Delusions of grandeur and of unity

Barroso show more respect for the differences between the EU and the US.

Not for the first time, the European Commission has succumbed to hubris. By styling the contribution of Commission President José Manuel Barroso to September’s first session of the European Parliament as his “State of the Union address”, he is inviting unfavourable comparisons between the EU’s political culture and that of the United States.

The term “State of the Union” is a direct steal from the US, whose constitution lays down that the president “shall from time to time give to the Congress information on the State of the Union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient”. By tradition, the US president uses his State of the Union address to survey the foreign policy challenges and set out his legislative agenda. The event has become a fixture in the political calendar, given on the last Wednesday evening in January or the first in February.

But the EU is not the US and Barroso should show more respect for the differences.

For starters, the European Parliament is not the US Congress. It does not enjoy the same power, nor the same democratic legitimacy, even though voter turnout in December’s Congressional elections is most unlikely to match the turnout for last year’s European Parliament elections (a record low of 43%).

More importantly, Barroso is not the president of the European Union. He is merely one of the EU’s many presidents. Herman Van Rompuy, the president of the European Council, is arguably exerting more influence than Barroso on the EU’s agenda. But Van Rompuy will not be at the debate.

Catherine Ashton, the foreign policy chief, will not be present, but in any case neither she, nor Barroso, nor Van Rompuy, embodies the EU’s foreign policy, which is nothing like as neatly concentrated as is the case in the US, where the president is also the commander-in-chief.

In the US’s more clear-cut set-up, Barack Obama heads the executive branch of government. In the EU, executive powers are dispersed, shared and often curtailed. A representative of the Belgian government, which currently holds the rotating presidency of the Council of Ministers, will be at the debate, though how long that government will last is still uncertain.

Click Here: All Blacks Rugby Jersey

Almost at every turn, therefore, the comparison with an American-style State of the Union address is unfavourable to the EU.

Barroso and his advisers could have taken a more understated approach. They could have billed his appearance before the Parliament merely as the Commission setting out its work programme for the 12 months ahead. (A work programme, be it noted, that will be at the mercy of both the Parliament and the national governments, who will water down or reject outright its proposals.)

A workmanlike approach would go down well at this moment. It is not as if the Union is riding the crest of a wave of popularity. Its recent achievements are sparse and the imminent challenges are daunting.

The fate of the European single currency (arguably one of the EU’s greatest achievements of the last 15 years) still hangs in the balance. A full-blown sovereign debt crisis may have been put off for the present, but the threat persists.

Across Europe, unemployment is rising and public services are being cut back. An upturn in Europe’s economic fortunes is dependent, to a disturbing degree, on Germany’s recovery.

In the global context, the EU is losing out in power and influence to Asia. In the European context, the EU institutions are losing out in power and influence to narrow national interests. The imminent debate about the EU’s budget for 2014-20 will be the opportunity for some unhealthy bloodletting, which will probably further weaken the patient.

Such home truths next week in Strasbourg would be welcome. Barroso could yet redeem himself by offsetting the hubris of his speech’s billing with humility in its content and delivery.