Time to take the lead

The next European Commission must be more than just competent.

Could it be that José Manuel Barroso’s second European Commission will house more political talent than his first? The European Parliament hearings featured debutant performances ranging from efficiently competent to downright impressive. Neither unpronounceable names nor faintly questionable personal histories caused any marking down of Janusz Lewandowski (Poland, budget), Stefan Füle (Czech, enlargement and neighbourhood) and László Andor (Hungarian, employment and social affairs). Even Günther Oettinger (Germany, energy) turned in a workmanlike performance.

Extensive ministerial experience helped John Dalli (Malta, health and consumer policies), Karel De Gucht (Belgium, trade)and Maire Geoghegan-Quinn (Ireland, research and innovation) collect rave reviews from some MEPs, but could not prevent Rumiana Jeleva from abandoning her nomination – a reminder that the president of the Commission can do little to save any candidate if the Parliament insists on a ritual sacrifice.

Though easy to dismiss as more of an exercise in public posturing than democratic scrutiny, the hearings are useful but not sufficient in revealing whether nominee commissioners are made of the right stuff. The hearings are a first opportunity to identify those that do their homework, learn their briefs and map out a political direction for themselves and the Commission. Not surprisingly, most, but not all commissioners with at least one term under their belts scored highly on this front: Viviane Reding (Luxembourg, justice, rights and citizenship) paraded a virtual manifesto in front of her committee, Michel Barnier (France, internal market) was smooth and controlled and Joaquín Almunia (Spain, competition) quietly authoritative. Predictably, Olli Rehn (Finland, economics and finance) upset nobody but did not greatly enthuse either, while Neelie Kroes (Netherlands, digital economy), was not at the top of her form and failed to impress. Catherine Ashton’s hearing offered no real clues as to whether she has or ever will have real form as foreign policy chief. She lacked focus.

The presentations suggested that Barroso and Catherine Day, the Commission’s secretary-general, had exercised restraining hands. Nobody sought to upstage the president by colouring in his EU2020 strategy, and the holders of the education, employment and energy portfolios stressed the Union’s limited or non-existent powers in their policy areas. With the exception of Reding, whose portfolio has real muscle, thanks to steroids injected by the Lisbon treaty, the overall impression last week was of seamless continuity from Barroso I.

But once it buckles down to examining its options, this Commission ought to conclude that the problems facing the Union require discontinuity and strong, courageous political leadership ready to embrace radical solutions. Forecasts from both the Commission and the OECD plainly indicate that the economic outlook for the entire span of Barroso II is dismal. It is going to be a struggle to drag growth up to even a 1.5%-2% range. This is barely a recovery and offers no promise of significant job creation after unemployment has peaked at well above 10%. The implications of low growth, ageing populations, huge budget deficits and rocketing government debt will be the sternest test in more than 50 years of the Union’s cohesion and solidarity. The requirement is to allocate scarce financial resources at both national and European levels where they will be most effective at promoting economic adjustment, recovery and competitiveness without also tearing great holes in the fabric of social safety nets.

Barroso II will be sworn in in a radically different political context than its predecessor. The financial and economic crisis has put the nation state back in the driving-seat with an obligation on governments to re-order markets for banking and other financial services so that they become agents of recovery rather than threats to it. Nevertheless, regulatory zeal has to be kept on a leash by Almunia and Barnier so that it does not erode single market freedoms nor open a Pandora’s box of ‘beggar-thy-neighbour’ state aids and incentives to protect national champions.

Barroso will need to corral national governments into closer, more deter-mined policy co-ordination than ever before to agree on the timing and sub-stance of exit strategies from the stimulus policies that have piled up deficits and debt. Spending has to be cut and taxes raised in most countries. Without agree-ments on strategy, timing and effective co-ordination of implementation policies, we must fear for the future of the euro.

Low growth, high unemployment and fragmented political vision will hasten the slide in the EU’s influence and its ability to shape the future of the next phases of globalization. The burgeoning importance of the G20 heightens the profile of the large member states when they should be part of a compact EU27 speaking with a single voice. The manner in which the Union was sidelined by US President Barack Obama at the Copenhagen summit on climate change suggests that not even a single voice is enough unless Europe knows how to use it.

Barroso’s Commission is going to have to lead from the front. There is quality and political experience among its members that must be harnessed to make the College more than the sum of its parts. And in his second term, the president needs to be a little less obsessed with searching for elusive consensus among member states and be more focused on doing the right things for Europe.

John Wyles is a former Brussels bureau chief of the Financial Times