The European Parliament has approved the new Commission proposed by its President-designate Jean-Claude Juncker, with 423 votes in favour, 209 against and 67 abstentions.
In the end, the support of the two largest political groups – the European People’s Party and the Socialists and Democrats – along with that of the liberal ALDE group sufficed to ensure that the 28 proposed Commissioners, which include Maltese veteran politician Karmenu Vella, can take up their posts.
But the European Conservatives and Reformists abstained, and three other political groups – the leftist GUE/NGL, the Greens and the Eurosceptic EFDD – decided to vote against it.
The Juncker Commission still requires the approval of member states through the European Council, although this should be a mere formality.
As he opened this morning’s debate, Mr Juncker announced a slight reshuffle of his proposed Commission’s portfolios which reflected concerns raised by MEPs.
The portfolio of Maltese Commissioner-designate Karmenu Vella – environment, maritime affairs and fisheries – was not affected; however, Mr Juncker has made Vice-President-designate Frans Timmermans responsible for sustainable development, along with better regulation, inter-institutional relations, rule of law and the Charter of Fundamental Rights.
The request to assign sustainable development to one of the Commission’s vice-presidents was made in its letter of assessment on Mr Vella penned by the chairmen of the European Parliament’s Environment Committee and the Fisheries Committee. However, they had recommended that it should be assigned to Jyrki Katainen, who was made responsible for jobs, growth, investment and competitiveness.
The former Luxembourg Prime Minister also said that he listened to complaints about his decision to place medical devices and pharmaceuticals under the responsibility of the Industry and Internal Market Commissioner. These are now the responsibility of the Health Commissioner, as they have been under the present Commission.
Another change concerns the portfolio of Commissioner-designate Tibor Navracics, who was made responsible for Education, Culture, Youth and Citizenship. The decision to make the Hungarian politician responsible for citizenship had proven controversial; this is now the responsibility of Migration and Home Affairs Commissioner Dimitris Avramopoulos, while Mr Navracics was also made responsible for sport.
In his address, which was delivered partly in French, partly in English and partly in German, Mr Juncker stressed that he struggled to ensure that the number of women in his Commission – nine – is the same as the Barroso Commission, pointing out that at the end of July, just three member states were willing to propose a female Commissioner-designate.
He said that he had to turn down many male candidates – though he did not mention any – to get the number up to nine, but said that even so, nine women out of 28 Commissioners was a “pathetic” amount.
Mr Juncker insisted that his Commission would not be the “secretary-general to the Council” – a criticism the present Commission has received in light of its perceived subservience to member states – but added that neither would it be “the valet of the European Parliament.”
Mr Juncker’s address was followed by speeches from representatives of each political group in parliament, with the leaders of the EPP and the S&D both signalled, as expected, that they will back the new Commission. ALDE chairman Guy Verhofstadt also stressed that his group would back the new Commission albeit stressing that this support was not absolute.
But the third-largest group, the somewhat Eurosceptic European Conservatives and Reformists, announced that it will abstain, with chairman Syed Kamall stating that the group would work with the Commission when it chose reform but confront it when it looked to the past.
The leftist GUE/NGL group announced that it would be voting against the “neoliberal policies that the Commission represents,” and Greens chairman Rebecca Harms said that her group would do likewise despite her personal appreciation of Mr Juncker.
In her address, Ms Harms specifically mentioned a failure in policies when it came to refugees, noting how promises to create a separate portfolio to deal with the issue had not materialised. She said that this meant that the Commission was distancing itself from the enormous challenges faced, particularly in the Mediterranean.
The Eurosceptic EFDD group, unsurprisingly, also voted the Commission, as explained in a characteristically colourful address by its chairman, British MEP Nigel Farage.
Mr Farage described the proposed Commissioners as a “bunch of non-entities,” stating that most MEPs who will be supporting it could not name half of them. He further added that the British nominee, House of Lords member Jonathan Hill, was never elected to anything in his life, making him perfect for the job.
The MEP then insisted that the Commission was an inherently anti-democratic institution, pointing out that it was the only EU institution able to propose legislation and to seek the repeal or change existing EU laws.
He also asserted that this Commission would be the last to “govern” Britain, “because in five years, we will be out of here.”