligned will behave.

This is pretty unclear by now, and I can only hope that somehow there will be a coalition of the Europeans willing to make a step to the front after these elections have been two steps backwards.

So I don't see yet that Verhofstadt will get a majority but it would be more than desirable to make him replace the unbearable José Manuel Barroso!

Update: Just saw that Jon also published an article on this topic some minutes ago.

No longer European leaders without European biographies!

European leaders should have European biographies. All the others may leave. Now!

For Europe to advance as a common cultural space, as an area of shared identities and a feeling of connectedness, we have to leave behind those old-fashioned politicians - so-called "European" - whose biographies are based on national education and national careers.

We have to get leaders and politicians who have actually lived what the European Union promises - mobility, multicultural experiences, multilingualism.

When you look into the CVs of the outgoing European Commissioners (you may add Solana to the list), almost non of them has lived a life that deserve the term "European". This is no surprise, since they are nominated by the member states, you may rightfully say, but that doesn't make it more satisfactory. I suppose most MEPs CVs don't look much different.

A handful has studied in another European country - rather limited to France, the UK or Russia - and the most common foreign education experience seems to be a Master or PhD in the US. Almost non has lived or worked in another European country - let alone two or more - for a considerable time before getting into some EU-related or international organisation office.

No surprise again - they had to build their national political (at maximum: diplomatic) careers to be promoted into a European office. But this is not European in the true sense of the word, it is neither transnational nor supranational, its just old wine in new skins.

But now is the time that the terms of these worn-out biographies ends, that a new generation of Europeans comes into higher offices.

I have no doubt that some of the old personalities now in office have learnt to play the European game, they have learnt do make European politics, and they may have been socialised into the European Union's institutional culture. Fine.

But I as a European do not really feel represented by those who have never been really European before political power was calling. They talk about the four to five freedoms, but they don't know how it feels to actually make use of them. They take decisions on policies in countries other than their own without ever having lived in another European country, especially none with a more distant culture than their own.

They should represent the common Europe, but in my eyes they represent a Europeanised national perspective. And this is the maximum we can get from them. Not necessarily do they represent the interests of their own country, but they lack the pan-European feeling having grown up in the small worlds of their national politics.

They lack the cultural diversity that is the essence of a European identity, and they don't have the spirit that we need to revitalise this amazing project called European Union.

And Barroso is the tip of the iceberg!

If I had a wish, I would wish that the new European Parliament - of which we will know the new composition in two weeks - would be much stricter in its scrutiny of new and old candidates for the European Commission. I would like to hear tougher questions on the European identity and biographies of the future Commissioners, on their actual ability to feel European, not just act European.

The European Union of national politicians - in the Council, the Commission, and also the European Parliament - has to end; we need a European Union of European politicians, with European biographies, with European identities, and with a true connection to the community of European citizens, not just to the European Union of member states.

So let the old generation leave their offices and spend some years living throughout Europe. Let them catch up their European socialisation, let them do ERASMUS, COMENIUS, and LEONARDO DA VINCI - and meanwhile the next generation will try to rebuild Europe before it is too late!

PS: This is the kind of "radical" approach I would like to hear from European political youth organisations, even much more radical, against the old elites - not boring old people's rhetoric through prefabricated statements!

European Parliament elections 2009 (103): No PES candidate before the elections

In a move to end speculations, the President of the European Socialists, Poul Nyrup Rasmussen, has issued a press release stating that the PES is definitely against Barroso but will not have an own candidate for the European Commission presidency prior to the elections:

I would have preferred the PES to have a candidate for the President of the European Commission, but we do not, and we will not before the elections. Who becomes President of the European Commission now depends on the result of the European elections. This is the one thing that everyone agrees – Governments are free to nominate who they like - the shape of the new Parliament will determine the next President of the Commission. If there is a new majority in the European Parliament Barroso will not become Commission President.

This is what I expected at this time of the campaign, and, even though for the true democratic character of the elections a PES candidate would have been an important factor, I don't think that at this stage the Socialists do not have any other possibility than to run just on issues.

------------------------------
Under the category "European parliament elections 2009" I am following up national and European activities on the path to the European Parliament elections 2009.

For an overview over all articles in this category have a look at the overview article.

For the five newest post see also the sidebar.

European Parliament elections 2009 (101): YEPP, ECOSY and LYMEC met with Barroso calling for more youth participation

The three major European youth organisations of political parties - YEPP (EPP youth), ECOSY (PES youth) and LYMEC (ELDR youth) - met with EU Commission President Barroso today to discuss youth participation.

Jointly, the three party organisations issued the following statement urging young people to vote (statement at the end of the article)

Although I support the message and its content, I am not a big fan of using the EU Commission President, whose personality is probably one of the reasons why young people won't be attracted to go to vote, to get this message passed.

But apparently, the youth organisations needed the presence of Mr Barroso to make their voice heard, which is already a bad sign.

So why should this actually raise citizen participation? Isn't this kind of boring political, self-referential talk without heart exactly the kind of politics young people don't care for? It is nice PR, and it will bring some attention to the three youth organisations and to Mr Barroso, but not more.

Just take a look at this extract from the press conference (first Barroso, then Laurent Schouten (YEPP), Petroula Nteledimou (ECOSY), Aloys Rigaut (LYMEC)):



Will this encourage young people to vote? Just because it happened in the presence of Barroso?

I think this professionalised kind of political communication won't reach out to any young voter, and the only one profiting from this meeting might be Barroso who can now claim to support youth activities.

They should have come up with something more creative, more youth-like thing!

But probably, the apathetic Commission President would not have allowed to destroy the image of the Union that he has built over the last five years: Less spirit, less dynamism, less young faces.

Therefore bravo, YEPP, ECOSY and LYMEC for your incredible courage to call young people to vote (what else should political youth organisations do?), and your willingness to follow the boredom of Barroso, risking not to reach out to anyone!

And here is the famous statement:

"We, representatives of the European party political youth organizations, namely YEPP, ECOSY and LYMEC, wish to urge all young Europeans to participate in the forthcoming European elections, to act and express themselves with a clear voice on Europe's future.

It is our decision and our choice to give the European Parliament a strong mandate in order to face citizens' needs and demands in the next period, taking the European Union out of the institutional and economic crisis, and designing a better future for all. And participation is a democratic right which we should not denounce or neglect - because this is what makes our voices stronger.

At the same time, we urge the European institutions, the Commission and the new Parliament, to deal in a more effective way with the everyday problems with the citizens, and to make European policies more visible, more understandable, more concrete.

We, Young Europeans expect from them a clear and effective plan on how to overcome the economic crisis, how to deal with unemployment, how to ensure sustainable development, how to expand the Erasmus programme, how to prepare a new Youth Pact with impact.

Therefore, our message today is simple:

When young people participate, and representatives provide effective solutions, Europe becomes stronger!"

Update: Some photos from the event by an ECOSY activist here

------------------------------
Under the category "European parliament elections 2009" I am following up national and European activities on the path to the European Parliament elections 2009.

For an overview over all articles in this category have a look at the overview article.

For the five newest post see also the sidebar.

Siim's budget, José's campaign

On 4 May, Commissioner Siim Kallas will present the Preliminary Draft Budget for 2010 to the EP's budget committee.

For Follow The Money, this budget will be part of José Manuel Barroso's re-election campaign.

I'd like if the European Parties would comment the draft in campaign style, as soon as it is out. And to use their member parties to make this public!