Signal Berlaymont: Von der Leyen's team looks problematic

On September 16, Brussels witnessed its own internal “Brexit”: the exit of France's EU Commissioner Thierry Breton from the European Commission. The Frenchman resigned with immediate effect, claiming European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen offered President Macron a political trade-off. Von der Leyen promised Macron would receive “an allegedly more influential portfolio for France in the future College”, if he nominated someone else. So much for the myth EU Commissioners would not pursue the interest of their member states.

Breton got into a spot of trouble this summer, when he warned X's owner Elon Musk against “amplification of potentially harmful content in the EU” during Musk’s upcoming interview with Donald Trump. So endangering free speech is not the reason why Breton was booted by “VDL”, who does not cease to warn “large internet platforms” against spreading difficult-to-define “hate speech”.

Instead, as Jean Quatremer (longtime EU correspondent of French newspaper Libération) explains, von der Leyen’s problem was Breton “has repeatedly and publicly criticised the German's dictatorial governance, so it's fair to say that the two dislike each other cordially (in fact, von der Leyen doesn't get on with anyone).”

Breton was reportedly not the only EU Commissioner to challenge von der Leyen’s centralisation of control, but he was more willing to clash with her. An example is von der Leyen’s attempt to nominate her German party colleague Markus Pieper as ‘EU SME Envoy’. As Quatremer recalls, this was “a position that had previously been honorary, but was transformed for the occasion into a highly paid job.” The journalist also reveals von der Leyen had already tried several times to get rid of Breton. Another important reason Breton had to go was his “overly bad relationship with American companies in the sector, which risked complicating transatlantic relations, especially if Donald Trump were re-elected”.

It does say something about von der Leyen's increased power that she is able to get France to do this. At the end of the 1990s, European Commission President Jacques Santer did not even manage get French EU Commissioner Edith Cresson to step down voluntarily, despite her involvement in a large-scale corruption scandal. France's power was so significant that the whole Commission was forced to step down instead. 

The new Commission team – some concerning candidates   

Instead, Macron has now nominated a loyal ally: Stéphane Séjourné, France’s Europe Minister, and until January also an MEP. A close look at his EP voting record reveals him as a fan of transferring even more power and money to Brussels. Despite membership of the "liberal" Renew faction, Séjourné is anything but in favour of free market economics. He wants to give Brussels power to tax citizens directly, and favours climate tariffs. He also backs all the controversial climate regulation passed during the previous EP mandate, in particular the EU’s de facto ban on the combustion engine, a symbol for Europe’s self-inflicted industrial decline. As European Commissioner, Séjourné will be responsible for "prosperity" and "industrial strategy". What could possibly go wrong?

Séjourné’s nomination as a European Commissioner isn’t even the worst one. Surely, the prospect of Spanish socialist Teresa Ribera serving as the EU's new Competition Commissioner should make all the alarm bells go off. The EU Commission already didn't care much about combatting unfair state aid before, and to have a hard-blooded Spanish leftist run EU competition policy risks politicising it entirely.

If that is not bad enough, Ribera also receives the “clean, just and competitive transition" portfolio. The Spanish Socialist has had a career dedicated to pushing for climate policies that distort the economy. They form one of the key reasons for Europe’s current economic predicament. Unsurprisingly, she is also hostile to nuclear power: even if it is the only proven energy source able to meet current living standards while reducing CO2 emissions. To add insult to injury, one of the two other EU Commissioners responsible for climate and energy policy, Denmark’s Dan Jørgensen, is also strongly anti-nuclear. That is aside from being responsible for one of Denmark's big failed climate policy projects: the energy islands, that are now, after several years and wasted millions, falling apart. In other words, von der Leyen wants to appoint people to key positions that go directly against the pro-nuclear trend across Europe. Nobody seems to remember that the EU Commission is legally bound to “encourage” nuclear energy, as a result of the Euratom Treaty.

Reportedly, climate activists and the renewable energy lobby interpreted von der Leyen’s decision to make Ribera, Jørgensen and Dutch EU Commissioner Wopke Hoekstra responsible for climate and energy policy as survival of the “Green Deal”. (Even if that term has now been scrapped from the titles of the EU Commissioners, as those policies have become so toxic.)

During her press conference, von der Leyen said Ribera "will guide the work to ensure Europe stays on track for its goals set out in the Green Deal”. Keeping the Green Deal “on track” wasn’t exactly what voters opted for during the June EP elections, but this hasn't held back von der Leyen.

The new Commission team – still more concerning candidates  

A third troubling nomination is Luxembourg’s Christophe Hansen as the new EU Commissioner for Agriculture. This EPP member acted in the previous term as rapporteur for the EU’s deforestation directive. While attempting to combat deforestation is obviously laudable, the EU’s approach to do this has badly strained trade relations with important trading partners.

As a result, Germany is now demanding the EU postpones its implementation. This follows similar demands from Hansen’s own EPP Group, as well as Czechia, Austria, Finland, Italy, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia, and Sweden. The United States and Brazil have asked the EU to do so, too. 

A key problem is the EU refuses to accept its trading partners' standards. Particularly for South East Asian palm oil producing nations, like Malaysia and Indonesia, this is unacceptable: it drove them to freeze trade talks with the EU last year. In contrast, the UK decided to recognise Malaysia’s own standards to combat deforestation. Malaysia represents an estimated 93 per cent of palm oil imports into Europe. NGOs reported a sharp reduction in forest loss in both Malaysia and Indonesia last year, so it’s a system that works. Trade should be about trust. But by trying to impose the EU’s specific policy choices onto its trading partners, Hansen has effectively damaged the EU’s standing in global trade. This should not be rewarded with a powerful position in the new European Commission. That his cousin is Luxembourg’s Agriculture Minister, who regularly complains about excessive EU regulation, is only a small cause for hope.

We could have a go at other Commissioners-designate for their personal skills or behaviour, or point out that there are no fewer than five Commissioners responsible for foreign policy in the EU. But ultimately, the real problem is when new EU Commissioners hold policy views that go directly against the voters' verdict in the EP 2024 election. Voters, for example, punished the EU's economically unsustainable green policies.  Séjourné, Ribera, Jørgensen, Hansen, and Von der Leyen herself are therefore some of the most problematic figures in the newly-proposed Commission.

Separately, and not least, it is worth mentioning Lithuania’s Commissioner-designate for Defence Andrius Kubilius, billed as “the EU’s first defence chief”, as a worrying figure. Right after he was presented to the media on Tuesday, he starting demanding more joint European debt, to be able to spend a whopping €500 billion. Anticipating that may not be exactly politically feasible, he already suggested a fall-back option: using cash from the EU’s Covid Recovery fund or Eurozone bailout fund ESM. He clearly feels right at home from the start.

Conclusion

Fundamentally, as more street-wise Europeans say, the fish rots from the head. Ursula von der Leyen herself is the source of the EU’s fanatical regulatory drive in environmental and digital policies. With Mario Draghi exclaiming “with this legislation, we are killing our companies”, it really has become a mainstream view to worry about EU overregulation. Nevertheless, with her new European Commission, it looks as if von der Leyen has learned precisely nothing. In June, EU leaders missed a chance to block her from a second mandate. The European Parliament will soon have a chance to vote on the new Commission. Hoping MEPs will dare to block the whole new von der Leyen Commission is far fetched, but at least reducing the powers of one Commissioner-designate listed above would be a good start.