“It seems (..) an interesting contribution.” European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso didn’t exactly shrug when asked about Germany’s suggestion to set up a European Monetary Fund. But the words rather did. The proposal was put forward by the minister for finance of Germany and lacked “any details,” he noted.
In all, a supremely understated response. And clearly not of the order liberal leader Guy Verhofstadt was looking for. But there was more. Lest, it would seem, the casual observer may be led to think that the commission was no longer in control of the loud discussion started by “the minister for finance of Germany.”
There will be a draft directive on derivatives before the summer; a market abuse directive before the end of the year; and a communication on reinforced economic policy coordination and country surveillance (time unspecified). Meanwhile, the commission is “ready to propose” an EMF, only it’s calling it a ‘European framework for coordinated assistance.’
And yes, it “might probably require” a treaty change.
Two things to take from the parts of the debate on Greece. The disaster was all of its own making. And a little bit the fault of other member states too. The commission had in the past called for more “audit powers” several times. “Unfortunately this was rejected by member states,” said Barroso, as if he was talking about the vagaries of the weather. Unfortunately it was raining that day. Now governments appear to have seen the error of their ways. Even Germany is on board.
“I don’t have any position in favour or against GMOs,” said Barroso in response to a question about why he was “pushing” GMOs onto an unwilling public. The college makes decisions only on the basis of the opinion its scientific advisory board. A cluster of Greens holding placards saying “For a GMO-free Europe,” hissed and booed as appropriate.
There were about 30 of them. They roughly tripled participation in Question Hour. Alas, they proved to be a one-issue lot and were soon gone.
EPP leader Joseph Daul made a series of tough-sounding statements on the diplomatic service. His delivery, note-read, meant it was like being blasted by cotton wool. Perhaps it is because both questioner and the questioned are of the same political colour.
“Hats-off to you,” said a Dutch MEP sarcastically noting that Barroso managed to spend 2000 euros a day while going about his presidential duties. “Why can’t you just publish these details?” he exclaimed.
Barroso, who rather thrives on these exchanges, drew himself up. “I do not accept this easy criticism, populistic and demagogic.”
And this led to what can only be described as a landmark moment in Barroso’s question time to date. Socialist leader Martin (Shouty) Schulz, normally loudly, resolutely and reliably anti-Barroso cheered and thumped his desk in agreement. One can only wonder at this strange turn of events.
#1 by Damien on March 10, 2010 - 1:36 pm
2000 euro expenses a day, no wonder the outcoming Commissioners and the President put so much energy into canvassing for a second(or third take in the case of some commissioners) at the trough.
While national politicans have some, but not alot, restraint when it somes to their expenses because of the possibility of embarrassing questions asked by their oppositions and the media, these eurocrats have no such constraint exerted on them, apart from the annual furiore over MEP expenses, which die a suddent death after a week.
#2 by zarazek on March 10, 2010 - 5:41 pm
Could you please tell me where I can watch the whole debate or download it from?
#3 by french derek on March 10, 2010 - 6:20 pm
That Dutch MP – and as many others of other countries as he can win over – should continue to press for more transparency in the EU’s (our!) budgetary details.
#4 by al on March 11, 2010 - 2:24 am
“Populistic and demagoguic”? Wow, Barroso is super-arrogant, but I suppose when you are appointed and unaccountable, all that power makes you say hypocritical things like that.
Barroso can’t do anything about the EMF proposal. It will be the German version.
The disaster in Greece was not of its own making. The euro was set up so that it would engender crises such as this, for the purpose of the powers at the top grabbing more power. Purely imperialistic. Prodi even admitted it back when the euro first came out—a crisis to allow Brussels to break taboos and force a European economic government? Well, here we are…
#5 by Desmond O'Toole on March 11, 2010 - 11:15 am
Wrong again AI, just as you were with your previous anti-German attack on this site; an attack you slyly repeat again in your latest post. You must entertain us more with the foam-at-the-mouth rhetoric you use when telling us about the dreadful Germans and their plans for a Fourth Reich on http://www.politics.ie, the Irish political discussion board.
Barosso was ELECTED by the European Parliament on the nomination of the European Council. Furthermore, he and his fellow commissioners are directly accountable to our directly-elected parliament for the policies and decisions they make.
It is these sorts of very basic mistakes by europhobes that degrade their entire argument against the European Union. Better luck next time.
Desmond O’Toole
PES activists Dublin
(Personal capacity)
#6 by Marcel on March 14, 2010 - 3:05 pm
Wrong again, democracy-hating Desmond.
Barroso was APPOINTED by the heads of government, with the not-really-a parliament EU ‘parliament’ given the ‘swallow or spit’ option only. Anything that does not have legislative initiative, by definition is NOT a parliament.
Clown Barroso wasn’t elected by anyone as democratic elections can only be done by voters who represent a nation (demos). And the EU has nothing of the kind. Barroso, the arrogant unelected undemocratic unaccountable elitist EU Politburo premier (commission = politburo) does not represent me.
Why do you hate democracy so much? Why do you love the undemocratic EU so much? Do you look down upon ordinary voters? Or do you not trust them to ‘vote the right way’ (ie vote for more integration)?
I shouldn’t really be surprised you are a socialist, because socialists have an extremely bad trackrecord when it comes to democratic values (I present national socialism and international socialism -communism- as facts that support such a statement).
#7 by Jean-Baptiste Perrin on March 15, 2010 - 11:30 am
Sorry to say so, Marcel, but according to your own definition, then, both the French and Dutch Parliaments are not Parliaments. The EU Parliament is a real one, no doubt about this.
Barroso was appointed just like the Prime Minister in France and the Netherlands is appointed by the head of state of these respective countries. Nothing undemocratic about this. Again, Marcel, you can’t recognize a straight fact.
I am also wishing, of course, that the EU would be more democratic, by being indeed more of a demos and having more direct representation within its institutions. But saying that it is a politburo and undemocratic is an obvious distortion of facts. Unless of course you believe that France or the Netherlands are undemocratic, also governed by Politburos… In this case, there is nothing we can do for you.
#8 by Marcel on March 15, 2010 - 4:15 pm
@JBP
what a laughable comparison. We the Dutch people elect 100% of the Dutch parliament which forms the Dutch government. In other words, the dutch ‘demos’ has complete control. And in France, the president is directly elected by people (again, a ‘demos’, the french one in this case).
On the EU level there is no demos, thus there cannot be democracy. Furthermore, like I have said a few times before, a ‘parliament’ without legislative intiative is not a real parliament under ANY definition. Maybe it fools gullible people, but it does not fool me.
We the people of the Netherlands did at no time authorize the creation of a setup that would enable Greek, Latvian, Italian, Portuguese and Polish politicians having a vote in what laws we in the Netherlands ought to have. Democratic? I think not.
If you lived in a street with 27 houses, and your neighbours would vote 20-6 that you would have to give them money, because after all they just had a ‘democratic’ vote, would you honor their vote? Of course not, because they are not a ‘demos’. The EU is not, never has been and was never meant to be democratic. The political elites despise the people which is why people like Merkel and Sarkozy fervently try to deny referendums and all that because they know the peoples DO NOT AGREE WITH MORE INTEGRATION.
#9 by Desmond O'Toole on March 16, 2010 - 3:10 pm
LOL … just a few words from Marcel’s intemperate post:
“democracy-hating … ’swallow or spit’ … Clown … arrogant unelected undemocratic unaccountable elitist EU Politburo premier (commission = politburo) … hate democracy … look down upon ordinary voters … national socialism … communism”
You really should calm down, Marcel. All that rage can’t be good for your blood pressure. It also reduces your arguments to ridicule. My advice is to take a step back, take a deep breath and try again … Maybe then you’ll be listened to.
My very best wishes, Marcel.
Desmond O’Toole
PES activists Dublin
(personal capacity)
#10 by persephone on January 29, 2011 - 1:33 pm
LOL just about sums up your superior attitude, desmond. Laughing while European democracy dies. Marcel is completely correct and his rage does not reduce his arguments to ridicule – it eloquently expresses what many other people in the EU are feeling. Our opinions are simply ignored by gits such as yourself who think they know better. Well, you don’t.