Steely Neelie and national parties dabbling in EU politics

14 janvier 2010 | Par Robert van Geffen 1

How national party politics degrade the European Commission

Both friends and opponents were generally positive about Neelie Kroes becoming the European Commissioner for Competition. Especially her strong action against big companies like Microsoft was praised. Nevertheless her nomination in European Commission as Commissioner of the Digital Agenda is obviously a step back. This can be explained by looking at national politics. The political parties in the Netherlands, the country that nominated Neelie Kroes, were deeply divided until the last moment. Kroes’ nomination is a perfect example of how party politics at the national level can weaken the Commissioners position at the European level.

Steely Neelie

In her five year period as EU Commissioner for Competition, Neelie Kroes attracted attention due to her tough attitude towards multinationals like Microsoft, Intel, E.on and GDF Suez. She imposed billions of euros of fines on companies distorting the free market. She also had a tough approach during the financial crisis on member states giving illegitimate state aid to companies and banks. During this period she clashed with the French president Sarkozy, the German chancellor Merkel, the Dutch finance minister Bos and many others. This earned her the nickname ‘Steely Neelie’. Nevertheless she was widely respected throughout Europe for the integrity and fair play she showed in dealing with corporate irregularities and bank bailouts. The public opinion was mobilised when citizens set up petitions for her to stay. Besides, Neelie Kroes made no secret of the fact that she aspired to serving another term in Barroso’s Commission. After first publicly speaking about this in the media she actively started campaigning for herself in the last few weeks before the nomination. This is something quite unusual.

Although this resulted in her nomination as a Commissioner, she was not chosen to represent one of the main portfolios such as Trade or Transport, to which she, and the Netherlands, aspired. Therefore it is seen as a defeat for Dutch diplomacy in Brussels and it is interesting to determine what went ‘wrong’ during the nomination process. It can all be explained by the deeply divided party politics at the national level in the Netherlands. Especially the Dutch Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende can be blamed for not securing one of the main portfolios for a Dutch Commissioner. It is not an example that is typical for only the Netherlands. What happened in the Netherlands could happen to any other EU member state too, especially to those with multiparty governments.

Colour matters

By analysing what went wrong it is necessary to look at the political situation in the Netherlands. Traditionally the three main parties in the Dutch politics are the Labour Party (social democrats), the Christian Democrats and the Liberals. The Dutch representative in the European Commission has always been a member of one of these three parties. Besides, it has always been a member of one of the parties that was in government. At the moment the government led by Jan Peter Balkenende is composed of the Labour Party and the Christian Democratic Party. With the history in mind it would be logical to have a Dutch nomination for the European Commission from one of these two parties. Neelie Kroes is a member of the Liberal Party so it was unlikely that she would be re-elected. Therefore the Christian Democratic Prime Minister Balkenende focused on the nomination of a Christian Democratic candidate. But there was one big problem that could obstruct the nomination of a Christian Democratic candidate : the election of the new EU President.

Jan Peter Balkenende

The Christian Democratic Prime Minister of the Netherlands

Source : Flickr, Radio Nederland Wereldomroep

The EU president election

Long before the official election of the new President of the European Council, Balkenende was mentioned as a possible candidate for this position. As soon as it became clear that the British candidate Tony Blair was not a serious option for many countries, the member states were looking for a low-profile, consensus seeking candidate. That is when Balkenende came into consideration. As the Prime Minister of one of the founding countries of the EU, Balkenende was a good candidate. Since the President of the European Commission is from a peripheral country (Portugal) and the President of the European Parliament is from an Eastern European country (Poland), having a Council President from one of the founding member states would establish a natural balance between the EU institutions. Besides, a Christian Democratic background may put Balkenende into a better starting position than Tony Blair given the Christian Democratic hegemony in the European institutions. Therefore he seemed to be the perfect candidate for the position of EU President, until the Belgian Prime Minister Herman van Rompuy came into the picture and won the election.

Acting too late

The possible election of Balkenende caused majors delays in the nomination of a Dutch candidate for the European Commission. With the possibilities of having a Christian Democrat (Balkenende) elected for an important position in the EU, the Labour Party saw its chance to nominate a Social Democratic candidate for the European Commission. This would be their first candidate in thirty years for the position of European Commissioner. But as long as there was no certainty on the nomination of Balkenende as Council President, the Labour Party was not able to nominate its candidate since Balkenende would not allow this to happen. For him, and for the Christian Democratic Party, it was impossible to lose both the position of EU President and member of the European Commission. In the end, this was what happened anyway.

When it became clear on the 19th of November that the Belgian Prime Minister Van Rompuy was elected as EU President, Balkenende pressed for the nomination of a Christian Democratic candidate for the European Commission. However, a couple of days earlier the Labour Party which is also part of the government coalition supported the re-appointment of Neelie Kroes. Public opinion also tended to support her candidacy. Balkenende was therefore heavily criticised for letting party politics prevail over the nomination of such a competent candidate. Under the pressure of the latter critiques, the Dutch government nominated Kroes on Tuesday the 24th of November. Three days later, the portfolios were submitted to the Commission. It is very clear that the time span between the nomination of Kroes and the moment Barroso unveiled his new Commission was too short. The allocation of portfolios was almost finished by the time of Kroes’ nomination. The member-states which had nominated their candidate long before were in general able to secure better positions in the European Commission.

Liberal success stories

Especially those candidates from the Liberal Parties who were members of Barroso’s first Commission and who were nominated long before the announcement of the new European Commission were able to secure important portfolios. A good example of this is the Belgian candidate Karel de Gucht. During Barroso’s first term he was the Commissioner for Development and Humanitarian Aid and now he will probably be in charge of DG Trade. Also the Finish candidate Olli Rehn who is nominated for the position of Commissioner for Financial and Monetary Affairs was a member of Barroso’s first college of Commissioners. So is the Estonian candidate Siim Kallas, nominated for the position of Transport Commissioner after being Commissioner for Administrative Affairs, Audit and Anti-Fraud. The appointment of Liberals


Equality of power ?: Source : Flickr, IcyMidnight

on the main portfolios while the majority of Council members have a conservative, Christian Democratic background can be explained by the appointment procedure of Barroso as the new European Commission President. During this appointment procedure, the Liberal party (ALDE) in the European Parliament supported Barroso in exchange for the nomination of liberal candidates on important positions in the new European Commission. If the Netherlands had nominated Neelie Kroes earlier, like Belgium, Finland and Estonia did, her chances for a higher position in the European Commission would have been much better.

Colour should not matter

The case of the nomination of the Dutch candidate shows how strongly national party competition can influence the chances of a Commissioner to get a high-profile position in the European Commission. As previously mentioned, this is true for all member states, especially for those with multi-party governments. It is a pity that a Commission candidate who is widely respected and praised for her diligence is limited by national party politics. Therefore it is important to stress that Member States should, when nominating candidates for the European Commission, not look at the political colour of a candidate but mainly focus on their competencies. A European Commissioner is after all not able to, and should not be able to let a certain national political group benefit from their appointment. Not looking at the political colour of a candidate would result in the nomination of the best candidate instead of the one with the right political affiliation. Ultimately, that would be better for the European Union and for European citizens.

Headline Picture : Flickr, World Economic Forum

Recommander cet article

reagir Imprimer envoyer par mail Auteurs

Espace réactions (1)

Ajouter un commentaire

Willem de G.
16 janvier 2010
08:51

Steely Neelie and national parties dabbling in EU politics

You write that « A European Commissioner is after all not able to, and should not be able to let a certain national political group benefit from their appointment. » I agree with you in the sense that he/she cannot do this directly and explicitly. However, every political decision has a different impact on different countries and societal groups.

Since the European Commission is involved in making those political decisions it is actually a good thing that political and national colours are represented in it. Because of the right of initiative European Commissioner’s are not, and should not be seen as, Weberian civil servants (merit and competency based, obeying higher authority).

In my opinion, an increasing (perception of) ’weberization’ of the EC will only amount to the (perceived) lack of democratic legitimacy. Let the Commission openly mirror the political cleavages in the European Parliament and let the latter have the most fundamental role in appointing them. Don’t depoliticize politics.

Réagir à ce commentaire

Ajouter un commentaire

Netherlands

Domestic politics

Lib Dem: What liberalism?

What does it mean to be Belgian?

isn’t it having the humility to accept that the other is needed to define oneself? Doesn’t it mean accepting that one individual cannot represent (...)