Saturday

17th Apr 2021

Opinion

Power is slipping from the commission to the council

In one of these pieces, a year or so ago, I wrote that it seemed to me we were watching an accelerating shift of power away from the European Commission and towards the European Council and that this unscripted change would prove as significant for the future development of Europe as anything in any constitutional treaty.

The function of the Commission, headed by an appointed college of commissioners, is to propose initiatives designed to forward the construction of Europe, the development of the single market, competition policy, the environment, climate change and so on. They are the guardians and promoters of the European interest, as opposed to the national interests of the member states represented in the European Council and the Council of Ministers. These bodies, along with the European Parliament, turn the commission's proposals into law.

Read and decide

Join EUobserver today

Become an expert on Europe

Get instant access to all articles — and 20 years of archives. 14-day free trial.

... or subscribe as a group

  • "With the experience of recent history behind them, hegemony by large states was something that Europe's founding fathers were determined to avoid" (Photo: Peter Sain ley Berry)

Such was the prestige of the commission, in the days when the Union was smaller than it is today, that this model held good most of the time. The commission represented the European interest, while member states, also keen to promote the European interest, ensured that it became the motor of European development.

My point, for which I remember being taken to task by one commission official, was that as the Union had grown and particularly since the great enlargement of 2004, the council was no longer content to leave the business of of European initiatives entirely to the commission. It wanted to develop initiatives of its own. The rapid rise in the importance attached to European energy policy was one example.

One effect of this has been to make the commission itself a more presidential body, with Mr Barroso himself intervening in several important dossiers, as well as becoming a more public face than some of his predecessors.

Nevertheless, it was Mr Blair, two years ago, Angela Merkel, last year, and today Nicolas Sarkozy, the French president, who are capturing the headlines with European initiatives that cut across the smoothly graded path mapped out by the commission. Indeed these days, it seems some new European initiative appears from the Elysée Palace almost every week. All of which serves to take the wind out of the commission's sails.

Most recent is the mini-summit, called by Gordon Brown, the British prime minister, to discuss how Europe's economies might react to the global credit crunch and guard against similar developments in the future. One might have assumed that the commission would have been indispensable to any progress on these pan-European issues, but it appears that Mr Barroso only received his invitation as an afterthought and when, after protests, it was decided to include the Italians as well.

Here is (or will be on 29 January) a group of member states proposing to develop a key element of European policy, almost without reference to the commission. Such is the way power is moving. They are, moreover, large states and the widespread fear on the part of small countries is that by seeking to eclipse the commission they will be acting not in the interests of Europe as a whole, but in the interests of their own well-developed economies.

With the experience of recent history behind them, hegemony by large states was something that Europe's founding fathers were determined to avoid. Which is why far-sighted decisions were taken to place the responsibility for European development within an institution that represented solely the European interest and did not have a national axe to grind.

The commission's influence may become even further eroded when the European Council appoints its first president in 2009. This could easily mark another stage in Europe's retreat towards a chaotic inter-governmental future. Last week, I argued that the president ought to be democratically appointed, with sample polls in each member state and a decision in the European Parliament.

That would help to ensure that whoever finally got the job would speak up not only for Europe across the world, but would also represent all member states, large and small, developed and underdeveloped. As matters stand, the presidency is likely to be behoven to large member state interests.

What this means in practice is that the commission is increasingly likely to find that securing tough policies that advance the European interest (as opposed to simply being the lowest common denominator) will become like dragging feathers through treacle.

We are already seeing evidence of this in the recent withdrawal of the commission's health policy proposals in the face of national protests. If that was a shot across the commission's bows, other warnings are being fired in its direction as it prepares to unveil proposals for meeting climate change targets: reducing carbon emissions by 20 per cent by 2020 and hitting a 20 per cent target for renewables in the energy mix at the same time.

Leaving aside whether it might have been more sensible to have based the targets on the results of an implementation plan rather than the other way about, it is clear the commission will have a hard job in squaring the circle. No country wishes to put its industries at risk or see them up sticks and remove to Asia as a result of trying to implement the commission's proposals.

We are in for a real battle of wills, with the commission staking its credibility on adhering to its targets and member states coming up with their own agreements and devices for thwarting the plans.

The loser in this battle for power between the European institutions is likely to be Europe itself. Big states may get their way, but this is not necessarily going to be in their long-term interest, however much it may seem so at the time. The big states should remember the old Talleyrand dictum, ‘I have always tried to act in the interests of Europe, believing that what is good for Europe will ultimately be good for France.' For France, substitute any large member state.

What was true 200 years ago remains true today.

The author is editor of EuropaWorld

Disclaimer

The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author's, not those of EUobserver.

'Ethno-nationalism' is not way forward for Bosnia-Herzegovina

In Bosnia-Herzegovina, tempted by the allure of a 'deliverable', the EU, US, and UK are supporting a political process that would enhance the power of ethno-nationalist leaders, cement ethnic partition, and quite possibly lead to violence.

Will Romania be EU's Green Deal laggard?

Of the €30bn allocated to Romania under the EU recovery fund, just four percent is slated to go to renewable energy and energy-efficiency. Despite the pressing need to decarbonise Romania's heat and power sectors, this is not an investment priority.

Column

Muslims, Ramadan, and myths facing 'European civilisation'

Happy Ramadan? The UN special rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief warned the Human Rights Council last month that institutional suspicion of Muslims and those perceived to be Muslim has escalated to "epidemic proportions" worldwide.

Industry lobby to 'co-decide' on nearly €10bn EU public money

Several industry EU lobby groups are about to be entrusted again with the privilege of co-deciding how €9.6bn of public EU research funding should be used - in research areas as essential as healthcare, transportation, energy and IT infrastructures.

News in Brief

  1. EU postpones decision on labelling gas 'sustainable'
  2. MEPs call for mass surveillance ban in EU public spaces
  3. Greek and Turkish ministers trade jibes in Ankara
  4. Biden repeats opposition to Russia-Germany pipeline
  5. Navalny in danger, letter warns EU foreign ministers
  6. Lithuania keen to use Denmark's AstraZeneca vaccines
  7. Gas plants largest source of power-sector emissions
  8. Study: Higher risk of blood clots from Covid than vaccines

Column

Why Germans understand the EU best

In Germany, there is commotion about a new book in which two journalists describe meetings held during the corona crisis between federal chancellor Angela Merkel, and the 16 prime ministers of its federal constituent states.

Why Iceland isn't the gender paradise you think

Iceland's international reputation masks two blunt realities that face the country's women - the disproportionate levels of gender-based violence that they experience, and a justice system that is frequently suspicious and hostile towards victims of this violence.

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. Nordic Council of MinistersDigitalisation can help us pick up the green pace
  2. Nordic Council of MinistersCOVID19 is a wake-up call in the fight against antibiotic resistance
  3. Nordic Council of MinistersThe Nordic Region can and should play a leading role in Europe’s digital development
  4. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic Council to host EU webinars on energy, digitalisation and antibiotic resistance
  5. UNESDAEU Code of Conduct can showcase PPPs delivering healthier more sustainable society
  6. Nordic Council of MinistersWomen benefit in the digitalised labour market

Latest News

  1. US rejects Slovenia-linked plan to break up Bosnia
  2. Ukraine urges Borrell to visit Russia front line
  3. Could US sanctions hit Russia vaccine sales to EU?
  4. Polish court pushes out critical ombudsman
  5. Political crises in Romania and Bulgaria amid third wave
  6. Von der Leyen's summer plans undisclosed, after Ukraine snub
  7. Over a million EU citizens back farm-animal cage ban
  8. Three options for West on Putin's Ukraine build-up

Join EUobserver

Support quality EU news

Join us