Brussels, 19/01/2010 (Agence Europe) - During his hearing on Monday 18 January with the constitutional committee of the European Parliament, chaired by Carlo Casini (EPP, Italy), Slovakian Commissioner-designate Maros Šefèoviè (Institutional Affairs and Administration) demonstrated his capacity for dialogue and his desire to see the EU progress under the Lisbon Treaty. He may only have replaced his compatriot Jan Figel at the European Commission since October 2009, but his experience as Slovakian Permanent Representative to the EU and Director General for European Affairs at the Slovakian Foreign Ministry has given him a firm grasp of European matters.
In his own words Šefèoviè has devoted himself to Europe for more than 15 years, and he welcomed the opportunity offered by the Lisbon Treaty: the opportunity to be better understood by citizens, to establish a “special partnership” between the Commission and the Parliament, and to better inform and communicate with national parliaments. High on his list of priorities, Šefèoviè mentioned the new European citizenship initiative, putting in place the European External Action Service, improving transparency and making better use of human resources within the institutions. He stated, too, his willingness to improve the Commissioners' code of conduct.
A shadow hung over his reputation, however: the comment made at a trainee conference in 2005, about Roma living in his country, taking advantage of the Slovakian welfare state. The question put immediately for the EPP by Spanish MEP Inigo Mendez de Vigo probably helped lighten the atmosphere. “Honestly, I cannot remember making that remark. If I unintentionally offended anybody, I really regret it. It is not representative of my view,” Šefèoviè said. “This quote was taken out of context. If I thought I had offended, I would have apologised.” He called for people to take note of his work on behalf of the Roma and on Roma inclusion. It was only towards the end of the debate that Joszef Szajer, also of the EPP, declared his unhappiness with this answer, asking why Šefèoviè had waited five years to say he regretted the comments. The Commissioner-designate replied sharply, “If you are trying to label me as being anti-Roma, I feel offended”. He went on to point out that Roma NGOs had sprung to his defence. Scottish Labour MEP David Martin said that, around Glasgow, there was a large Roma community. They had never heard of Šefèoviè, he went on, but, after learning of all that he had done for them, they “issued a strong statement saying you had a very good record”.
For the S&D group, Spanish MEP Ramon Jauregui Atondo expressed concern over respect for the Parliament's legislative powers and, in particular, application of Article 29 on delegated legislation, which he wanted to be seldom used and to be limited in time, and on financing the agencies. Šefèoviè reassured him: there were limits on the content of these acts and on their duration, and, in any case, Parliament could use its veto - although it would, of course, be better to avoid coming to such a pass. He said he was intent on ensuring that the EP's new legislative powers should be fully respected. As for the agencies, it was important to better monitor how they operated.
Answering Andrew Duff (ALDE, UK), Šefèoviè said that national parliaments had to be more involved, for example, through the subsidiarity control check. And inter-institutional planning, he said, had been tried, but it had not worked as a result of Council resistance, but, “we should simply try again”. Duff retorted, “We are now obliged to agree”. On electoral reform, Šefèoviè said he would support any measure that would increase turn out in the European elections, and would back transnational lists and elections over two days rather than four, in May rather than June.
How could the Lisbon Treaty's “great promise” on the citizens' initiative be realised, asked Gerald Häfner (Greens/EFA, Germany), somewhat disappointed by the Commission's Green Paper. Šefèoviè said that this would be one of his priorities, announcing the release of the findings of the consultation exercises on 22 February and hoping that a draft proposal could be prepared for spring, and, in any event, during the Spanish Presidency.
The Commissioner-designate was more succinct in his reply to Ashley Fox (CRE, UK) and Morten Messerschmidt (EFD, Denmark), who had protested about the waste of holding parliamentary sessions in Strasbourg and who tried to get him to say that the Treaty should be amended to allow the EP itself to decide where it should sit. Šefèoviè refused to do so: as a member of the Commission, he said, represented the guardian of the treaty and could not, therefore, have personal views on the issue.
He was more loquacious on the register of lobby groups, when asked by Soren Sondergaard (GUE/NGL, Denmark), indicating that he agreed that if big consultancies and law firms carried out lobbying activities, they should not be able to hide behind the lawyer-client relationship “If they are lobbying, they must be registered”. In response to other MEPs, he said he backed the idea of a joint register with Parliament (he said the Commission would work with Diana Wallis), while stating that the Commission could not give access cards to all those registered. The existing register had already proved successful, he said.
Šefèoviè also agreed that there had to be rules on the types of activities that officials leaving the Commission could undertake: there could be no abuse of information gathered during the exercise of official duties.
Would the new full-time Council President report properly to MEPs on European Councils, asked UK non-attached member Andrew Brons. He would, replied Šefèoviè, expressing the opinion that, even though the full-time President had not agreed to take part in question and answer sessions, MEPs would be seeing much more of him than previously.
In response to other committee members and to members of other invited committees (budgetary control, legal and petitions), Šefèoviè said:
- Citizens' initiative. This must remain, indeed, a citizens' initiative, and too early intervention by the Commission may be seen as interference. It was important, too, not to raise false hopes, and he mentioned a specific issue: maternity leave. Was this, he asked, within the Commission's area of responsibility? Yes. Would it bring forward a proposal? “Never,” he said, certain that it would be bad for the Commission to send out contradictory signals in areas of importance to citizens.
- European External Action Service. In response to Italian MEP Roberto Gualtieri (S&D), Elmar Brok (EPP, Germany), Ines Ayala Sender (S&D, Spain) and Polish MEP Rafal Trzaskowski (EPP), Sefcovic stated unequivocally, “I have only one goal: it must be a big success,” calling for genuine esprit de corps. Parliament should be involved, and the Commissioner-designate wanted the normal legislative procedure to be followed, but time was of the essence if a decision was to be reached. However, he said, “I promise to do my utmost to consult the Parliament: there will be no surprises”. He spelt out that the Treaty provided for the staff for this Service to come from three sources: Commission, Council Secretariat general and member states: however, once established, he felt it should be open to European Parliament officials.
- Commissioner-designate's vision of Europe. He was asked about his vision of Europe firstly by Hungarian Gyorgy Schöpflin (EPP), who asked what he had retained of his time as a student in Moscow. Šefèoviè said that his feeling above all was that, under Gorbachov, things felt much more democratic in Moscow than in Bratislava or Prague. Europe, he said, had “enormous transformatory power”, and his presence there proved that. If anyone had suggested in 1987 that he would be interviewed as a member of the Commission, “everyone would have laughed”. This proved the distance travelled. “Do you see yourself as a federalist, or are you still in the closet?” asked Andrew Duff. “I am not in the closet,” smiled Šefèoviè, and I “support an even closer union” but “with realistic goals, at a pace understood by citizens and which is not creating anxieties about a loss of national identity”.
- geographic representation of officials. It had to be fair, the Commissioner-designate repeated a number of times, stating that one Director General from the new member states was not enough. Sticking to indicative quotas was a good start.
- Granting the EU new areas of responsibility. Replying to Rafal Trzaskowski, Šefèoviè said he backed greater powers in finance and the budget and “probably greater coordination of major economic policies”. (L.G./transl.rt)