Grain de sel; à la lecture d’ d’un article de Joaquín Almunia paru dans Grand Continent le 8 octobre 202. Il réagit aux rapports Leta et Draghi et au programme de la Commission concernant le droit de la concurrence.
Les règles de base de la politique de concurrence sont énoncées dans quelques articles cours du traité, restés inchangés, complétées de règlements. Ce cadre ayant été interprété par la Cour JUE et des instruments clarifiant l’application des règles et de la jurisprudence par la Commission — « soft law ».
Ursula von der Leyen comme Mario Draghi proposent de modifier la politique de concurrence afin de la moderniser, de soutenir l’innovation, d’améliorer la compétitivité des entreprises et la durabilité. Mais cà n’a jamais été le contrôle des fusions et acquisitions qui bloque la croissance des entreprises européennes, mais la fragmentation du marché intérieur qui persiste en de nombreux secteurs majeurs ( banque, l’énergie ou les télécommunications), l’absence d’un marché unique des capitaux et l’absence de grandes plateformes technologiques européennes. Quant aux contrôle des aides d’État et la nécessité de soutenir une politique industrielle ,certes mais aujourd’hui c’est à l’échelle européenne et non à échelle des Etats que celà doit se jouer. On parle bien d’une politique industrielle commune !
For all the fuss around migration, the written submissions before the European Commission hearings show that the economy is the topic that Europe’s new commissioners really want to talk about. Perhaps wisely so, as it could be bouncing back up the agenda fairly soon.
There is nothing journalists love more than important people releasing 385 densely written pages of important content just before midnight (yes, irony). Yet that is what the European Parliament did on Tuesday when it published the written answers that the commissioners-designate gave to the questions from EU’s lawmakers ahead of the early-November hearings.
For newsrooms, that means the equivalent of sifting through Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone in just a couple of hours and then rehashing it for readers in a digestible format, ideally, by or shortly after dawn. If you ever wondered how we manage to do this – so do I.
Luckily, in this case, journalists did not need a full glossary to tell horcruxes from hinkypunks. Much of the commissioners’ input could be boiled down to one term: ‘competitiveness’, trendy Brussels lingo for making Europe’s ageing economy fit for the future.
That is a function of the way the new commission works, with its overlapping portfolios and obscure titles. Much has been written about European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s ‘overlap and conquer’ strategy, which splits each subject into micro-bits that are divided among the college, leaving her as the only person to oversee all subjects in full.
The commissioner hearings make this glaringly obvious: Almost every commissioner gets a shred of economic responsibility, given that 24 out of 26 are questioned by economy-related committees. By comparison, it was only 20 in 2019.
As a result, the word ‘competitiveness’ features 370 times in the commissioners’ answers. Stephane Séjourné alone drops it 74 times. Only two candidates – Kaja Kallas and Marta Kos – make no reference at all. Mario Draghi and Enrico Letta, the former Italian prime ministers tasked with preparing reports on the EU’s economy, also get shout-outs.
What commissioners-designate have to say on it, at this stage, might be less substantial. But, notably, ‘migration’ only gets 114 mentions from 11 of the 26 designated commissioners. This might seem counterintuitive given that migration has dominated the European discourse recently, not least taking centre stage at the last European Council.
But it reflects, first, that the economy is where the EU ultimately retains most power and most credibility, having come into existence as an economic union. Even the defence commissioner, a supposedly new post, is first and foremost a defence industry commissioner.
Back with a vengeance?
Most importantly, it reflects that for all the talk of migration, the commissioners might think that the economy is the underlying concern of leaders and voters alike. Migration has sprung up on the agenda with far-right election victories, and keeping it there also mostly seems to benefit the far-right.
There is a reason why the frontrunner in next year’s German election, Friedrich Merz – otherwise known as ‘Mr Border Controls’ – has explicitly stated that he does not want to campaign on migration, but rather on Germany’s shaky economy. That is likely to affect the European debate, given that Germany’s political discourse remains the continent’s pacemaker.
The economy and underlying fears of Europe becoming a glorified sweatshop where market leaders from China and America assemble their electric cars also keep European voters up. The cost of living and the economic situation were their top concerns at June’s EU election.
Much will be coming towards future commissioners. Controversial details of Draghi’s recommendations have yet received less airtime than they would have without migration. Think of common debt, which Germany’s Chancellor is already rhetorically preparing to block.
There is also the EU’s long-term budget, rocky international trade relations, and the fact that Europe’s economic powerhouses, Germany and France, are struggling with the bloc’s deficit rules.
In short, Europe’s economic woes could come back with a vengeance – possibly starting with the commissioner hearings.