In one sense, the recipe for success is simple: Show off your language skills, be respectful to the Parliament, and above all don’t make any spending promises.

But it’s also a trial by fire for the commissioners-in-waiting, who’ve had seven weeks to beef up their understandings of the portfolios bestowed on them by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.

Will they be able to talk eloquently about the nitty-gritty of the issues on their patch, or will the Parliament’s lawmakers — many of whom have spent years deep in Europe’s policy weeds — expose major gaps in the candidates’ knowledge?

Here’s POLITICO’s snap insider take on how well each commissioner hopeful fared, which will be updated throughout the week.

Glenn Micallef, Commissioner for Intergenerational Fairness, Youth, Culture and Sport, Malta

At 35, Malta’s Glenn Micallef is the youngest EU commissioner nominee, and was joint first to face MEPs. Despite never having held political office, he was largely successful in battling the pre-hearing narrative that he is too young and inexperienced to be a commissioner.

Micallef pulled off some tricks that scored him points among culture committee lawmakers and — crucially — didn’t screw up on the content (of his rather light portfolio of intergenerational fairness, culture, youth, and sport). He kicked off by referring to his time as a Parliament intern (and closed with an outstretched hand to lawmakers); spoke Maltese when addressing a question on multilingualism; and emphasized the importance of diversity after a controversial gender-in-sports-question — all of which went down well.

Culture, youth and sports are competencies in which the European Commission depends heavily on goodwill from EU countries (a fact Micallef acknowledged) and where the commissioner-in-charge has to team up with colleagues (which he repeatedly vowed to do). “Intergenerational fairness” was a key pitch by von der Leyen in her bid for a second term at the head of the European Commission, but EU lawmakers didn’t go in very hard on it. 

Helping Micallef was the fact that his portfolio contains nuggets that everyone cares deeply about but that aren’t too divisive, such as the impact of social media on the mental health of young people, and the immensely popular Erasmus + exchange program.

Yes, he once mixed up the names of two colleagues.

Yes, he had soundbites that became repetitive (such as that Europe has a “rich and diverse tapestry”).

And yes, he stuck to the script and gave rather general answers.

But who’s to blame him? Not European lawmakers, we reckon.

— By Pieter Haeck


Maroš Šefčovič, Commissioner for Trade and Economic Security, Interinstitutional Relations and Transparency, Slovakia 

Maroš Šefčovič walked a fine line between conflicting allegiances during his confirmation hearing in the Parliament on Monday. He said he’ll be tough on Beijing, putting some distance between himself and the man who nominated him to Brussels.

As the longest-serving current commissioner, Šefčovič sailed through the hearing, navigating with ease questions from European lawmakers that included the bloc’s fraught relations with China and, potentially, the United States. He was careful to balance national sensibilities, such as on trading with the Mercosur group of countries, an agricultural colossus, or with Ukraine. 

But with his fresh suntan and shiny white teeth, Šefčovič was also careful to show he’s not a crony of Robert Fico, the Slovak prime minister whose country could be turning into an illiberal state along the lines of Viktor Orbán’s Hungary.

Šefčovič was eager to point out that the pro-China lines of the Slovak government  — which included a meeting between Fico and China’s Xi Jinping on Friday — would not stand in the way of his job as EU commissioner. 

But he remained vague on how exactly Brussels intends to counter China’s cheap imports into the bloc and whether the European Commission would put forward a new trade defense instrument, despite questions from several groups on the topic. 

— By Camille Gijs and Koen Verhelst

Committee verdict: Yes


Share.
Exit mobile version