It is not always easy to follow or understand the inner workings of the European Parliament – or the dynamics within and between the different political groups. The “power games” that undeniably go on behind the scenes after an election do not normally engage the general public. At the moment the EU Institutions find themselves in a situation between the existing Nice Treaty and a new Lisbon Treaty which (hopefully) will enter into force before the end of the year. So the appointment of a new Commission President is uncertain and has been made part of the “deals” being discussed in the EP at the moment.
This is my view:
1. The procedure for nominating and appointing a Commission President and Commissioners has to become even more open and transparent. It should not be like finding a new pope! Names (plural!) should be presented early on in the process – including women! Don´t tell me that there is not even ONE European woman worth mentioning/ being nominated in the context of appointing four top posts in the EU (now three since the appointment of Jerzy Buzek as President of the European Parliament)!? To start with, here are a few names from me : Angela Merkel, Mary Robinson, Ursula Plassnik, Anna Diamantopoulou, Emma Bonino…
2. Member States can already now open up the procedure for nominating individual commissioners, for example: let different candidates be presented to the public, media and even to national parliaments. Nominate both a man and a woman so as to allow for a composition with even better gender balance in the next Commission.
3. Sort out/separate the relation between procedure, political programme and person. To most people it seems hypocritical to oppose the one candidate named and presented for the post of President of the Commission – if there is no other candidate!
4. I am not convinced that the Commission should be more politicised. The role of the Commission should be maintained, meaning that Commissioners - as they promise in front of the Court in Luxemburg- should first and foremost look at the European interest, not national interests or political party interests. Of course: the members of the college are politicians and they often engage in lively debates but I have appreciated that most of the decisions have been taken by consensus.
Since I already mentioned Anna Diamantopoulou’s name: I would like to support an initiative of hers to organise a trip to Burma insisting on a visit to Aung San Suu Kyi. “To show our solidarity to an extraordinary woman and show our will to change the world to the better,” as Anna writes. We insist on having Aung San Suu Kyi released as soon as possible. After her recent conviction she will be detained until after the May 2010 elections. Guess why?