the commission
DESCRIPTION
The Commission. A key institution in the EU System. By Florence Di Bonaventura, Marianna Manoukian and Cédric Gosse-le-duc. 2010-2011. The commission. Appointment and composition Organisation Power resources Responsibilities The influence of the COM in the EU Conclusion. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
The Commission
A key institution in the EU System
By Florence Di Bonaventura,
Marianna Manoukian
and Cédric Gosse-le-duc. 2010-2011
The commission
Appointment and composition Organisation Power resources Responsibilities The influence of the COM in the EU Conclusion
The College of commissioners
At the top of the commission: Commissioners
In charge of particular policy areas (portfolios) Further to the Nice treaty: one commissioner for
each member state as from 2005 and until an enlargement of 27 countries (after that: reduction)
BUT NEVER happened because of the Irish ratification of the Lisbon Treaty in 2009
Appointment procedure (1)
Before 1993: every four years by common accord within member states.
With Maastricht Treaty: strengthening of the link between the COM and EP– EP consultation for COM president and vote of confidence on the
college-designate.– EP and COM: close alignment – five-year term.
With Amsterdam Treaty: – EP veto confirmed for the COM President appointment.– Potential veto of the President-designate over the national
nominees for appointment to college.
With Nice Treaty: EC qualified majority for college/President nomination and appointment
Appointment procedure (2)
With Lisbon Treaty:– The president: EC, according to EP elections, after consulting, by
qualified majority suggests to the EP a candidate for COM presidency [shall BE ELECTED BY THE EP (by majority)]
N.B.: if not, another canditate in one month (the same procedure).
– The college: C+President: list of potential commissioners on Member states’ suggestions. After EP individual hearings and consent, appointment of the COM college by EC.
– The High Representative: Appointment by EC+President (among commissioners)
In practice: Change of application further to certain circumstances, many informal discussions between institutions and some political interferences related to the choice of the college.
Impartiality and independance
COM: Promoting the general interest of the EU
Commissioners: Independent Chosen on the ground of their general competence
and European commitment No instructions from any GVT or other institution,
body, office or entity
But in practice full impartiality doesn’t exist
Characteristics of commissioners
No rules but former (senior) ministers. Political balance reflecting the political composition of
GVTs in Member States Crucially: Commissioners = be pro-european and no
link with extremist party
Ex. Barroso II College: 13 Commissioners of Centre-right, 8 liberals and 6 centre-left
The COM President
is the main representative dealing with EU institutions and outside bodies
gives the guidelines to his commissioners + to the COM
allocates Commissioners’ portfolios may require Commissioners to resign is directly responsible for overseeing some of the
most important adm. Services (SG.,…). may take on policy responsibilities of his own (usually
with other commissioners)
Cabinets Composition: Small team of officials/support staff, with at least 3
nationalities and recruited from EU adm
Tasks: Gather information for their commissioner. Liaise with other parts of the COM Act as «unofficial advocate/protector » of the interests
of their Commissioner’s country
President’s cabinet: Involved in brokering different views and interests
amongst commissioners Ensuring the COM is clear, coherent, cohesive and
efficient
The COM bureaucracy
Biggest element of the whole EU adm. Framework (in 2008: Commission’s staff just under 26.000: 20.000 employed in administration and 6.000 at senior policy-making). Permanent and temporary multinational staff on a meritocratic way but not always (informal quota for a better representation among countries).
Organisation
The Directorates General and other services
– Commission: divided into organisational units
(DG or Specialised services)
– Various size and internal organisation of DGs & Specialised services
Staff: 200-500
4-6 directorates
Each divided into 3-4 units
Organisation (2)
The hierarchical structure
o Clear structure but with some complications due to:
- Imperfect match between Commissioners’ portfolios & the responsibilities of services
- Halfway position of Commissioners (= more than permanent secretaries, less than ministers)
Individual responsibility difficult to apply to Commissioners
o Question: Should Commission be subject to collective responsibility ? (art. 234 TFUE)
- YES: all Commission proposals & decisions made collectively- NO: to undertake ≠ tasks Commission is dependent on other
EU actors
Organisation (3)
Decision-making mechanisms
− An initial draft is drawn up in the lead DG− Progress is monitored by the Secretariat General− The draft is passed upwards until reach the College of Commissioners
(possibility to revise the draft) − Decision of the College of Commissioners: accept/reject/refer it back
to the DG/defer
‼ all sort of variations are possible ‼ Ex: in case of urgency -› procedures to prevent logjams
Other procedures are:
- “written procedure”- When policy issues cut across the Commission’s administrative
divisions
Organisation (4) Provision for liaison and coordination in the Commission: 4
procedures 1. At the level of the DGs: problem of horizontal coordination 2. The Secretariat General: charged with ensuring that proper
communication & coordination takes place across the Commission3. The ill-defined coordinating responsibility of the President of the
Commission4. The College of Commissioners: strong position to coordinate activity &
to take a broad view of Commission affairs
‼ However, there is a feeling that the Commission continues to function in too compartmentalised a manner + insufficient attention on overall EU policy coherence
Some of the problems are:
- Commission’s rigid organisational framework- Too jealously guarded demarcation lines - Difficulty to look much beyond their own tasks (for Commissioners
& senior officials)
Organisation (5)
Power Resources
Commission = political & administrative institution
- Exclusive & non exclusive power of initiative- Neutrality - Present in all decision-making forums and at all stages- Access to EU’s policies information & needs - Smaller states look to the Commission for protection (most EU
states = small)
Key responsibilities
Proposer and developer of policies and legislation
Executive function
The guardian of the legal framework
External representative and negotiator
Mediator and conciliator
Promoter of the general interest
Proposer and developer of policies and legislation
Policy initiation and development
Legislative initiation and development
Commission’s advisory committee network:− Experts national experts and specialists− Consultative private experts− Hybrid combination national/private
Executive functions
Rule-making powers− Similar to national executives− LT: legislative acts vs delegated/implementing− Few areas: more ‘policy-making’
Management of EU finances
Supervisor / overseer of policy implementation
Comitology: implementing committees
Guardian of legal framework
Non-compliance by M.S.: Since Maastricht: ECJ can specify financial penalty
Firm breaching EU law (restrictive practices and abuse of dominant market position):
Comm. tries to reach an agreement O/W: fines
Firms breaching EU law on State aid
Potential breach on merger cases
Other responsibilities
External representative and negotiator
EU’s external trade relations and other agreements, High Representative is a member of the commission, key point of contact with non-member states, support for CSFP policies,…
Mediator and conciliator
seeking agreement between competing interests
Promoter of general interest
‘conscience of the union’, finding a ‘general’ path to reconcile all interests. But what is ‘General Interest’?
The varying influence of the Commission in the EU System
Circumstances favourable to the exercise of Commission leadership when:- it has strong & clear powers- QMV (qualified majority voting) applies in the Council - Weak control mechanisms- Uncertainty of information amongst the member states- Absence of strong conflicts in the Council & the EP- Possibility to exploiting differences between member states
Number of factors explaining why it has happened:
- The increasing influence of the EC & EP- Loss of status - Defeats & failures - The growing importance of the use of “new modes of governance” - Notions of rolling back the responsibilities
Concluding remarks
Commission = the most distinctive of the EU’s institutions
Extensive debates & different views Two “polar” views - The intergovernmentalist- The supranationalist
BUT: !! Commission remains central and vital to the whole EU system !!
Thank you for your attention!