(19 September 2024, EPC, online)
Speakers:
- Fabian Zuleeg, Chief Executive & Chief Economist, European Policy Centre
- Janis Emmanouilidis, Deputy Chief Executive & Director of Studies, European Policy Centre
Moderator:
- Jacki Davis, Senior Adviser, European Policy Centre
Janis Emmanouilidis started the panel by exploring the proposed new European Commission lineup and structure which clearly focus on economy and competitiveness. Another noticeable thing is the seemingly lot of overlaps between different portfolios which is a sign of lessons learned from the last cycle, according to him. Commission President Ursula von der Leyen apparently wants to have control, and at the end of the day, be the one who determines key decisions. And even though this contains the danger of bottlenecks, it is a clear message of power towards her colleagues, Member States and the European Parliament.
Fabian Zuleeg noted that the broad priorities are reflected in the portfolios and the mission letters, but he still considers this ‘Christmas tree’ territory meaning that the talk is only about big themes. What Zuleeg would be interested in are the trade-offs, because hard choices will have to inevitably be made. The last time around, they had the same problem of puzzling about which DG will be connected to whom. Zuleeg thinks that the power relationships within the Commission are going to be decisive in this context which still leaves the fate of ‘difficult’ Commissioners hanging, if they will be integrated or sidelined. Zuleeg agreed with the danger of bottlenecks which could be even bigger compared to the previous setup.
Emmanouilidis admitted that wanting to be so much in control can be counterproductive, but von der Leyen would probably argue the opposite and say that this is a network structure. Taking into account the lack of setting policy priorities, the question is whether they will make sure that everything is aligned. Emmanouilidis believes that a more decentralized structure – stronger individuals in stronger portfolios – would have been an asset among difficulties. He also acknowledged the ‘Christmas tree’ structure, but added that von der Leyen tries to please a lot of people. Nonetheless, her acting so confident is another signal of strength.
On Thierry Breton’s resignation and the battle over gender balance, Zuleeg said that these have directed more attention to the process in Member States highlighting how political it is. Von der Leyen seems to have gotten what she wanted, but Zuleeg does not assume that she would like to be in confrontation with Member States from now on, she would rather attempt to keep things from going too far. In all likelihood, this will not be the kind of second mandate where von der Leyen will open up big issues against the wishes of Member States.
It is difficult to know the details of the Breton case, but for Emmanouilidis, it was quite clear that von der Leyen did not want Breton to be part of her new team. After all, he has publicly criticised her and indicated issues of governance in his resignation. Von der Leyen wanted to make sure to not have problematic members, although Emmanouilidis thinks that this is the wrong choice, because strong individuals are needed in a strong team. But as Angela Merkel taught her politics, there are a lot of similarities, such as being aware of potentially competing figures and operating without them becoming ‘problematic’ cases.
The Speakers discussed if the Commission will be able to deliver too. Zuleeg stated that there are enormous challenges, so we will have to wait and see, though he cautioned against putting too much emphasis on this institution, as long as the willingness of Member States is crucial for the system to work. According to Emmanouilidis, the key is how ambitious the Commission will be. He is not sure about that yet and wondered how von der Leyen could be ready to push for things if she does not have co-leaders at European level. A third term is not an option for her, so von der Leyen will have to decide what kind of legacy she wants to leave behind. Zuleeg added that having control over everything does not necessarily equal to strength and ability to deliver, even if politically, von der Leyen presumably sees it that way.
Talking about the Commissioners-designate, Emmanouilidis made it clear that due to Member States proposing candidates, there are limits to what the President can do. This EPP dominated Commission still reflects the outcome of the elections. However, Emmanouilidis counts on a bumpy ride, second hearings, Commissioners-designate who will fail, and portfolios that will be reshuffled. Based on this, he does not know whether the new Commission will be in place by the 1st of December. Zuleeg agreed that there will be some casualties, especially since the Parliament has to show power and take some Commissioners-designate down. Although he claimed that policy areas are more significant than personalities. But one thing is for sure, portfolios – as always – will reflect how important Member States are.
The Speakers obviously tackled the Draghi report as well. Neither Zuleeg nor Emmanouilidis found the analysis surprising, they were more interested in the proposed solutions, and more precisely, in the ‘how’ rather than the ‘what’. Zuleeg assumes that the report is going broadly in the right direction, but many new elements still risk not being used. Emmanouilidis agreed that we need a more competitive Europe and hopes that divergent opinions about what our priority should be – as some people defend the Green Deal, for example – will generate the much-needed debates about trade-offs and issues of implementation.
Zuleeg added that many areas will have to be addressed simultaneously and in certain cases, the fruit of labour will only be visible in 5-10 years, like when it comes to the Capital Markets Union. As Emmanouilidis recalled, three barriers were defined by the report: Europe lacking focus, wasting its common resources, and not coordinating well enough. And even if these are true, not every government will be in favour of all the changes. The question is where the pressure will come from to push them. Zuleeg confirmed the strong resistance, and not just from the obvious governments. He also touched upon the lack of lobbying to get governments on board and wondered if businesses will play an active role in this.
The state elections in Germany and the reintroduction of German border controls were also brought up. Emmanouilidis recognized the strong impact of AfD and the generally negative developments. Zuleeg acknowledged the fragmentation of the whole political spectrum and listed the main issues under pressure: migration and identity, support for Ukraine and green transition. Emmanouilidis reminded us that during Covid, there was a similar movement concerning the tightening of border controls, but that one faced a strong opposition. But the government is weak, and the candidate for CDU/CSU who is pushing his party further to the right, without any leadership experience, will probably not help the situation.
Zuleeg talked about new French Prime Minister Michel Barnier as well, explaining that his appointment was about the next presidential elections and the stabilization of the system. Emmanouilidis added that structurally, Berlin and Paris are expected to remain in difficult political waters. Meanwhile, there is a strong emphasis on Prime Minister Donald Tusk, due to things seemingly not progressing fast enough in Poland. According to Emmanouilidis, Tusk is quite engaged at national level and might score for home at European level too. As a closing thought, Zuleeg mentioned another potential crisis, the upcoming United States presidential election. He expressed that Donald Trump winning would be a disaster, but tried to make some positive sense of it by claiming that something drastic might need to happen for change and Trump as the President of the United States would definitely shake up Europe.
You can watch the event here: