V4 and the new EU institutional settings

Last update: 26 04 2010

Related articles

• Slovak ambassador tipped for commissioner job

Related expert opinions

• Lessons learnt from the Czech Presidency

Background

Lisbon treaty, which came into force on 1^st of December 2009, has substantially changed top institutional structure with adding “new faces” and top jobs. Choosing “Mr. Europe” coincided with the start of the new electoral period in the EU, thus also with decision on the new President of the Commission, national commissioners and President of the European Parliament. With all these vacant top jobs in place, it has been stressed that also the geographical balance of the EU, where Visegrad region holds a significant place, should be observed.

There have been several attempts to coordinate positions and the preferences within Visegrad, especially when it comes to the distribution of portfolios in the new Commission. However, the inclinations of the countries overlapped to a significant degree. The most popular among those preferred in Visegrad region (Slovakia and Czech Republic especially) were enlargement and energy portfolios.

In this Factsheet we try to explore what were the positions and preferences of the Visegrad countries in filling the new EU top jobs and institutional setting created by Lisbon Treaty in general, whom did the countries support for the top jobs (Presidency of the Parliament, Council, Commission, Foreign Policy Chief) and what were the national reactions to the actual nominations. Also, it summarizes the process of selection of new members of the European executive and responses to the choice.

CZECH REPUBLIC

Europeans still bear in their fresh minds how lengthy and cumbersome the ratification process of the Lisbon Treaty was in the Czech Republic. Critics of the document, lined up behind its most prominent opponent, President Václav Klaus, afraid that by signing the Treaty Czech Republic would lose a lot of its sovereignty (as many policy areas transferred under co-decision procedure).

Worries of center-right MPs from ODS party (Civic Democrats) caused by the so called „self-amending mechanism“ of the Treaty but also inclusion of subsidiarity check in the document resulted in adoption of the new parliamentary law in March 2009. The law stipulates that government cannot, without prior consent of the Parliament, agree on devolution of legislative powers to the EU level. It also sets down the rules how to proceed in case of (perceived) breach of subsidiarity principle.

As for top jobs, Czech government in its capacity of the holder of the EU Presidency (January-June 2009) helped to secure the support for José Manuel Barroso among member states for his second term at the helm of the European Commission. No other name was mentioned prior or during the process of searching for a suitable candidate. Undisputed support was also given to Jerzy Buzek, new EP President.

Ahead of decision on the name of President of the European Council and High Representative for Common Security and Foreign Policy, there was basically no public discussion and speculations on potential candidates were rare in the media. Also, Czech Republic had no special priorities over the names. As Prime Minister Jan Fischer stated ahead of his trip to the November „top jobs summit“, the only condition was that a new President should be rather someone who „is a moderator, can simplify debate, and is an excellent communicator“.

Selection of the Czech Commissioner was not an easy task for the caretaker government of Jan Fischer as every parliamentary party had their own candidates. There were such names as outgoing Commissioner Vladimír Špidla (Social Democrats, ČSSD), unsuccessful presidential candidate Jan Švejnar (second best for ČSSD, Greens), former deputy prime minister for EU Alexandr Vondra (ODS), and others. Also, the name of Jan Fischer himself appeared on a list for a while. Finally, in a compromise, political parties agreed on Štefan Füle, who was responsible for EU affairs in Fischer's government. In the new Commission, Füle is responsible for Enlargement and European Neighbourhood Policy.

HUNGARY

“A man looking for consensus and a man being able to build consensus, who does not want to steer the EU on his own: the decision was based on these aspects,” said the prime minister of Hungary, Gordon Bajnai after the election of Herman Van Rompuy as a president of the European Council in November 2009.

As the first country ratifying the Treaty of Lisbon, Hungary is a great supporter of the new Lisbon institutions.

Hungary had no special wishes regarding the top jobs, but the government obviously formed a coalition with other socialist governments of the EU (including Slovak government under the leaderships of SMER-SD). Before electing the EU President and the High Commissioner Bajnai (and Slovakia´s Robert Fico) joined four other PES members for a short discussion at the Austrian Embassy in Brussels.

As Tony Blair's presidential nomination was put aside by French president Nicolas Sarkozy, Britons wanted to see someone from the UK at the High Commissioner's post; and Lady Ashton fit well into this picture. She was supported by the before mentioned alliance of countries, including also Spain, Portugal and Greece.

As a medium country, it was also in Hungary's interest not to have an EU-president going his own way, but someone, who wants to coordinate the Member States' interest into one direction, so thus also possible to influence.

After the EU summit, the Hungarian prime minister welcomed the election of both Herman Van Rompuy and Catherine Ashton. He showed satisfaction to have an EU President of Belgium, which is member of the current presidency trio. Hungary will hold the rotating presidency in the first half of 2011, just after his Spanish and Belgian colleagues.

Regarding Ashton's election, Bajnai emphasized the importance of organizational skills, especially at the beginning of her duty, when she will be implementing the Lisbon Treaty and establishing the European External Action Service.

After filling the “top jobs”, also the new European Commission had to be put up. Hungary's choice, László Andor - a banker with obviously leftist views - was broadly criticized by the opposition. As former member of the board of directors of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) in London, being commissioner for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion is a great change of direction, but not this was the crucial point of the critics.

Andor also was Editor In Chief of a socialists, some say communist, journal. However, MEPs from the opposition party did not flank the commissioner-designee’s hearing in the European Parliament.

While some critics still say, that his portfolio does not have the importance that Hungary could have lobbied for, experts agree that its significance should not be depreciated. For example, having a  Commissioner at this post can be very helpful when Hungary will have to find compromises regarding the EU's competitiveness plan, the Europe 2020 strategy during its presidency in 2011.

POLAND (ready to die for the root)

Poland was generally positive towards the new institution of new top jobs in the European Union. The most controversial institutional novelty proposed by the Lisbon Treaty was the voting system in the Council of the European Union. The Lisbon Treaty was meant to replace the Nice system of weighted votes and put it place a system based on the double majority. However, the Nice voting system was very favorable for Poland, giving it only two weighted votes less than two times more populated Germany. In fear of excessive rise in power of Germany, Poland put forward its own solution in 2007: a root voting system. The principle was very simple: each country’s vote amounted to a square root of its population. Thus, the population of the smaller member states would be overrepresented and that of the big ones – underrepresented. “We treat our proposition very seriously. We are ready to die for it” - said Jaroslaw Kaczynski, then Prime Minister. After a round of strenuous negotiations a complicated compromise was reached, dropping the root voting system.

(Nobody but Buzek)

In 2009 as much as four top European jobs were vacate giving room to countless negotiations and speculations. Poland embarked on a diplomatic fight to settle its candidate, Jerzy Buzek, in a chair of the president of the European Parliament. Ex-Prime Minister and a Member of the European Parliament since 2004 had to first win the nomination of his own political fraction, right-wing European People's party where Italian Mario Mauro, backed by influential Silvio Berlusconi, was Buzek's main rival. The dynamic political and diplomatic action by Polish government and Prime Minister Donald Tusk in particular resulted in the final election of Jerzy Buzek which was covered as a triumph of Poland in the European Union.

(Not too ambitious, but safe)

After this success Poland refrained from supporting openly candidates for the remaining free posts, with the notable exception of José Manuel Barroso for the president of the European Commission. “The wise Polish strategy consists of the discrete talks on the high level” - explained Mikolaj Dowgielewicz, then president of the European Integration Committee Office. Only after the actual nominations were announced Donald Tusk admitted he would prefer Jean-Claude Juncker as a President of the European Council.

“The European Union is not ready for great individuals yet” - said Polish Prime Minister after the nomination of Herman Van Rompuy and Catherine Ashton for the two new positions created by the Lisbon Treaty. He believed that Van Rompuy was not a star but his views on the European integration were similar to Polish. Tusk described Ashton as “quite a mystery”, he was happy, however, that one of the top jobs is taken by a woman. All in all, the two nominations were “not too ambitious, but safe for Poland”- said Tusk.

(A politician, not an official)

Janusz Lewandowski was from the outset considered as a Polish candidate for the commissioner. Although some sources mentioned other candidates, among others the 2004-2009 commissioner Danuta Hübner, it was clear that Poland needs a politician and not an official in a Commission. The final decision taken by the Prime Minister was received with satisfaction.

SLOVAKIA

Slovakia was generally positive regarding the institutional reform, whether it was in the form of Constitutional Treaty or later the Lisbon Treaty. In the final phase of negotiations Slovak Republic joined the club of countries that shared the fear of being not present in the "smaller Commission" and eagerly accepted the guarantee given to Ireland ahead of the second referendum to keep the principle "one commissioner per one country". 

When it comes to Barroso, Slovak diplomacy said in advance that it will support his reelection. Robert Fico, chairmen of strongest party SMER-SD, the only member party of PES that gained substantially after the European parliament, did not share the hesitations and criticism that was raised against Barroso and his possible reappointment. In fact he said that the Socialists group in the European Parliament should not obstruct reelection of the Portuguese and better think why it had lost the election.

He even reproached slightly MEPs from his own party that abstained from supporting Barroso in the crucial vote. “I do not know, maybe they are playing some political games,” and they may have “manifest something with this kind of attitude”.

Slovak diplomacy has not voiced any preferences in the discussion about the job of the president of the European Council and the High representative for foreign affairs and security policy.

The general tone of reactions (if there are any) in Slovakia is, that those appointed for the two top jobs (Herman Van Rompuy and Catherine Ashton) should get a chance to show their competencies in their new respective capacities.

Premier Robert Fico, who said before the summit that the president should be more than a coordinator and should be respected internationally, after the summit only voiced satisfaction that the Union can now abandon the institutional issues, which “have bothered us for so long.“

Jan Figeľ, former Slovak commissioner, now leader of the Christian Democrats (KDH) highlighted Van Rompuy´s handling of the political negotiations in Belgium, even though he acknowledge he could imagine also another name in this post. Regarding the criticism that Van Rompuy is considered not to be generally respected politician that would “stop the traffic”, he highlighted that the strength of the Union lies in its ability to find a common position - which the new President committed to compromise should be able to find - and not in strong statements of an individual.

Boris Zala (MEP, SD) said he missed symbolism in the appointments and raised doubts whether citizens will be able to identify themselves with this choice. According to Eduard Kukan (MEP, EPP, former foreign minister) the fact that Van Rompuy is not as well known can even serve to his advantage. He voiced his surprise about the nomination of Ashton, since he “does not know much about her”.

The biggest issue in the public discussion was the selection of the new commissioner, who would replace the outgoing Jan Figeľ. As a part of the discussion the government officials made it clear that the first choice of Slovakia in the new college would be energy or transport. To support the claim, Bratislava sustained that it has and “interesting energy mix, good neighborly relations with Ukraine as the main transit country of gas and oil to Europe and also with Russian Federation.”

Closer to the decision Prime Minister Robert Fico embraced a more fatalist attitude: “In the world and European politics the philosophy of big and small dogs applies. The big state is a big state and small state is a small state. I am a big realist”. After the October European Council he said he talked about Slovak ambitions with those leaders whose voice is “crucial”.

Much clearer than the portfolio attribution, was the issue of personal choice for the new Slovak commissioner. The name of former Slovak ambassador to the EU Maroš Šefčovič circulated as the most common guess in the Slovak media many months before his actual nomination. The junior coalition partners in the Slovak government, centrist HZDS, and nationalists SNS agreed that the final choice will stay with SMER.

The opportunity for Šefčovič came even before the formation of Barroso II Commission, when he replaced Jan Figeľ one month before the end of his official mandate in the portfolio of education. That enabled Šefčovič to get the orientation in the Commission and to get closer to Barroso before he finalized the redistribution of the portfolios among member states.

Inter-institutional relations and administrative portfolio together with the vice-presidency of the Commission was generally very well welcomed in Slovakia, also as many hinted it fitted the professional background of Šefčovič more accurately. Some media however interpreted the result as a slap in the face to the Fico’s ambition for energy domain.