Blogs translated (2): The Unreformed Commission

In a longer article on Le Taurillon titled "The Commission dies but does not reform itself", author Laurent Leylekian writes about the European Commission, which, despite the changes over the last 10 years, is still unable to adapt to the the necessities of our days.

I have only translated the last chapter of this article, because it contains the most pertinent questions:

Not the Commission?

You could multiply the examples, and go more into detail, but let us remain brief:

Europe has changed, the world has changed, and the Commission has kept a structure that is basically unchanged, looking as if it was totally unadapted until today.

The most naïve observer could be astonished that there is no Directorate General on Sustainable Development: Is it still serious to consider "Environment" separately, like a cosmetic DG separated from the "serious" subjects such as Transport or Energy? Sure, the DG Transport and Energy seem to care about climate change and renewable energies, but is it not quite expensive or even counter-productive seeing the rivalries it might cause to separate this DG from the DG Environment?

Do we also need a sizeable DG Enlargement given that the obvious and urgent need would rather be a deepening of the Union? Shouldn't a large part of this DG - the one that dealt with the great enlargement of the ten new member states - merge with the DG Regional Policy in order to foster a new ambitious momentum for the European cohesion policy, in particular supporting the Regional Development Fund and the Cohesion Fund?

In the same way, shouldn't we finally create a large DG Privileged Relations giving substance to the explicit political will to treat the countries in the eastern neighbourhood differently - by extracting them from DG External Relations and treating in parallel those states covered by the Eastern Partnership and some others negotiating with the Union?

Finally, do we need to artificially maintain - in accordance with the number of Commissioners - the unchanged DGs whose substance has been removed to a large extend by creating according external executive agencies such as those for Research, for Health, Consumers, or for Education, the Audiovisual and Culture?

It is clear that a serious audit of the Commission and its adequacy for the European project as of today is necessary before answering these difficult questions. But they need to be asked.

These are excellent questions, and despite the fact that most of us are still focussing on the changes the Lisbon Treaty might bring about, they will need an answer in the near future!

Do you think the Commission will be able to find the right answers?

European Parliament elections 2009 (76): PES and JEF activists request socialist candidate for EU Commission presidency

In an open letter addressed to the Spanish and Portuguese Prime Ministers and published on Taurillon, two PES members from Britain and Spain - both also members of the Union of European Federalists (UEF) and in leadership positions at the Young European Federalists (JEF) - ask for a socialist candidate for the EU Commission presidency:

When probing why the PES failed to nominate a candidate in Madrid, to go along with its pan-European manifesto, the blame lies squarely at your feet, Messrs Prime Ministers. You, the two socialist leaders of Spain and Portugal, already assured Mr. Barroso late last year of your support for him to serve a second term as EC president, despite the fact that he is a leader of the European People’s Party (centre-right).

[...]

As PES activists, we are well placed to know that the elections will be at best an uphill battle. If the election were held today, the EPP would win by a landslide.

[...]

For the PES to win the election, a significant new factor needs to come in play. Having a candidate would make a substancial difference! Putting a face and a name on the Manifesto’s action would help enormously in imparting the PES’s message that a new direction is needed for Europe. Additionally, Mr. Barroso is strongly disliked by large parts of the electorate for his general lack of leadership, but is practically guaranteed under the status quo to keep his post; merely giving the choice to voters to elect someone else at the EC presidency would be a giant step for European democracy, as well as a strategic move for the PES.

This letter comes very late, but it asks something that would be natural in a national polity:

Political leaders from the same party should not support the candidate of the opponent. When regionalistic or nationalistic politics won't dominate over the politics of ideas, of principles, of values anymore, there might be room for a European democracy, but as long there is no choice, we'll just remain in the antechamber of a democratic polity.

I hope the open letter will be seen and heard in Madrid and Lisbon. For the sake of democracy.

------------------------------
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.

Quote of the day: Guillaume Klossa on EU leadership

On Taurillon, Guillaume Klossa, adviser to the French EU-Council Presidency last year, has said the following:

"[L]'Europe manque désespérément de leadership politique, d'incarnation et de force de réflexion commune, rôle que ne joue pas suffisamment la Commission. Les institutions de Lisbonne sont donc plus nécessaires que jamais sans être suffisantes."

Translation:

"There is a lack of political leadership in Europe, a lack of substance, of joint reflection, something the Commission does not fulfil sufficiently. More than ever, the Lisbon [Treaty] institutions are needed, without being sufficient."

I think that is exactly the point: The European Commission does not fulfil its role as 'engine' of the integration - of a joint European reflection - anymore.

Without proper leadership, the Commission's role will vanish - and already today member states in the Council and the European Parliament start to dominate the debates, regrettably with too much weight on the Council's side.

Taurillon on European communication strategies

For those able to read French, I'd like to point to an excellent article by Taurillon titled "Pour une communication européenne" ("For a European communication").