A European Commission in the process of renewing itself, a newly elected European Parliament and uncertainty over ratification of the Lisbon Treaty are just some of the institutional dossiers facing the Swedish Presidency. But Stockholm will attempt as far as possible to avoid these questions, which it feels are too far removed from the real concerns of European citizens.

COMMISSION TORN BETWEEN TWO TREATIES

In June, the European Council gave the ‘political’ green light to the re-appointment of Portugal’s Conservative ex-Prime Minister, José Manuel Barroso, as head of the Commission for another five years. It now remains to be seen whether he will be formally nominated by the Council and then approved by the European Parliament in July, according to the current Nice Treaty, or whether his nomination will be postponed until the autumn after the Irish referendum on the Lisbon Treaty and its entry into force. The rest of the Commission will, however, definitely be nominated under the Lisbon Treaty, provided, of course, that it is ratified, for one very good reason: under Lisbon, the principle of one commissioner per country will remain, whereas under Nice, the Commission, after 1 November, would have to have less commissioners than member states. No government wants that.

But the idea of electing a president under Nice (to satisfy Barroso and his supporters), and a Commission under Lisbon does not meet with everyone’s approval, notably in the European Parliament. The Swedish Presidency has therefore started consultations with the heads of the different political groups, which will then be expected to decide, on 9 July, whether the assembly will approve Barroso’s nomination for the mid-July plenary session or wait till the autumn. Opinions in the Council are divided. Sweden is pushing for a formal nomination in July because it fears a ‘power void’ in September after the summer break when the EU will be faced with important international deadlines.

The dossier is, therefore, likely to be difficult to manage and could drag on, especially if the Lisbon Treaty does not enter into force immediately after the Irish referendum and the existing Commission is forced to stay an extra few weeks. Or worse, if Barroso is rejected by the Parliament and the Council is obliged to present another candidate. During all this time, the existing executive is hardly likely to make any major proposals.

EP UNDERGOING TRANSFORMATION

At the same time, the newly elected Parliament will be setting itself up. The entire month of July will be devoted to its ‘constitution’ with the inaugural plenary session scheduled for 14-16 July in Strasbourg during which the president, vice-presidents and quaestors will be elected. Sweden will present its programme for the next six months.

The following week in Brussels, the establishment of the parliamentary committees and the election of their Bureau (presidents and vice-presidents) will take place. During this time, Swedish ministers will make their traditional presentations to the relevant committees.

Given that only around half of the members of the former assembly were re-elected, the Presidency will have to deal with a large number of new MEPs. This will also mean many new rapporteurs, who may not necessarily have an in-depth knowledge of the dossiers. This could delay some of the important negotiations, notably under co-decision.

TREATY CLOSE TO RATIFICATION

And then, of course, there are the last niggling doubts about the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty. Ireland is the only country that has not yet approved the text, following the failure of its first referendum, on 12 June 2008. The Irish government, satisfied with the legal guarantees given by the European Council in June, is now expected to organise a second referendum at the beginning of October. The Taoiseach, Brian Cowen, believes that it has reassured the population, which may vote ‘yes’ this time, prompted also by the economic and financial crisis of the wisdom of belonging to a protective Europe.

Apart from Ireland, the signatures of the Polish, Czech and German presidents are still missing in order to complete the ratification procedures in their countries. If all goes according to plan, the text could enter into force before the end of the year, and the Presidency would then have to quickly organise all the necessary preparatory work. Certain questions, such as establishing a new European external action service, have been left open so as not to second guess the result of the different ratifications, notably in Ireland, but they should soon become clear. New senior posts created by the Lisbon Treaty, such as the fixed president of the European Council or the high representative for foreign affairs, will also need to be filled.

TIGHT BUDGETS

The Swedish Presidency will have two important budgets on its agenda, the first being the negotiations with the European Parliament on the 2010 financial package. Again, clarity on the situation of being between two treaties will be required since Lisbon provides for a new annual budget. This means that if the treaty enters into force before the 2010 budget negotiations are concluded (end November-beginning December), a decision will have to be taken as to which procedure to adopt.

The second concerns the postponing of the 2007 discharge to be granted to Council by the Parliament in April last year. The Council appears increasingly to be spending a part of its administrative budget on operations and MEPs acting in their quality as discharge authorities are keen to keep an eye on expenses. The Council, however, refuses to provide an annual report of activities in the same way as the other institutions, quoting the 1970 ‘gentlemen’s agreement’. The debate will once again take centre stage in November, given that the Council has six months in which to respond.

Finally, there is the revision of Regulation 1049/2001 on public access to EU institutions’ documents which was postponed in April until the next term of office. The standoff between the Council, Parliament and Commission is expected to continue, but the Swedish Presidency, being determined to promote transparency, may facilitate things.