Prodi’s case against EU president wins backing from Delors and policy watchdogs

Date: 22/05/03

By Simon Coss

Valéry Giscard d'Estaing's plans would be bad news for the Union, according to several influential think-tanks.

EUROPEAN Commission President Romano Prodi may be having trouble finding political allies in his crusade to scrap plans for an EU president, but at least some of Europe's most influential think-tanks seem to be on his side.

As European Voice reported recently, Prodi wants the European Parliament to support him in opposing the plans for an EU president that have been put forward by Valéry Giscard d'Estaing, chairman of the Convention on the future of Europe.

The Parliament is proving somewhat ambivalent about backing Prodi, however, with many MEPs concerned that they could isolate their institution if they wholeheartedly throw in their lot with the Commission chief.

But several of Europe's most respected think-tanks have had no such qualms, and agree with the former Italian prime minister that a European Council president would be bad news for the Union.

France's Notre Europe, which is headed by former Commission leader Jacques Delors - a man with the status of a minor deity among many committed europhiles - has come out categorically against Giscard's plan.

In a recent hearing before the French parliament's European Union delegation, Delors said he was "not convinced" by the idea.

He said he would prefer to see some sort of "chairman" who could ensure continuity in the way EU business was conducted without the trappings of political power the term president would entail. He followed up on these comments earlier this month in an interview with Agence Europe.

Delors argued that the job of any future president/chairman "must be defined in such a way that he or she has no temptation to create their own administration or have any bureaucratic powers. He or she must be surrounded by a 'presidential team' (which is not Giscard d'Estaing's office) that will allow all countries to play their part in running the Union on an alternating basis".

John Palmer, of the Brussels-based European Policy Centre (EPC), offers a more basic criticism of the way Giscard has addressed the question of how power should be shared out in the new EU. He is particularly critical about the former French president's plans for the Commission.

By proposing no real changes to the way future Commission presidents will be appointed, Giscard has "dealt a potentially deadly blow to the democratic legitimacy of the Commission and its essential role in safeguarding the European interest".

The EPC director said Giscard should have called unequivocally for future Commission presidents to be elected by the European Parliament.

Instead, the draft constitution uses "weasel words" that give the impression that Parliament will be involved in appointing Commission presidents when, in reality, the institution would merely be asked to rubber-stamp decisions taken by EU leaders "in one of their ubiquitous smoke-filled rooms".

Ben Crum, of the Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS), another leading Brussels think-tank, also feels democracy gets a raw deal in Giscard's draft constitution.

In an article first published in this newspaper he pointed to a "lack of democratic vision" in the recently released text. "The topic of European democracy has had no more than a cursory treatment," he complained.

Several European think-tanks have voiced their agreement with Romano Prodi that a President of the European Council would not be good for the future of the Union.