The question bouncing around the corridors of the European Parliament in Strasbourg is not "if", but "how". One does not ask "if" tomorrow, Tuesday 15 July, Jean-Claude Juncker will be elected president of the new European Commission which will take office in the Berlaymont Palace in Brussels on 18 November, but one thinks about "how". That is, on the number of votes that the ex-prime minister of Luxembourg and ex-president of the Eurogroup, i.e. the ministers of the economy of the XNUMX member countries that have adopted the euro, will collect.
To reach a qualified majority of half plus one (i.e. 376) of the members of the Strasbourg assembly, and therefore guarantee Juncker's election, the votes of members of the three parliamentary groups (popular, socialist and democratic, liberal democratic) would be largely sufficient which form that sort of Grosse Koalition which coagulates most of the time that the European Parliament approves a law. With more than 479 votes available, any candidate would feel the nomination already in his pocket.
But in this case it's not that simple. Not all individual parliamentary groups are united internally when it comes to choosing between a policy of financial rigor and one of greater flexibility to give breath to an economy that is still stagnant or nearly so after years of heavy recession. Furthermore, different positions coexist within each parliamentary group, clearly influenced by reasons linked to the "state of health" of the member state that each MEP represents,
A panorama that Juncker, by virtue of his European curriculum, had known for some time; and of which he received further confirmation last week on the occasion of the meeting with the group leaders, who submitted to his attention assessments and solicitations which will certainly have an influence on tomorrow's vote. The new leader of the Socialists & Democrats Gianni Pittella, for example, has stated flatly that "the stability and growth pact will have to be softened to combat growing poverty and social injustice". And he added that a new immigration policy will have to be built "with the sharing of the operational and financial commitment on the part of all the member countries, not just those along the coast".
The leader of the Popular Party Manfred Weber – the German MEP who on July XNUMX in Strasbourg, on the occasion of the opening of the Italian presidency of the EU Council, argued harshly with Matteo Renzi accusing Italy of "not doing its homework at home” – was less drastic with Juncker. Who, moreover, as president of the Eurogroup, had indeed supported rigor but with some opening in the direction of flexibility. A position that Angela Merkel, the German leader of the European political family of Christian Democrats (to which Juncker himself belongs) had not liked at all. To the point that immediately after the European elections you had sponsored the French Christine Lagarde, today at the head of the International Monetary Fund, for the leadership of the Brussels Executive.
Juncker therefore, as an experienced politician that he is, in these days leading up to tomorrow's vote in Strasbourg, has seen himself forced to engage in some reckless political slalom. Like when he anticipated that the post of economic affairs commissioner will be assigned to a socialist (the French economy minister Pierre Moscovici, it is speculated). But will this move be enough to secure him the vote of all Socialists & Democrats? Pittella, in this regard remained buttoned up. “We'll see on Tuesday”, he replied to those who asked him for an anticipation.
Apart from the no shouted from the rooftops by British Prime Minister David Cameron, who went so far as to threaten the United Kingdom's exit from the EU (but he won't do it) and the obvious one from the anti-European parties, Jean-Claude Juncker will in all probability overcome the 'examination. The risk that he might not reach the qualified majority of 376 votes is considered minimal by Strasbourg veterans. But to govern Europe, especially in such calamitous times, it is essential to be able to count on strong parliamentary support.
And this, still on the eve, cannot be taken for granted. Also because the expected support from the three largest groups (EPP, S&D and ALD) could turn out to be numerically weaker as a result of discontent arising following the many, and sometimes contradictory, overtures by Juncker in his meetings in recent days with the MEPs. One of whom, in private, blurts out like this: "He promised the representatives of each group exactly what they wanted to be promised...". Thus, the undeclared fear of some supporters of the candidate is that the number of votes may exceed the bar set at 376, yes, but not by much; and that in the end the Juncker presidency may be less strong than necessary. Or even that that level may not be reached.
