Appointment to the Commission. A very justified procedure but far too slow

(BRUXELLES2) In a few days we will come to the end of the sequence started at the beginning of 2014 with the electoral campaign for the renewal of the European Parliament. The political game which we witnessed during the hearings of the Commissioners is very sane both for democracy and for the political meaning it gives to European construction. Even if the maneuvers to which he gives the flank lend themselves to irony (read: Operation Pacification in Parliament. 1 collateral victim).

The European machine in slow motion

But there is an equally political fact. Since the beginning of the year, the European machine has been idling. No notable proposal is put into the legislative circuit anymore. No big decision is made. Only current affairs (competition, state aid, humanitarian aid, etc.) are managed. All reform processes, European initiatives are frozen. Even if the field of foreign policy is less affected by this slowdown, certain decisions - such as the reorganization of the organization chart of the European Diplomatic Service, the overhaul of the financial regulations, budgetary decisions are postponed to more.

Do not delay

This power vacuum, tolerable for a few months, cannot last indefinitely. It is possible, perhaps, that the future Commission has some "weak weights" or that others are somewhat out of place. But, overall, this executive is rather better than the previous one. And we must try this chance, without starting to look for the best "dream team" for Europe. Even if there are adaptations along the way (as in any government).

An unsuitable mode of designation

More generally, we will have to learn the lessons of the decision-making mechanism that has been put in place. This device, where for almost a year Europe slows down its mode of action and decision, enters into lethargy, raises questions. Is it adapted to a modern era where political developments go very quickly, at a time when the feeling of belonging to a continent could not be more fragile, and at a time when security threats exist at our borders.

A cumbersome Commission designation mechanism

Wait for the results of the elections so that each Member State appoints its commissioner, then wait for the appointment of the President of the Commission, a first hearing to await his confirmation, then the nominations of commissioners by the President, the hearings and finally the confirmation (in a second vote) of the Commission as a whole, is far too heavy. We will have to review the entire designation process. That is to say, keep its democratic virtue, the "highlight" of which (now) revolves around the election to the European Parliament. But reduce the latency phases before and after, particularly in terms of appointing Commissioners, and in particular the High Representative. In other words, speeding up the designation process...

Some ideas

Some ideas can be put on the table. For example the creation of a complete college and no longer just a head of the list, within the political groups. It will then be a question of each party running in the European elections presenting a "President of the Commission - High Representative" ticket (or even President of the Council). A list could not pass in full. Because the establishment of the Commission requires a consensus between several parties. But we could thus have a pool of at least 2-3 Commissioners per country per position, from which it will be a question of drawing.

A compromise is, in any case, necessary. Because if the European Commission must be more political (composed of politicians), it cannot and should not be partisan (composed of politicians), except to be discredited. Another idea: to oblige or allow each Member State to designate, before the European election, or at the latest the day after it, its commissioner or its contenders for the post of commissioner. The designation of several candidates allowing either to compensate for a defection or a questioning, or to have the best candidate profile facing an available position.

In any case, it is important to think about and change the methods of appointing the Commission. A political freeze of almost a year is totally unrealistic and irresponsible.

(Nicolas Gros-Verheyde)