IT WAS not a propitious start for the second term of European Commission president Jose Manuel Barroso. Like his first commission, the second has stumbled at the first fence, the parliamentary hearings on its individual members.
In 2004, it was Italian Rocco Buttiglione who was forced out over homophobic comments. This time, Bulgarian foreign minister Rumiana Jeleva has withdrawn after claims that she failed to declare interests in a privatisation consultancy firm and for displaying inadequate knowledge of her brief at hearings last week. In truth she might have survived on the first issue – she was cleared by the parliament’s lawyers on her commission declaration, though there are still problems with two earlier ones as an MEP – but MEPs had tasted blood and she did herself no favours when she met them.
The rights of the European Parliament are limited, although much expanded in recent years. But it likes to flex its muscles. MEPs may only vote down the whole team, not each individual, and this “nuclear” option has yet to be exercised. But the threat is sufficient. Ms Jeleva, the weakest in the pack, has been taken out partly to prove a point in an ongoing inter-institutional tussle in which the parliament is struggling to extend its right to call the commission to account.
Her membership of the European People’s Party (EPP) was also a factor, and the latter may well yet decide to take its revenge by targeting socialist or liberal nominees. Even if it refrains, the prospect of ratification of the new commission before mid-February is now less likely.
Ms Jeleva will be replaced as Bulgaria’s nominee by Kristalina Georgieva, a senior World Bank official with long experience in aid and restructuring in the developing world. Ms Georgieva is expected to sail through her own parliamentary hearing.
But the whole episode reflects poorly on a weak Mr Barroso whose political judgment and willingness to stand up to member states during the nomination process is clearly in doubt. The commission president has considerable discretion to reject nominees of member states and is entitled to ask for more names if he is not happy a candidate fits the profile of competences required by the treaty. No prime minister will welcome such a challenge to what was once his sole discretion but it is an important element in the strengthening of the independence of the commission. It is a pity Mr Barroso did not see fit to exercise it.