The European Union Explained: Institutions, Actors, Global Impact

6. The Presidency

6 The Presidency Organization The Presidency is not an EU institution but a distinctive organizational feature that has a bearing on the workings of the Council of Ministers and the European Council, and therefore profoundly influences the outcome, shape, and direction of EU politics. Every six months a different member state takes its turn in assuming the Presidency of the European Union. The order in which this occurs used to be alphabetical, but with the enlargement of 1995 a new system was adopted to balance and reflect the different political and economic characteristics of EU member states. An effort is made, therefore, to rotate the Presidency so that a smaller country is followed by a larger one, and a richer country is preceded by a poorer one, although this formula can only serve as a rough guideline (see Table 6.1). This system might end in 2009, however, should this aspect of the Reform Treaty be taken on board. After 2009, member states therefore might appoint a full-time Council President to chair all summits for two and a half years. Over the years, the responsibilities of the Presidency have expanded significantly to include: 7-EUE Ch6 (56-58).indd 56 9/24/08 9:10:59 AM The Presidency · 57 preparing and chairing meetings of the European Council • preparing and chairing meetings of the Council of Ministers and special • committees such as the Committee on Budgetary Control brokering deals in the Council of Ministers to enact legislation • launching strategic policy initiatives • acting as EU spokesperson and representing the EU internationally • These responsibilities can place an enormous strain on the country that holds the Presidency. Large member states have an obvious advantage here, as their sizable bureaucracies offer solid infrastructural support, not to mention the number of civil servants that are required to fulfill such a function. In contrast, smaller countries sometimes have difficulty finding enough qualified people to chair all the meetings. Some member states radically reorganize their bureaucracies in order to absorb the shock of the Presidency, often at the cost of diminished attention to domestic politics. Despite the organizational and administrative burden, small countries relish the chance to be at the helm of EU politics and, understandably, enjoy basking in the international limelight for this period. Regardless of the greater bureaucratic resources of larger states, by no means do they necessarily have more successful presidencies. Another feature of the Presidency is that it can be turned to domestic political advantage either by distracting from pressing problems or by enhancing the government’s prestige and popularity. The Presidency is also responsible for maintaining good relations between EU institutions. Relations between the Council of Ministers and the Commission can be awkward at times, as the latter is a supranational organization designed to promote European integration, whereas the former represents the member states and is designed to safeguard national interests. Yet harmonious relations between the two are crucial for effective policy making, since the Commission proposes legislation that the Council of Ministers (and the European Parliament) subsequently votes on. The Presidency’s job, therefore, is to mediate between these two institutions and, if necessary, broker compromises. The Presidency also plays a role as liaison between the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament. The EP tends to see the Council as the jealous guardian of national sovereignty, and the Council regards the Parliament as the supranational newcomer to the EU’s political power game, whose main intention is to increase its legislative and supervising powers. The Presidency has the task of meeting with parliamentary committees and filtering the committees’ views back into the decisionmaking processes within the Council of Ministers. Although one might argue that the rotating Presidency offers a certain degree of fairness, the system is inherently inefficient, as a term of six months is probably too short to pursue a coherent program. The frequent rotation also undermines political continuity and encourages short-term views and policies.1 A natural consequence, 7-EUE Ch6 (56-58).indd 57 9/24/08 9:10:59 AM 58 · Institutions therefore, was that prior to the 2004 enlargement calls for reform were widespread. After all, with twenty-seven members, any given country would hold the Presidency only once every thirteen and a half years, hardly conducive for continuity or political effectiveness. Although the constitution proposed that a president would chair the meetings of the European Council,2 the principle of...