Jose Manuel Barroso may have over-reached himself this time. Publicly he is fond of saying that the Lisbon Treaty creates no winners among its EU institutions and that each of them emerges stronger from the new set –up and equally so.
Behind the scenes, however, he has been working to make sure that he does emerge a winner from the new legal set-up, now in place for almost three months. The prize is exposure, influence and a prominent place at the table in international gatherings.
Because although the Lisbon Treaty says the commission represents the EU in all external matters except CFSP – something Barroso is at pains to underline – there are now two other permanent actors in the picture. Catherine Ashton as EU foreign policy chief and Herman Van Rompuy as president of the European Council.
Fond of the limelight, Barroso started his chess moves early. In June last year, he appointed Joao Vale de Almeida, his right hand man, to head up the external relations units in the commission. The obvious aim was to have a trusted aide dealing with foreign policy questions.
Since then, it has been to Barroso’s luck that two low-key actors are now foreign policy chief and EU president, both compromise figures and both chosen, particularly Ashton, following a checklist of criteria (geography, gender, political affiliation).
The foreign policy chief, who has a foot in both the commission and the council, being vice-president of the first and supposed to represent the foreign policy wishes of the latter, could have been a real challenge to Barroso. A powerful figure could have relegated him to the sidelines, outshone him in his own house.
But in Ashton, new to the world of diplomacy and still finding her feet in the huge new job, Barroso has fallen on his feet. This appears to have emboldened him to make the surprise move to send his man – Joao Vale de Almeida – to head the EU delegation in Washington. This remarkable for two reasons – member states seem to have been caught unawares and de Almeida is a civil servant, not a politician. John Bruton, former Irish prime minister, held the post last. It simply looks like a ploy by Barroso to get a trusty set of eyes and ears in Washington.
Now Sweden has complained. Foreign minister Carl Bildt, a heavy-weight politician whose name was also briefly mentioned as a possible contender for Ashton’s post, has asked for clarification on how the appointment was made. Barroso’s people say he was entitled to make the move because the EU’s new architecture – the diplomatic service – is not yet in place. Still it looks rather like Ashton has been out-manoeuvered.
#1 by Desmond O'Toole on February 22, 2010 - 1:24 pm
I think that there is actually some value in the power play that Barosso is making. The PES adopted a resolution at its last Congress in Prague in December 2009 that it would run a candidate for the position of President of the European Commission at the next elections in June 2014. If the EPP, and indeed other parties, do the same then this position, of all the presidencies that the EU institutons have collected, will have significant, indirect democratic legitimacy. We may even see the emergence of a powerful parliamentary democracy and de facto European government after the next Europe-wide elections.
Prior to the appointment of Van Rompuy, there was a lot of lazy speculation in the press about a US/French style presidency for the EU and whether Van Rompuy would fit this role and if so what this said about the democratic deficit in the manner of his appointment. What this speculation failed to notice is that the EU is developing organically into something quite different to a president-led entity.
Rather, the EU is incrementally adopting the default mode of democratic government in EU member states, i.e. parliamentary democracy with powerful, indirectly-elected premiers.
There is a limit as to how far this development can go and still remain within the treaties, but there is also much wiggle-room for such innovative political evolution.
Desmond O’Toole
PES activists Dublin
(personal capacity)
#2 by Marcel on February 23, 2010 - 10:26 am
Except that the European Parliament isn’t a real parliament. Does it have legislative initiative? No? Then it isn’t a real parliament.
Democracy belongs on the national level. The national level is where the ‘demos’ is.
And for all intents and purposes, the European Commission is a ‘Politburo’. The comparison with national governments is ludicrous. National parliaments, despite having their powers gutted, are still real parliaments with real legislative initiative and powers. The EU is still totally undemocratic.
#3 by Desmond O'Toole on February 23, 2010 - 11:19 am
Like a needle stuck in a groove, Marcel, plays the same tune of existential EU angst over and over and over and over again ….
Change the record, Marcel, and try spending some time in the real world.
Desmond O’Toole
PES activists Dublin
(personal capacity)
#4 by Jean-Baptiste Perrin on February 24, 2010 - 10:45 am
The French Parliament does not have true legislative initiative either (laws are initiated by the government and although some can be proposed by MP’s, the Parliament schedule is still under the control of the government). The Dutch Parliament also has no pure legal initiative, by the way, only amendment rights. In this matter, it acts very much in a similar fashion to the European one.
#5 by droom on February 24, 2010 - 11:15 am
Sorry, Mr Perrin, the Dutch parliament has 100% legal initiative. And, for sure, it uses it. Sorry for the French parliamanent.
It’s actually pretty useless to focus on small things like differences between national parliaments and EU parliament. And certainly on petty talk issues from Ms mahony – she is always stirring by small and espeially speculative talk. And does not inform the piblic correctly, e.g. like what the procedure of appointment of EU ambassadors is under the Lisbon treaty.
#6 by Luis on February 24, 2010 - 4:47 pm
To “droom”: if you are si critical with Ms MAHONY why do you read her and why do you make comments in her blog?
to “Marcel”: oh my goodness…tell Americans that EP has no competence…they were furious when EP rejected the SWIFT agreement… that was extremely powerful…!
#7 by droom on February 24, 2010 - 4:53 pm
Strange reasoning – to say the least – Luis: one can not read articles and comment on them when one is very critical of them! But I am tolerant and accept different levels of thinking in EU states. Some have still a long way to go, but no problem.
#8 by Desmond O'Toole on February 24, 2010 - 10:36 pm
Likewise the Irish Parliament, the Oireachtas, where the government has an effective monopoly over the right to initiate legislation. That is pretty much also the case in the UK parliament. Both of these parliamenary FACTS are conveniently overlooked by europhobes who place a much higher burden of proof for democracy on the European Parliament than on their own domestic parliaments. I wonder why that is?
Desmond O’Toole
PES activists Dublin
(personal capacity)
#9 by Desmond O'Toole on February 24, 2010 - 10:45 pm
The Lisbon Treaty contains no procedure for the appointment of ambassadors.
Desmond O’Toole
PES activists Dublin
(personal capacity)
#10 by Marcel on February 27, 2010 - 9:42 pm
The real world Desmond? As in that dimension where people who oppose undemocratic EU are labelled as obstructionists? Where the hell is the popular mandate for more integration?
Oh, and the Dutch parliament has 100% legislative initiative. Something the undemocratic EU non-parliament does not have.
People like Desmond hate and despise democracy and want political elites to continue eliminating what remains of democracy so he can have his ‘EU-superstate’ dream or whatever it is.
Let’s have 27 referendums on the undemocratic Lisbon treaty, then, and just a single NO would stop it. Democracy belongs only on the NATIONAL level. In fact, there would be plenty of NO’s and the politicians and other EU-loving and democracy-hating elitists know this. Which is why they oppose referendums.
I don’t see the political difference between Merkel and Sarkozy trying to dictate to Europe and godwin-Hitler doing it. Just say NO to the Franco-German Fourth Reich.
The EU commits genocide with the Common agricultural policy which is racist and designed to protect white french farmers against black African competition. Whoever supports the EU, supports the racist CAP and is a racist himself.
#11 by bodybuilding supplements on April 24, 2010 - 7:29 pm
Its amazing what the irish fought for over the years only to give their soverignety away to the EU and now the lisbon treaty. It doesn’t make sense.