All bets are off in the making of a president

Date: 15/04/04

AS JUNE quickly approaches, speculation is rising as to who will be the next president of the European Commission.

On 17-18 June, the European Council is expected to nominate the person it intends to appoint as president.

Although not legally required, it has been suggested that member state leaders 'take into account' the results of the elections to the European Parliament - as envisaged by Article I-26 of the draft constitution put forward by the Convention on Europe's future - when choosing their nominee.

Although this has not been confirmed, the EU's heads of state and government will necessarily have to pay some regard to the elections' results, because the nominee must be approved by an absolute majority of the European Parliament, meeting in plenary session on 20-23 July.

Forecasting who is likely to replace Romano Prodi as the Commission's president is even more hazardous this time around because:

• The choice will be made by 25 European Council members;
• a decision will for the first time be taken by qualified majority voting (QMV), and;
• the decision is likely to have to take into account the results of the European elections on June 10-13.

The results of these polls are also difficult to forecast because: the final composition of political groups will depend on several factors, such as negotiations and manoeuvring within the assembly's biggest group, the European People's Party-European Democrats (EPP-ED); the possible formation of a new 'federalist' group; the emergence of a larger nationalist group on the right; the large intake of MEPs from new member states (162); the probable low turnout, and; the likely greater fragmentation of the parties.Of the current 622 MEPs (four seats are vacant), the group line-up is EPP 231 members, Socialists 173, European Liberal, Democrat & Reform Party 52, United Left 49 and Greens 44. After the election there will be 732 members and an absolute majority will therefore be 367.The EPP is expected to remain the biggest party but not to have an overall majority. However, it is not unimaginable that the Socialists, Liberals and Greens - and possibly a new federalist group - might join forces and support a non- EPP candidate. It has been widely assumed that there will be an EPP- dominated European Council, which would therefore nominate a candidate of the same political colour. However, the choice of a candidate is still wide open, as no single party controls the number of votes in the European Council necessary for the decision to be taken under the QMV system. Under the voting weights in effect until 1 November (when the Nice Treaty weights enter into force) the EPP has some 52 votes in the Council (from France, Italy, the Netherlands, Greece, Portugal, Austria, Finland, Ireland, Slovakia, Luxembourg and Malta). The Socialists retain 48 votes (Germany, UK, Spain, Czech Republic, Hungary, Sweden, Latvia and Lithuania). Even with all 24 votes from the remaining countries (Belgium, Poland, Denmark, Estonia, Slovenia and Cyprus), neither would gather the 88 (out of 124) votes needed under the present QMV formula.This increases the chance of a compromise candidate.But the planned procedure for appointing the Commission president is inappropriate, as the new Parliament's political groups will not be known when the heads of state and government gather in June. On the other hand, it will be premature to take informal soundings of the new Parliament before their meeting. Were Parliament to reject the European Council nominee, this would create unnecessary controversy and make it very difficult for the new Commission to take office on 1 November. The following procedure would be preferable: the European Council makes no decision in June; Parliament establishes its political groups; informal soundings of Parliament take place; an EU summit is in Strasbourg during Parliament's July plenary session to propose a candidate, and the candidate is approved by Parliament This procedure is unlikely, however, to be adopted.Candidates being talked about for the Commission presidency are Jean-Luc Dehaene (former Belgian prime minister), Jean-Claude Juncker (premier of Luxembourg) and Wolfgang Schüssel (chancellor of Austria) for the EPP; Paavo Lipponen (former Finnish premier) and Ant-nio Vitorino (Portuguese justice and home affairs commissioner) for the Socialists, and Irishman Pat Cox, Parliament's president, for the Liberals. There is, as yet, no 'declared' candidate from the larger member states. Of the centre-right, both Dehaene and Juncker have 'ruled themselves out', but might be persuaded to change their mind 'in the interests of Europe'. Schüssel, meanwhile, would be unpopular with a number of countries because of his alliance to the far-right Freedom Party.Of the centre-left, Vitorino is an excellent commissioner, a good communicator and is likely to be acceptable to Parliament. Lipponen is also a serious candidate. Finally, Liberal Pat Cox is another good communicator and is likely to be acceptable to the assembly he currently heads. So it cannot be ruled out that the EU could this year have both a Treaty of Dublin (if the Irish presidency can have the draft constitution agreed before its stint ends on 30 June) and an Irish Commission president.

• Stanley Crossick is director and founding chairman of Brussels-based think-tank the European Policy Centre. s.crossick@theepc.be

Article considers the revised selection procedure for the post of European Commission President.

• Primary Source