After his first year in office, the Commission for review: Ambitious or effective? What is expected of the Commission? Do you think that this is a Government European? Would you like to behave as such? Would you be better understand the roles of commissioners? What real power of the president Barroso? Do you have questions about the political competence? "They miss a single voice in the EU? "Transparency? "Accessibility? Does political courage? Is the Commission an effective and useful to citizens? I fear that many citizens, even the most enthusiastic, largely unknown what does the European Commission.
It's time to be assuming that the EU tends to greater uniformity, in a special way in Eurozone. Just today, the press
echoes the criticism that MEPs expressed on Competitiveness Pact proposed by the Franco-German axis in the Council is highly relevant to the debate on power sharing in the European Union. Without a doubt, is need for a visible and equipped with autonomy, can gradually develop the skills that states are losing.
Today marks one year of operation of the mandate of the second committee chaired by Portugal's Barroso (more popularly known as
Barroso II). We have worked hard. Have continued to issue regulations, in the gap continues to bring forward the new directive on the single market in services. States still lingering on meeting deadlines prescribed whenever the Commission in its Guidelines. Some become eternal in credit and transfer of European laws, the slackers are blatantly ignoring that is in the interests of businesses and consumers, ergo citizens, meet the requirements of the EU executive, and this is especially bloody, unsuccessful in achieving - Single Market and Energy Services already mentioned, great workhorse of this Committee. Is the struggle for visibility. Barroso fights for not get eclipsed by the Council, including Merkel and Sarkozy. Remember doubts that arose at the time of the vote in Strasbourg
a year ago. Several observations. To mark this anniversary, we are developing today and tomorrow in Brussels a conference ("Implementing the Lisbon Treaty") involving a large number of commissioners. Precisely which involved adjustments to the Treaty of Lisbon, which takes just over a year in force, have greatly hampered the launch of the Commission. Yesterday, also in Brussels, there was a high-level meeting on the internal market, sponsored by the Commission, which addressed the preparation of the summit on reducing carbon.
These and many other such acts are part of the regular agenda of the EU executive. Their aspirations go far beyond. It is undeniable that some federalists would like to see the Commission less shackled by the Council, more autonomous. But for this, the president should be chosen in voting by all European citizens and address their management in an election. The unreality of this scenario, the desired but unlikely, does not prevent the EU forward.
However, despite uninformed criticism is often expressed slightly against Brussels, there is the strange paradox that public opinion demanding greater visibility and force European institutions, especially the President of the Commission. I imagine that, immediately afterwards, was asked about the role of Van Rompuy as president of the Council. In my case, I have no doubts. Barroso's power spectrum is much higher than that of Van Rompuy, not only by the personal profile of each of these characters, but because the Commission has a mandate of five years, while the permanent president is in two and a half years, and his role has more to do with mediation between the heads of government at the European Council. We must not forget that the Commission has legislative initiative, and is the guardian treaties, so its power is remarkable political surveillance.
know I want to give an assessment of the Barroso II and his team. With a few exceptions. This is a study, however, must be quarantined because it has been made between ordinary citizens, but is selective. Let me explain. Exhibits certain biases, which has developed mainly of politicians, actors and officials from all EU countries. However, it is interesting and so I invite you to read the results of this survey
that is rigorous and thorough, despite also present, bias gender, because - "attention" - 64% of respondents were men, although it is fair to recognize that this percentage reflects the glaring reality. Women we have a long way to go to reach for relevance and presence, even in European politics.
Select some striking details. For example, only 5% of respondents felt that relations with third countries are relevant ... my immediate thought leads me to wonder where are the cries against the slow continuous Ashton, not to mention the complex network of European External Action Service, which have poured so much energy and so many broken dreams left between officials of the former Relex. Unfathomable mysteries. So is that just stop Ashton out pretty well on the exam, and some excuse their profile blurred by the dual mandate, the famous double-Hatting
(as is Vice President of the Commission but also represents the interests of the States).
Similarly, many opinions are demanding more political courage to Barroso, who they accuse of being too cautious and gray, is criticized for abusing over the showcasing of their tongues, while schizophrenia-en-le strange value better than their own national governments. No surprisingly, very active (and sometimes controversial) Rehn, Reding and Kroes appear well scored, while the blurred Tajani is located in the tail ... concern, given that manages jobs and growth, although in his defense we should recognize that this is a somewhat empty wallet real expertise.
The general feeling among respondents is that Barroso is starring in the presidential mandate in history, even over Delors. Is a statement that is damaging interpretations. To what extent is questionable presidential profile? If something is clear is that Delors was a key to European integration and their relevance places him at the level of the "fathers of Europe." Barroso do not know if you can achieve this level of historical importance, but it is not ruled out that the presidential mandate is a direct consequence of having to deal with a government too big. This is leading and coordinating an Executive of 27 ministers / commissioners, something worthwhile that appeases the intensity of the daily work of the Europe and work inaccessible to despondency.
A mid-term (summer, 2012) to perform a new survey. I hope to go further and involving also the citizens of the street.
I think this type of concrete (beyond the cold Eurobarometer) also contribute to creating public awareness of European policy. If we want a Europe with a visible and responsive president electorally, we must first create such a European public space where they germinate the political interest of Europeans and their leaders. We need to know to be critical. This is an area where we have some margin pressure and acting as civil society.
Until then, much has to rain on a European Union must overcome the confusion in its power structure, as well to forge closer cooperation between their institutions with greater ambition and clarity. I harbor no doubt that the Commission has to exercise that leadership, strengthening its ability to influence and monitor (and possibly expand) the achievement of common goals enshrined in our treaties.
