Europolitical reading: "The Making of a European President" by Nereo Peñalver García and Julian Priestley

It is with trepidation that I begin to write about this book, it being the second by someone I actually know (the first one was this). Not only that, half the writing team is familiar to me not only as a former colleague, boss and friend, but also as co-writer of a previous book. So you can see there are potential pitfalls here. 

 So it is just as well that I can honestly say I enjoyed this book. A mark of that fact is that I read it extremely quickly, partly in the office (the subject matter made that somehow acceptable). The assertion of "enjoyment" may seem strange - as it did to a friend I mentioned this to - when discussing a non-fiction book on the potentially rather arcane subject of the evolving manner of electing a president of the European Commission, but I can offer two explanations. First, I am something of a geek myself on such matters, not least having played my own small part in making the Spitzenkandidaten process a reality, through my role in a communication campaign on the 2014 European elections which insisted that "this time it's different" and exhorting voters to "choose who's in charge". Second, spare the blushes, dear authors, the book is well-written, easy to read and, well, interesting.

Three things stand out for me as I look back on the book. The first is its historical perspective. The history of the EU is of course relatively short, and that of the European Parliament, at least as a serious factor in the story (i.e. since the first direct election in 1979), is even shorter. Short enough indeed that one of the authors, Julian Priestley, has first-hand experience of pretty much the whole thing. However, being a practitioner inside the system does not necessarily imply the ability to step back and look cooly at the historical trends and tendencies that were playing out. In this case, however, that perspective is very much there. It is fascinating to see how the jump to (what appears to be) an entrenched new way of electing a Commission President is not some out-of-the-blue coup pulled off by a newly assertive Parliament, but a coup pulled off by a newly assertive Parliament as part of a long term process, whereby the choice of president has steadily been politicised and democratised over the years. Seen this way, the step taken with the 2014 elections and the election of Jean-Claude Juncker, in the face of the opposition of most EU governments, is the continuation of a long-ongoing trend, rather than a one-off - and therefore more inherently fragile - event. 


The second is the clear-sighted recognition that though the institutional realities changed markedly, and in the direction the Parliament hoped for, the Spitzenkandidaten process did not deliver, at least at this first outing, on a major hope and expectation of its proponents, namely that having the choice between different individuals is a quasi-presidential European election would engage voters and enliven the election - perhaps even boost turnout. There are reasons for this, which the book analyses cogently, and even glimmers of counter-indication which suggest that the europeanisation of the election is not a forlorn hope and that, in the future, lead candidates might be more present in European electoral campaigns across all the EU Member States. Much will depend on how European political parties develop, and how much national political parties accept them as part of a more integrated European political landscape. On this, it is admittedly difficult to share the implicit optimism of the authors that change can occur at all soon.

Authors Sir Julian Priestley and Nereo Peñalver García

The third eye-catching aspect of the book lies in those insiderish details that the authors can provide about the campaigns, particularly, of course, about the Schulz campaign. Schulz, though the loser in the electoral race for the presidency, is at the same time very much a winner. He was by no means the only proponent of the Spitzenkandidaten idea, but it was undoubtedly he who drove the idea forward most effectively, both in his role as the socialists' lead candidate and from his institutional position as President of the Parliament and, briefly, as leader of the group of Socialists and Democrats in the Parliament. To fight so hard - and not without some hope - both for the process and for its main prize, and to triumph in establishing the process, but without winning the prize, makes Schulz an even slightly tragic figure. Certainly we have fascinating insights both into his character and into his mood and state of mind as he undertakes the frankly herculean task he has set himself, placing himself under pressures which, one suspects, Juncker did not inflict on himself to anything like the same degree. Concerning Juncker, the book does contain a revelation, namely Juncker's late-night call to Angela Merkel threatening to resign his candidacy if she to not back him as the winner of the election, thus tipping her hand definitively in that direction, in a direct reversal of her previous position. On such moments do even long term historical trends hang... 

The final chapter looks ahead to how the process might be taken forward in the future. It is perspicacious, even though it does not have the benefit of observing how the new logic of the Spitzenkandidaten is playing out to date in terms of how a new "parliamentary majority" - albeit a flawed and shaky one - backing an executive on the basis of an agreed programme, is governing Europe in practice. The day-to-day reality will arguably do as much to seal the new process as the electoral events of 2014. On this, the jury is still out, though there are clear signs that the fundamental logic of the system has indeed changed. 

Perhaps that is a subject for the second edition...