In a letter addressed to Joseph Daul, chairman of the Conference of Committee Chairmen, the Development and Cooperation Committee claimed that while it remained convinced of Dr Borg’s professional abilities, it was not entirely satisfied with the levels of his expertise as expressed in his answers to MEPs’ questions last Tuesday.

“In general terms, the nominee Commissioner has given a convincing impression of his personal and professional capacities and his aptitude to assume the high office he has been proposed for,” wrote the committee’s acting chairman, Max van der Berg. “However, we remain to be convinced of his expertise and political vision in certain areas regarding development cooperation and the fight against poverty.”

Mr Van der Berg added that “(the committee) wishes to express its opinion that the fields of EU development policy and humanitarian aid policy need a person of the highest level of expertise, commitment and quality.”

The letter was made public last Thursday evening during a press conference addressed by Mr Daul and the president of the European Parliament, Pat Cox. Both played down the negative assessments of certain commissioner-designates, with Pat Cox declaring that there were “no yellow or red cards” regarding any of the commissioners proposed.

However, Mr Daul admitted that some commissioners would face a “steep learning curve”, and that “some additional training is still required” before the new commissioners can take on their respective portfolios after enlargement. He added that there was also the possibility that some commissioners may be assigned different portfolios altogether... a decision which ultimately rests with the new commission, and not with Parliament.

Apart from Dr Borg, other nominees to receive less than satisfactory appraisals include Slovak Jan Figel (Industry, External trade, Research and Energy) – whose answers were described as “very general in nature and lacked depth” – and Cypriot Markos Kyprianou, who, in the words of the Budgets and Budgetary Control committee, “could not... be described as a heavyweight candidate.”

Meanwhile, in his own letter to the European Parliament president, Mr Daul expressed overall satisfaction with the hearings, and concluded with a recommendation that “Parliament should approve the Commission in its new form following the accession of the 10 new Member States to the European Union as from 1 May 2004.”

This decision to go ahead with all 10 nominations was also unanimously approved in a meeting chaired by EP president Pat Cox earlier that same day. Answering questions put to him by journalists, some of whom made specific reference to Dr Borg’s assessment, Mr Cox said “if we had reservations regarding any of the 10 nominees, we would have said so.”

He added that all 10 nominees will be questioned again regarding the areas specific to their future portfolios in the coming months.

A vote on the new commission will meanwhile be taken on May 5 in Strasbourg. According to the EP’s statute, the vote must be taken to approve the commission in its entirety, and as such will not take into consideration the merits or otherwise of individual commissioners-designate.

The assessment letters mark the culmination of this week’s hearings of the commissioners-designate from the 10 acceding countries before the European Parliament. Dr Joe Borg was questioned on Tuesday by members of the European Parliament on numerous aspects of his temporary portfolio, including:

• Combating poverty;

• Doubling expenditure for basic education and healthcare;

• CAP reform and the ending of export subsidies;

• Cooperation with NGOs;

• Administrative structure of the commission;

• Reproductive health matters and the right of women to determine their own destinies;

• Trade as a tool in promoting development;

• His own ambitions in the area of development cooperation.

Meanwhile, The Malta Independent On Sunday contacted a European Parliament official for additional comments. The official in question, whose name cannot be divulged, claimed that when it came to assessing Dr Borg’s contribution to the hearings, a widespread comment among committee members was that his answers were “quite general.”

“Many on the board would have liked to know more about what Dr Borg personally thought of the issues presented to him last Tuesday,” he said. However, when asked whether this report might damage Dr Borg’s chances of success as commissioner, the official replied in the negative.

“The concern of the committee is simply that there are some areas in which the Maltese commissioner-designate has yet to convince us of the depth of his expertise. All this means is that by the next hearing, committee members will expect Dr Borg to display more knowledge and detail in certain specific areas, as well as to give a clearer indication of his own ideas on, for instance, the eradication of poverty.”

Asked whether a firm, principled opposition to abortion might jeopardise future relations with the Development and Cooperation Committee, the official admitted that such a stance, “if extreme”, might lead to considerable friction between the new commissioner and several members of the committee.

“On this issue in particular, some members would have liked Dr Borg to take a clearer stand. As it is, the commissioner-designate gave us diplomatic answers, as opposed to the more technical answers many members expected.”

Replying to questions put to him by Socialist MEP Glenys Kinnock, Dr Borg had reaffirmed that with regard to the issue of women’s reproductive health, he fully concurred with the declaration of the UN conference in Cairo... which stipulates, among other things, that abortion should not be promoted as a means of population control, but ought to be made more safely available in those countries where it is not illegal.

This answer failed to satisfy Mrs Kinnock, and has already provoked speculation locally that Dr Borg’s views on the subject are not entirely consonant with those of the government of Malta, which had insisted on the inclusion of an annex to the Cairo declaration.

“A widespread concern among committee members was Dr Borg’s reluctance to be outspoken on certain issues,” continued the official. “However, while we are still dealing with a temporary assignment, these observations should not be perceived as serious. Everybody on the committee is ready to give Dr Borg a fair chance for his appointment as commissioner.”

The official concerned stressed that these are his own opinions, based on personal impressions after having spoken to all the individual committee members.

Although efforts to contact both Mrs Kinnock and Mr Van der Berg proved fruitless, The Malta Independent on Sunday did talk to one of the members of the Development and Cooperation Committee on the subject: Italian MEP Vittorio Gemelli (Forza Italia), who defended Dr Borg’s performance last Tuesday.

“I was present for the auditions and found that some of the questions put to Dr Borg were highly specific and ideological in nature. The Commissioner-designate certainly answered these questions, although his answers were often too generic for the satisfaction of some of my colleagues who would have preferred him to be more specific. However, in the wider dialectic picture, the commissioner-designate did not fare at all badly.”

Mr Gemelli also dismissed the view that some of the thornier questions, coming as they did from outspoken members of the European Socialist party, may have been political in nature.

“Naturally, when a speaker’s political orientation is known beforehand, it follows as a matter of course that the line of questioning will be conditioned accordingly. This is perfectly normal for these kind of hearings.”

The Development and Cooperation Committee is responsible for the promotion, application and monitoring of the European Union’s development and cooperation policy. This policy includes political dialogue, technical and financial cooperation with developing countries, humanitarian, food and emergency aid, among others.

At present, the European Union is the single largest provider of development aid in the world.