Signal Berlaymont: Showtime in the European Parliament

Far from the spotlight of US presidential elections, the European Parliament has held its hearings of European Commissioners-designate over the past two weeks. The idea behind this is good enough. Beginning from the premise the European Parliament is meant to act as the EU’s elected watchdog, MEPs have the opportunity to interrogate the people chosen by EU member states to be European Commissioners. This is not something that happens in EU member states.

In practice, however, things work a bit differently.

Jennifer Rankin, The Guardian's EU correspondent, described the hearing with Estonia’s Kaja Kallas, nominated to serve as High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, as “a missed opportunity, as these sessions are. So many repetitive questions from MEPs, almost no follow ups, so the person at the front repeats their talking points. Not a criticism of Kaja Kallas, but the hearings don't work as they should do.”

Diego Velazquez, a journalist from Luxembourg, notes on Twitter/X: “Is the European Parliament really happy about those hearings? Is this the transnational democracy we're dreaming of? A proper coalition agreement would help bring some dignity back in the game. Pretending there are no deals while publicly barking at each other is a painful sight.”

“You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours” 

At the start of previous terms, the situation appeared simple. Almost every time, one Commissioner-designate was picked on, to be sacrificed later. In 2004, Italy’s Rocco Buttiglione was considered too ethically Conservative by MEPs, and in 2009, Bulgaria was forced to withdraw its nominee, Rumiana Jeleva, after she was labelled “incompetent”. At the time, commenting on media rumours her husband would be involved in shady businesses, then-UKIP MEP Nigel Farage quipped perhaps her husband may be more fit to become European Commissioner. 

In 2014, Miguel Arias Cañete, Spain's nominee as climate action and energy commissioner, was accused of a conflict of interest, as his brother-in-law was apparently involved in two petroleum companies where Cañete himself had sold his shares shortly before the hearings. The issue was solved through a secret political deal between EU Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker and senior MEPs, to the satisfaction of socialist MEPs that had raised the concerns. In return, the European People’s Party (EPP) did not oppose Pierre Moscovici.

Trouble

“You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours” is also what this year’s hearings are all about, or at least should be, if the past is any guide. But this time around, things do not seem to go according to plan.

The EPP took a critical stance towards Spanish Commissioner-designate Teresa Ribera, who is also still a Spanish Minister, accusing her of performing poorly in dealing with the floods in Valencia. Afterward, the Socialists & Democrats sent out an angry press release. In it, they denounced the EPP for its "destructive" attacks against her, which they considered a violation of the agreement between “pro-European” parties. The EPP was "recklessly" jeopardising the next European Commission, said the Socialists & Democrats.

Ribera was selected by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen to be her powerful right hand in the next Commission, so this is a major issue. Unfortunately, she is also going to be responsible for EU competition policy, already strongly politicised, something unlikely to improve with a Socialist in charge.

In their criticism on the EPP, the Socialists are being supported by the Renew Group and the Greens. The latter now accuse the EPP of “aligning with the far right.”

The “far right” slur

For most people, the term “far right” evokes images of neo-Nazi skinheads glorifying Adolf Hitler. For Greens and their fellow travellers in mainstream political parties, the label applies to virtually everyone that does not agree with their Left-Green dogma, which in itself has decided authoritarian aspects. The EPP, a hotbed of political opportunism bordering on political nihilism—evident in Brussels Report’s 2024 ranking of MEPs—is considered just acceptable as a partner.  

The European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) group in the EP is most certainly considered to be “far rght” by these people. Only yesterday, the Greens, Socialists and Renew were urging von der Leyen to clarify the governing majority does not include the ECR, and demanding a letter or a public statement saying this.

The fact the EPP is willing to work with the ECR, following the epic defeat of the Greens in June’s European Parliament elections, is making these usual suspects on the Left more than angry.

A big question has been whether EU Commissioner-designate Raffaele Fitto would make it through the hearings unscathed. Fitto is a moderate figure but he is also a member of the party of Italian PM Giorgia Meloni. Her party is is a member of the ECR, and despite her track record of governing as a moderate, she is equally labelled as “far right” by the Left.

Fitto, currently the minister responsible for EU recovery funds in the Italian government, illustrated at the hearing he is not exactly a rabid eurosceptic. Then, he was asked to clarify why there are more investigations into possible misuse of the funds in Italy than elsewhere. "Because [Italian] authorities investigate more thoroughly," he responded. This is truly laughable, when listening to renowned international experts like Italian criminal law Professor Vincenzo Musacchio, who estimated “Between 2015 and 2020, the EU has allocated around €70 billion to Italy in structural and investment funds. Half of these funds ended up in the hands of organised crime.”

Following pressure on Ribera, the EP’s Socialist group now demands stripping Fitto of his title as European Commission Vice-President. If loyal servants of the status quo like Fitto are already beyond the pale for the Left, the Left is truly helpless.

The “Venezuela majority”

Over the last months, ECR’s moderate stance helped craft a so-called “Venezuela majority” in the European Parliament, referring to a vote on a resolution condemning threats to democracy in Venezuela. A majority was obtained due to the fact EPP MEPs were happy to jointly issue a resolution together with MEPs from the ECR and Patriots groups. Perhaps it doesn’t get more ironic than the Left being angry about the supposed “far right” endorsing a resolution calling for more democracy. Surely, the point of being wary of “far right” is it would represent a danger to democracy. That’s not to say there are no issues with rule of law in the EU member states that are singled out for criticisms, but as I have discussed earlier on these pages, there are lots of double standards at play.

Reportedly, Ursula Von der Leyen, a member of the EPP herself, is now trying to help sort out the mess to save her rather problematic team. That may not appear so easy, given the increased weight of the Right in the EP. Apparently, the EPP has threatened to use the “Venezuela Majority” to approve Raffaele Fitto with a simple majority in the EP’s Committee on Regional Development.

Pietro Guastamacchia of Italian press agency ANSA describes this as “an explosive move, as Ribera does not have such majority without the EPP Group.” He thinks the standoff “will at least last a week.” Ultimately, he notes, Hungarian PM Viktor Orbán can “simply ‘pull a Breton’ and withdraw his candidacy. That would mean at least 2 months of uncertainty and possibly the end of von der Leyen 2.0.”

In any case, whatever the outcome, this is all yet more evidence that, unfortunately, the process of EU Commissioner hearings has little to do with Parliamentary control over the European Commission. Instead, it has everything to do with party political games and attempts to shift the balance of power. And it won’t much help dispel the accusation, once levelled by UKIP MEP Godfrey Bloom, that the European Parliament is a “Mickey Mouse Assembly”.