October 19, 2007
The case of the disappearing MEP
The case of the disappearing MEP may be the most baffling of all the mysteries contained in the new EU reform treaty. Others include the decision by 27 presumably busy leaders to fly to Lisbon to sign the wretched thing a day before they all meet in Brussels. Presumably this cost in time, taxpayer’s money and carbon emissions is the price to pay to thank the Portuguese for putting the “Lisbon treaty” to rest.
Romano Prodi, the most pro-European of premiers, went into the summit demanding an extra member of the European parliament from 2014. Plans drawn up by the parliament foresaw Italy losing parity with France and the UK when the house shrinks to 750 members because its population is slightly smaller.
Prodi, with a wafer-thin majority at home, could not put up with this slight. Yet the treaty restricted the size of the Strasbourg assembly to 750. In the middle of the night some bright spark came up with an idea. What if one of the MEPs wasn’t an MEP? Then the Italians could get their extra one. So the parliament’s speaker is to become a non-person, or at least an non-MEP. Diplomats in Lisbon said he would not be able to vote. However, the current incumbent, German Hans-Gert Pottering, swiftly dismissed that suggestion.
“This solution does not call into question the right of the Parliament’s President to take part in plenary session votes,” he said.
Voters will install 751 MEPs in reality but in euroland there will be 750. A strange solution for a community built entirely on the rule of law and governed by treaties.
Even Graham Watson, leader of the Liberal group in parliament and campaigner for European transparency, accepted the grubby deal.
"To have satisfied the Italians by pretending to take away the vote of the President of the European Parliament seems to be a case of comedy turning into farce. But if it serves to build the necessary consensus on the new Treaty then I can live with it."
The question is, can the people of Europe? It’s surely one more nail in the coffin for the claim that the EU is trying to make itself intelligible.
Is that more ridicuous as the United States’ senate where the president (the Vice President of the US) has only got the right to vote in case of a tie ?
Posted by: john somer | October 19th, 2007 at 9:02 pm | Report this comment….or the Speaker of the House of Commons.
Google is your friend. The FT: newspaper, or Conrad Black 2.0?
Posted by: Alex | October 22nd, 2007 at 12:14 am | Report this commentThe odds of every MEP turning up on the same day are pretty long of course, and far longer that a vote could be tied 375-375, but surely it would make sense that there is an odd number of MEPs to address this minute possibility? In comparison, a 50-50 tie in the US Senate is likely to arise far more often, hence the need for the VP’s casting vote, imperfect a solution as it is for maintaining the separation of powers.
Posted by: James | October 22nd, 2007 at 9:59 am | Report this comment