Barroso II Commission

Tabled by Rebecca Harms and Daniel Cohn-Bendit
on behalf of the Green/EFA Group

The European Parliament,

– having regard to Article 17 of the TEU,

– having regard to the statements made by the President-elect of the Commission to the European Parliament on 15 September 2009,

– having regard to the written and oral statements made by each of the Commissioner-designates in the context of their hearings and the assessment of these hearings as set out in letters from the committee chairmen to the President of Parliament,

– having regard to the President-elect's formal presentation of a proposal for a new Commission on 4 February before the Conference of Presidents,

– having regard to Rule 106 (4) of its Rules of Procedure,

A. whereas, according to Article 17 (3) of the Treaty, the members of the Commission shall be chosen on the grounds of their general competence and commitment to the European Union from persons whose independence is beyond doubt,

B. whereas the hearings of the Commissioners-designate make the procedure of the investiture of the European Commission more open and transparent and demonstrate that the European Parliament has a real role to play in ensuring that Commissioners-designate correspond to the above mentioned criteria;

1. Reminds that the people of Europe are currently struggling to exit from the economic, social and ecological crisis, a situation which needs strong European leadership and a new political approach on national and European levels;

2. Believes that the incoming Commission must be measured against the challenges of overcoming this triple crisis, as well as defining the role of the EU on global level through policy action in the fields of trade, development, human rights and foreign policy, and in making the EU a more democratic area, accessible to its citizens and guaranteeing their civic rights, assuring transparency and democratic scrutiny, all of which necessitates new ideas and firm action;

3. Reiterates its desire for a Commission which strongly defends European interests and values, and motivated to make full use of the new instruments available following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, including increased transparency and citizen participation in decision making in the EU;

4. Regrets that President Barroso's work program and the composition of the proposed College of Commissioners does not give convincing guarantees in the majority of these regards;

5. Criticises some Member States for not having chosen their candidates on the basis of their suitability and vision for such key positions in the European Institutions, instead making their nominations according to domestic political considerations, thus diminishing the role of the European Commission and weakening the community system;

6. Pleads for a new procedure where Member States would have to propose a gender balanced list of two candidates for the Commission; notes however, that it is the President-elect of the Commission who decides on the internal organisation of the Commission and is responsible for defining and allocating portfolios;

7. Deplores the fact that Mr Barroso has already weakened the potential of individual Commissioner-designates through divide et impera: by defining and allocating the portfolios without proper consideration for their competences and affinities and has even moved Commissioners away from portfolios in which, to date, they have demonstrated their competence; his negligence led, i.a. to the resignation of one of the candidates ;  

8. Takes note of Mr. Barroso's reshuffling of portfolios within the Commission in a such a way that there is no clear responsibility in some key areas; thus reinforcing the tendencies towards a presidential model for the Commission, whereby the role of individual Commissioners risks to be reduced to the role of advisors to the President, in contradiction to the spirit of the Treaties; reiterates that in that respect its deception that Mr Barroso has not foreseen a portfolio for Consumer Protection;

9. Is of the opinion that the Commission, in order to be competent enough to fulfil its task as motor of the European integration process, must be composed of persons whose integrity and competence is beyond any doubt, and who are also willing to achieve advances and be committed to the European project;

10. States that there are some clearly positive evaluations of Commissioner-designates, who not only proved to be competent but also drew a comprehensive picture of their respective portfolios, pronounced their personal views on the issues in question and committed themselves to strong cooperation with the European Parliament;

11. Expresses its disappointment in Lady Ashton, who during her hearing did not demonstrate a clear sense of vision, plans of her own, or the necessary leadership to shape European Foreign and Security Policy during the next five years; expresses its willingness nevertheless to support her role in the newly-created position of high-representative/ vice-president of the Commission in case of undue interference by the Council;

12. Expresses its disappointment regarding several Commissioners, who in their hearings failed on one or several counts of: expressing individual views on their planned political direction and achievements; demonstrating they would defend their convictions in the event of disagreement with the Commission President; demonstrating that they were the best placed to fulfil the requirements of their assigned portfolios; 

13. Reiterates that the procedure for nomination and election of the Commissioners remains unsatisfactory; not only is there is no choice regarding candidates proposed by the Member States but also because the Parliament can only approve or disapprove the Commission as a whole and not dismiss a Commissioner-designate by a separate vote on each of the candidates;

14. Regrets that a motion of censure of individual Commissioners is still not foreseen in the Treaties;

15. Is, in the light of these conclusion not in a position to give a positive approval to the Commission as a whole;

16. Instructs its President to forward this resolution, to the European Commission, to the Council and to the other relevant institutions.