Deense reserves over inrichting nieuwe Europese Commissie (en) - Hoofdinhoud

EUOBSERVER / DEBATE - Giscard's constitutional convention proposes that the current Commission be replaced by an EU government consisting of 15 commissioners with voting-rights and a number of vice-commissioners without voting-rights.

Half the time, half of the countries will not be directly represented in the institution that holds the monopoly on proposing new laws, and which will now also be given the right to make new laws itself through a new system with delegated ordinances.

We may thus get thousands of EU laws with precedence over Danish law for example, without any Dane having been part of the decision making process in the European Commission. In such cases, Danes will not have been present when laws are being considered in the special conciliation committees in the European Parliament.

In the Council, a Dane will have been part of the process, but in 9 out of 10 cases, that person will be an official, who is not easily made accountable to the electorate.

It is puzzling how popularly elected politicians can propose a system so far removed from the electorate.

Even the Danish commissioner or vice-commissioner will have a poor link to the Danish political system. In the future, he or she will not be appointed by the Government (answering to the Danish Parliament). The Government must propose three persons - who should all be prepared to flunk out at the President's examination.

But as we know, Danes are not all the same. In a democracy, we prefer to elect our representatives, and we like to hold them accountable for their actions i.e. reward someone doing well with re-election, and punish someone doing less well with no re-election.

That form of accountability is non-existent in the new EU system. The people in charge are not up for election, and the electorate cannot elect anyone.

If the EU were to apply for admission to the EU, membership would have to be refused on the grounds of a lack of democracy.

Commission - the most important EU institution

With its position as sole initiator of EU law the European Commission is the most important EU institution and accordingly ought to have the strongest democratic foundation. This could come about by allowing each national parliament (or the national citizenry) to elect its own representative in the Commission. All MPs would then have a say in the matter.

The European Commission would then consist of the envoys of the national parliaments in Brussels. Every Friday, the commissioners could then return to the national parliaments and give reports on the weekly happenings in the EU to the Committee on European Affairs and receive a mandate for the programme for the coming week. Each commissioner could then be part of the national debate in his or her country and thus be more in touch with public opinion.

If the commissioner does not do their work properly or fails politically, they could be removed from the position by the national parliament.

The Danish Parliament would be able to hold the Danish commissioner responsible for his or her actions in the college of commissioners.

If the commissioner gains responsibility for a certain portfolio in the European Parliament, the European Parliament must control how they run their offices - and preferably more efficiently than today.

Enough portfolios for 25 Commissioners

Some have claimed that there are not enough portfolios for 25 to 30 members. But with the EU's current responsibilities, there is enough work for more than 25 commissioners.

First, there is the President, who must have a Vice-President responsible for foreign affairs, a Vice-President for economy and financial affairs, a Vice-President for legal and internal affairs, a Vice-President for the Single Market and a Vice-President for relations with the European Parliament and the Council.

That amounts to one senior position and five co-ordinating functions, for six persons.

Below the commissioner for foreign affairs, an external trade commissioner is needed as well as a commissioner for development aid, a commissioner for relief aid, a commissioner for enlargement negotiations and a commissioner responsible for relations with the Balkan countries and other countries where EU action is particularly important. That amounts to no less than five portfolios.

For justice and internal affairs, there are assignments enough for a traditional minister of justice, for a person responsible for police co-operation and for another responsible for topics relating to refugees and immigration - that amounts to another three positions.

Concerning the Single Market, there are portfolios for industry, energy, transport, agriculture, fisheries, finance, social affairs, regional affairs, the environment, consumer affairs, culture, research, education, and employment (see the list in the draft constitution).

And last but not least, the EU will need a commissioner for the budget, a commissioner for budgetary control and a commissioner responsible for better law making and cleaning up the 97,000 existing pages (so far) of EU laws.

All together, that amounts to 25 natural areas of responsibility, which have been moved to Brussels. The forthcoming constitution will also create the need for a minister of defence as well as a minister of health, a minister of civil defence, a minister of sport etc.

There are actually more portfolios than the 25 countries which will be EU members May 1st next year and the possible 30 which will be members by 2010.

If having a small Commission were to make sense, the majority of issue areas would have to be transferred back to the member states. But all of the Constitution is about transferring even more areas of law making to Brussels. Thus, there is no objective argument for having a small commission of 15 members.

For the larger member states, there might also be some reason in keeping the two-commissioner structure for a while yet. The Vice-Commissioner from the larger country could have the right to vote in the Commission, but no real portfolio in Brussels. Instead, he or she would focus on the connections to the population and the organisations in that particular country.

Commissioners organised in working groups

Work in the Commission could take place in working groups - each one headed by a vice-president. Work in the full Commission could then consist of publicly accessible plenary meetings where the different law proposals are put to the vote.

Today, only 2.3% of Commission decisions are actually taken at Commission meetings. Let us, also in the Commission, see who makes what decisions so that they can be held responsible. Let us have a Commission that has its roots in the electorate and is accountable to the electorate. That is actually the greatest principle of democracy.

JENS-PETER BONDE - Danish member of the European Parliament for the EU sceptic June Movement and representing the Parliament in the European Convention. President of the SOS Democracy intergroup and the EDD group in the European Parliament and author of 40 books about European integration.