Political commentators point out that in the last 10 years the institutional power balance of the EU seems to have been imperceptively shifting. There seems little question in some quarters that the European Commission has seen its power of political leadership slipping away to the European Council. It is pointed out that in the early days of the European Union, member states virtually nodded through most of the Commission’s proposals. Today, the reverse seems to be true: the Commission has maintained its administrative role, but in terms of political initiative it has been reduced to little more that a secretariat for the Council.
But if the Council has gained more power at the expense of the Commission, the European Parliament stands accused of voluntarily giving it up – through sheer greed, timidity and ineptitude. On paper Parliament is considerably more powerful than it used to be; indeed, there have been a few occasional victories, here and there, but most ordinary people have very little idea of how European life would differ if Parliament were to depart en masse for a year’s sabbatical.
As they approach the June elections what people in Europe are likely to remember, is not the few occasions when the Parliament made a difference, but the many occasions when it didn’t. They might point to the absurd expenditure of the monthly shuffle between Brussels and Strasbourg; something that the Parliamentarians could change tomorrow by forcing the member states to amend the Treaty of Amsterdam that decrees where and when they sit. They will certainly remember Parliament for the stories of greed and secrecy over pensions and expenses and the expenditure on vacuous initiatives such as a TV station for Parliament.
But above all, people cannot understand, since we have a European Parliament, why its members cannot arrange themselves in groups with visible leaders putting forward European political programmes together with a list of candidates for Commission Chairman (as his proper title should be), Foreign Minister and, of course, President of the European Council. As one commentator wrote: Raw European political power, for once democratic, is hanging like a ripe fruit above the heads of our well-paid Parliamentarians, who, for some reason, haven’t the nous to reach up and grab it.
What the three main groupings really show is that there is no leader, there is no manifesto couched in everyday practicalities. Not surprising then that in only two out of the EUs 25 member states (where voting is not actually compulsory) will more than half the electors be going to the polls. It is difficult to be keen on people whose job is to reconcile the different positions of member states and find the lowest common denominator. Any competent civil servant can do that.
At the end of the day people vote for people; they trust or distrust them, admire them or revile them. What Europe needs is visible leadership not invisible wielders of power. And it is up to the MEPs to begin to change all this.
No one should be frightened of more democracy. Better a more democratic Europe than the confused noise of the twenty-seven we tend to get when the going gets tough. We in Malta have seen what the lack of strong and efficient leadership can do; we are still waiting for Europe to act rather than pass resolutions that take so long to implement that the patient could well be dead by the time they become active. Europe needs a breed of assertive MEPs.
Dr Josie Muscat is Leader Azzjoni Nazzjonali and a candidate for MEP Elections.