dal Financial Times
LEADER: Quality first for the EU Commission
Financial Times; May 27, 2004
As European leaders cast around for a new president of the European Commission, they should study closely the outgoing incumbent and aim to make a better choice this time.
For the performance of Romano Prodi as Commission president has been dire. The former Italian prime minister was the wrong man for the job. He has shown neither the breadth of vision nor attention to detail required for one of the most difficult executive roles in the world. An incapable manager, he has also lacked communication skills and been alarmingly prone to gaffes.
Mr Prodi has now all but turned his back on the Commission to campaign - against the spirit and letter of the EU treaty - as leader of the centre-left in Italy. Morale in the Commission is low as it slides into lame-duck status. Yet the newly enlarged European Union has a greater need than ever of an effective Commission with a strong president who would be an effective operator in the complex web of federal and intergovernmental bodies that steer the EU's destiny.
Mr Prodi should now do the honourable thing and resign. The EU's 25 leaders, at their summit in Brussels on June 17-18, could then name a new Commission president and plan for their nominee to take office as soon as possible after obtaining the necessary approval of the European parliament. They should not wait until November 1 for the new person to take over.
But whom should they choose? The successful candidate will take charge of several important responsibilities. The Commission proposes legislative initiatives for the EU, ensures its founding treaties are obeyed and must also manage efficiently those policies and programmes for which it is responsible.
The job requires a person of high intellectual calibre, well-honed political instincts and proven administrative skills who is a communicator and a problem solver. As head of the EU's main federal institution, the Commission president must obviously understand the institution and other European bodies and yet be sensitive to the legitimate concerns of member states and their governments.
One clear lesson from the Prodi years and the preceding presidency of Luxembourg's Jacques Santer is that past prime ministers do not automatically make good Commission presidents.
The EU's leaders should take this to heart and search elsewhere, starting with the existing college of commissioners. Paradoxically, the Prodi Commission has been one of the most impressive in terms of individual talent since the institution was created in the 1950s. Chris Patten, the external relations commissioner, Antonio Vitorino, responsible for justice and home affairs, and Günter Verheugen, the enlargement commissioner, have what it takes to be Commission president.
It is hardly likely Mr Patten would be offered the job, given the UK's position outside the euro and the prospect of a difficult referendum on the constitutional treaty. Germany's Mr Verheugen so far lacks the explicit backing of Berlin. Portugal's Mr Vitorino has great qualities but (like Mr Verheugen) is left of centre while the parliament due to be elected next month is expected to have a majority from the centre-right.
The centre-right has said that if it wins the European elections it will only approve a Commission president from its own political family. This is worryingly rigid and potentially bad news for Europe. Quality should be the overriding consideration in selecting a Commission president, with party political concerns a distant second.
Re: Perché votare a sinistra?
