Dec 13, 2019
A Europe that strives for more: the European Commission Class of 2024
In the Union’s institutional architecture, the European Commission’s role is not only that of upholding the EU treaties. It is also the executive with many different prerogatives, ranging from proposing legislation, implementing decisions and managing the day-to-day business of the Union. No surprise that the composition of the new Commission, starting with its President-elect Ursula von der Leyen, and even more so her policy guidelines for the 2019–2024 mandate, received a lot of attention when presented to the European Parliament on 16 July 2019, following her confirmation. Gaston Moonen and Clare O’Donohoe, a trainee in the ECA, give an overview of the main priorities presented by the new President-elect, covering the foreseen modus operandi of the new Commission and key issues in which the proposals appear to differ with its predecessor.
By Gaston Moonen and Clare O’Donohoe, Directorate of the Presidency
A Commission with a geopolitical outlook
At a time that is characterised by rising geopolitical tensions, (the fear of) a stagnating economy and increased political uncertainty, the political priorities, the structural organisation and the clout both in the EU and outside it of the European Commission are of increasing importance. The Commission’s priorities offer direct insight into the manner in which it will address the most pertinent issues facing the European Union over a five-year period. Indeed, President-elect Ursula von der Leyen described her goal of ensuring that the new Commission will be ‘well-balanced, agile and modern’ in order to tackle such pertinent issues. As is often the case with new political set-ups and political transitions, many spectators are seeking to examine the extent to which there is continuity between the priorities of the Juncker Commission and the proposed Von der Leyen Commission. While there are notable similarities, in particular with regard to the areas of finance, taxation, trade, and the digital single market, the structure and key priorities of the Von der Leyen Commission (Figure 1) represent a substantial divergence from that of its predecessor (Figure 2).
Described as a ‘geopolitical’ Commission, with the ability to ‘better align the internal and external aspects of our work’, Ursula von der Leyen outlined her ultimate goal of strengthening the Union’s global position. This overarching aim is guided by the slogan A Europe that strives for more and preliminary observations suggest that the Von der Leyen Commission plans to make significant strides in several key policy areas. The structural changes, combined with a renewed focus on climate change, European defence, and the strengthening of borders in order to ‘allay the legitimate concerns of many’ highlights the Union’s desire to maintain its position as a key global actor, while also instilling trust among those of the electorate who disproportionately felt the effects of the refugee crisis. Underlining the existential challenges in some of the areas, notably with regards to climate change, the first signs are that this Commission intends to combine a sense of urgency of today with ambitions for tomorrow.
Structure more geared towards priorities
One aspect of the new Commission that marks a notable departure from its predecessor is the proposed new organisational structure. The five Vice-President positions created by President Juncker remain, but President-elect Von der Leyen has increased the total of Vice-President positions to eight. Each Vice-President will be responsible for overseeing the implementation of Von der Leyen’s key political priorities, as outlined in her political guidelines.
In addition to the Vice-Presidents, Ursula von der Leyen seeks to create three Executive Vice-Presidencies with the aim of constructing a more political Commission. The positions will help to ensure that the largest political parties in the Commission are represented in key leadership oversight roles, while also maintaining responsibility for their respective Directorates-General. These three super Commissioners face a heavy task. They have to expedite the shift towards an EU that is both green and digital, while maintaining prosperity and a social face. Clearly, these three Commissioners — but also others — will have overlapping portfolios in order to facilitate more teamwork and coherence. However, this overlap risks causing problems related to coordination and potentially stretched resources.
Margrethe Vestager is expected to remain as Commissioner for Competition, while coordinating work on Europe Fit for the Digital Age — a decision that will presumably be a cause of concern in the U.S. in light of her previous work at reining in tech companies for violations of anti-trust policies. Frans Timmermans has been provisionally selected to act as Commissioner for Climate Action Policy, while helping to formulate and negotiate the proposed European Green Deal, and Valdis Dombrovskis has been provisionally designated the role of Commissioner for Financial Services, while also working on Von der Leyen’s plan to develop An Economy that works for People. A further point of interest in Von der Leyen’s proposed Commission is the attempt to achieve gender parity. If approved in full, it will be the most gender-diverse Commission in history of the Union and led by the first female President.
Climate: A European Green Deal
A purported key priority of the new Commission is the proposal of a ‘European Green Deal’ within the first 100 days and the inclusion of a clause to make the EU’s commitment of European climate-neutrality by 2050 legally binding — a decisive step-up from the climate goals of the Juncker Commission. Additional measures include the proposal to extend the Emissions Trading System to cover the maritime sector, reduce allowances given to airlines, and developing a strategy for green financing which would see part of the European Investment bank converted into Europe’s climate bank in order to fund climate and clean-energy projects.
Should such a Green Deal be implemented in full, there exists the potential to have a profoundly positive impact on the global climate while simultaneously acting as a world leader in this policy domain. The issue, however, is gaining the support of all the Member States — including those who are either less concerned with the gravity of the situation, or those who fear the economic repercussions of such climate policies and their effect on the EU’s competitive edge compared with other global economic blocs. Executive Vice-President-elect Frans Timmermans has committed himself to present proposals in his first one hundred days on how to realise EU climate neutrality by 2050, including proposals on how the EU can reduce greenhouse emissions by at least 50% by 2030. He underlined the need to address a ‘Fair Transition’ by creating a Transition Fund aimed to facilitate and share the burden for lower income EU citizens on their path to more sustainable energy consumption.
Defence: A New Priority
A rather new component compared to the Juncker Commission is the prioritisation of defence. Von der Leyen’s aim is to embolden European forces in a world that is increasingly characterised by geopolitical instabilities. For the first time in the history of the Union, a specific department has been established to oversee the development of the defence industry and space policy — a move which aligns with Von der Leyen’s declaration that Europe should be ‘more assertive’ in responding to the challenging global environment of the 21st century. This focus on defence is of particular interest in light of the ECA’s recent review on European Defence (see Box 1).
Box 1 — ECA’s Review 9/2019 European Defence
Recent international developments, coupled with economic and industrial considerations, have given European defence cooperation new momentum. Several defence-related initiatives and mechanisms have been set up in recent years, among which the Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO), the Coordinated Annual Review of Defence (CARD) and the European Defence Fund. In addition, the European Commission proposed last year a significant increase in the EU budget for defence and external security: €22.5 billion for 2021–2027, compared to €2.8 billion for the 2014–2020 period.
European defence policy is very much dependent on Member States’ willingness to cooperate in this area — predominantly because this policy domain is traditionally viewed as being central to the national sovereignty of a state. Governments in Europe are typically hesitant to integrate defence policies at the supranational level in order to avoid being seen as attempting to challenge the military status quo and the prevalence of NATO. Furthermore, it is worth noting that five Member States continue to maintain military neutrality, with the launch of Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO), causing significant domestic controversies in previous years.
The goal of working towards ‘a genuine European Defence Union’ with an ‘integrated approach to security’ is likely to be a major point of contention in some Member States — militarily neutral or not. It remains to be seen as to whether the new Commission will be able to overcome these issues. As the history of defence policy in the European Union has often shown, the ECA’s review found that ‘the EU’s success and future in the field of defence is fully dependent on the Member States’ political will.’
Immigration and the European Way of Life
In the wake of the refugee crisis, immigration has continued to be a hot topic in the Union. Rather than having a ‘migration commissioner,’ Ursula von der Leyen has proposed a portfolio with the controversial title of ‘Protecting Our European Way of Life.’ The Vice-President in charge will be responsible for implementing stronger borders and formulating a fresh start on migration by proposing new legislation ‘to allay the legitimate concerns of many and look at how we can overcome our differences.’ While it is necessary to seek to alleviate the legitimate concerns of the electorate, particularly in the wake of online disinformation and the rise of populism, critics of the portfolio title argue that it merely serves the further politicisation of the topic by pandering to right-wing extremism. While the President-elect has defended her decision amidst widespread criticism, the phrase has raised questions as to how this can and should be interpreted, particularly within the European Parliament. It is possible that the European Parliament will refuse to accept such a title — and all the elements in the portfolio that has been proposed for Margaritis Schinas and the proposed Home Affairs portfolio for the Commissioner-elect Ylva Johansson.
Finding the right balance — a condition for success
The new Commission has clearly selected horizontal, cross-border issues as top priorities for their mandate. It is crucial that these issues are allocated enough financial resources in an EU budget that not only has a de facto ceiling of approximately 1% of the overall EU Gross Domestic Product (GDP), but is also characterised by traditionally large spending areas for the next seven years, such as Natural Resources (mainly related to the Common Agricultural Policy) and Cohesion policy. Moreover, the issue is that such achievements on cross-border issues are dependent on constructive cooperation with the European Parliament, the (European) Council, and key political parties in the field.
The goals of the new Commission can best be described as a delicate balancing act — weighting controversial policies on immigration and defence against progressive positions on climate change, gender quality, fair taxation and democracy. President-elect Von der Leyen is visibly attempting to both alleviate fears and be a source of inspiration within a diverse and apparently increasingly polarised electorate. Will it be possible to consolidate sufficient support from the European Parliament, not only for its composition, but also for the specific portfolios that have been proposed to achieve these goals?
This article was first published on the 4/2019 issue of the ECA Journal. The contents of the interviews and the articles are the sole responsibility of the interviewees and authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the European Court of Auditors.
