José Manuel Barroso's interview to Agence Europe (EUROPE 9828 and 9829) clarifies his vision of Europe and thus his attitude as president of the Commission. It also goes further than the decisions he has made and results he has achieved. What he said particularly illustrates that:
1. The EU in his opinion cannot be governed according to “majority against opposition criteria”. In a Union of 27 members (and soon to be more), there will always be countries that have Socialist and Liberal governments or changing coalitions and changes in the parties in office. It is unthinkable that Europe's decisions and orientations do not take this into account. He believes that “pro-European political families must understand that they are not each others' enemies but have to fight together against certain extremes that are Europe's real adversaries and who risk making a breakthrough at the European elections…” In the next election campaign, Mr Barroso said that he hopes “that the major European political families will be able to go into the elections by highlighting what is positive in Europe, even if they don't agree on everything”. The different political forces should, nonetheless, make it clear to voters why they want the latter to vote for them. The balancing act is not an easy one.
2. The European institutions should not compete with each other. Mr Barroso rejects the idea of competition between the three main political institutions in the EU. When he was part of the European Council, he defended the role and autonomy of the Commission. In his current position, he welcomed the extension of the remit and powers of Parliament, as well as a permanent presidency of the European Council and the decision to make the Commission vice-president chair of the External Relations Council. The stronger the three institutions, the stronger the EU. He rejects the idea that the Commission has to be at war with member states all the time. He explains that in this way “I could perhaps increase my popularity ratings but it would not achieve any results”. Moreover, it is the results that count and the public does not distinguish between the institutions: citizens believe that when a decision is taken, it is the EU acting and deciding. The active partnership between the three main political institutions is at the basis for all of Europe's progress, even if in some circumstances, it is a critical partnership. Mr Barroso considers that concepts founded on rivalry between the institutions are sterile.
3. Commission's role and composition. Mr Barroso robustly defends his Commission against accusations of it becoming a simple secretariat of the Council and illustrates both the weight and significance of: a) its legislative initiatives (of which the putting into practice depends on the Council but now on the Parliament too); b) its autonomous action (it is the Commission that deals with the big multinationals from the EU, US or elsewhere and which imposes sanctions on them if required); its management powers which, in several fields, are quite substantial. What he does not like doing is launching projects that have no chance of succeeding because he is wary about the effects announcements can have. Announcing what we cannot do hurts all of us.
Mr Barroso also described what he calls the technical charisma of the Commission, as a positive element. For Mr Barroso, this expression means the preparatory work and control of the dossiers that enable the Commission to take all the different and sometimes contradictory aspects in a project into account, as well as the sometimes divergent national interests, so that it can efficiently play a mediating role between Parliament and the Council in codecision procedure. I have often observed that the compromises between the two institutions that hold most power are prepared by the Commission's services, owing to their technical expertise in the different dossiers.
One of the most controversial and heavily debated institutional issues involves the question of how the Commission is made up - with the European Council getting involved in the affair of the Irish referendum, and returning to the formula of one commissioner per member state. Mr Barroso does not agree that this formula is likely to transform the Commission into a kind of inefficient assembly of wisemen. The number of commissioners does not, in his opinion, impede the Commission's effectiveness or capacity to propose and act due to the fact that it is based on the European and not the national interest.
How the Commission is made up and how it works includes, nonetheless, certain aspects that require consolidation. This will be a subject for tomorrow.
(F.R./transl.rh)