Why did you vote Yes/No to Lisbon?

[Coleman]

"Brussels" - the Council actually - has always had the right to approve or not.

Brussels is a common metonym used to designate the EU as a whole. I think most people appreciate that.

Under Lisbon we only have the right to "make suggestions" with regard to commissioners, the choice is left to the commission president (who also is newly empowered to dismiss commissioners at will). Formerly we had the right to "propose" a commissioner which ensured that our nomination was accepted as we could have blocked another country's nomination should they have blocked ours- something that never in fact happened. The new system has important federalist significance since it centralises the nomination process, moving it out of the hands of the member states powers.

Nice: "The Council, acting by a qualified majority and by common accord with the nominee for President, shall adopt the list of the other persons whom it intends to appoint as Members of the Commission, drawn up in accordance with the proposals made by each Member State. The President and the other Members of the Commission thus nominated shall be subject as a body to a vote of approval by the European Parliament." (Article 214)

Lisbon: "The Council, by common accord with the President-elect, shall adopt the list of other persons who it proposes for appointment as members of the Commission. They shall be selected, on the basis of suggestions made by Member States... The President, the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and the other members of the Commission shall be subject as a body to a vote of consent by the European Parliament" (Article 9d)

So, under Nice, is there a right to block other countries' nominations? Clearly not: it's a qualified majority.

Under Nice, does a country's proposal automatically go through? Clearly not, since Berlusconi's homophobic nominee was not appointed.

Actually what happened was that the entire European Commission was vetoed and Buttiglione subsequently withdrew his candidacy because of the pressure.

[fatcat]

Lots of reasons, but Garrett Fitzgeralds self-righteousness sealed the deal.

[Grumpy Fogey]

The difference between a list of commissioners "drawn up in accordance with the proposals made by each Member State" [Nice] and one that would be "selected, on the basis of suggestions made by Member States" [Lisbon] is indeed crucial.

I don't understand why more wasn't made of this point by the 'No' side during the referendum campaign, but I did raise the issue here on P.ie:
viewtopic.php?f=172&t=36707&p=1207600#p1207600

At present, only Ireland can propose an Irish commissioner designate, but if Lisbon had gone through then Berlin, Paris, or even London, could have suggested an Irish national for the post of commissioner during the 10/15 years when an Irish national would be entitled to be a member of the commission.

[ibis]

The difference between a list of commissioners "drawn up in accordance with the proposals made by each Member State" [Nice] and one that would be "selected, on the basis of suggestions made by Member States" [Lisbon] is indeed crucial.

I don't understand why more wasn't made of this point by the 'No' side during the referendum campaign, but I did raise the issue here on P.ie:
viewtopic.php?f=172&t=36707&p=1207600#p1207600

At present, only Ireland can propose an Irish commissioner designate, but if Lisbon had gone through then Berlin, Paris, or even London, could have suggested an Irish national for the post of commissioner during the 10/15 years when an Irish national would be entitled to be a member of the commission.

The current text does not enforce an exclusive limit either:

"The Council, acting by a qualified majority and by common accord with the nominee for President, shall adopt the list of the other persons whom it intends to appoint as Members of the Commission, drawn up in accordance with the proposals made by each Member State."

And, if the Council took up allowing Member States to propose each others nationals, there'd be no end to that, why would it just be people proposing Irish Commissioners? Smells like victim spirit to me - any such move would cause a huge breakdown in trust.

[Grumpy Fogey]

The current text does not enforce an exclusive limit either:

"The Council, acting by a qualified majority and by common accord with the nominee for President, shall adopt the list of the other persons whom it intends to appoint as Members of the Commission, drawn up in accordance with the proposals made by each Member State."

The council could, at present, reject the list of commissioners, In doing so, it would prevent the appointment of a new commission - so it's a weapon that would be used with great reluctance. If an obnoxious commissioner were nominated by a member state at present, (s)he would be given the least important portfolio rather than blocking the appointment of the new commission.

Under Lisbon, the list would no longer be prepared "in accordance with the proposals made by each Member State" as at present, but rather "on the basis of suggestions made by Member States" - the "each" has disappeared and words don't disappear without reason! The German text of Nice is the clearest of those that I've examined: "die gemäß den Vorschlägen der einzelnen Mitgliedstaaten" - "einzeln" is more like "individual" or "separate". So Nice is clear and unambiguous: "each" "individual/separate" member state "proposes" its commissioner and the Council votes on the resulting list of nominees in toto.

This would have completely changed under Lisbon: member states would have made "suggestions", there was nothing to restrict them from making "suggestions" about commissioners of other nationalities, and the list would only be based on rather than be in accordance with those suggestions.

And, if the Council took up allowing Member States to propose each others nationals, there'd be no end to that, why would it just be people proposing Irish Commissioners? Smells like victim spirit to me - any such move would cause a huge breakdown in trust.

Under QMV some member states will have many more votes than others. Malta is unlikely to try to suggest who the German commissioner should be. The reverse, however, is quite conceivable.

[ibis]

The current text does not enforce an exclusive limit either:

"The Council, acting by a qualified majority and by common accord with the nominee for President, shall adopt the list of the other persons whom it intends to appoint as Members of the Commission, drawn up in accordance with the proposals made by each Member State."

The council could, at present, reject the list of commissioners, In doing so, it would prevent the appointment of a new commission - so it's a weapon that would be used with great reluctance. If an obnoxious commissioner were nominated by a member state at present, (s)he would be given the least important portfolio rather than blocking the appointment of the new commission.

Under Lisbon, the list would no longer be prepared "in accordance with the proposals made by each Member State" as at present, but rather "on the basis of suggestions made by Member States" - the "each" has disappeared and words don't disappear without reason! The German text of Nice is the clearest of those that I've examined: "die gemäß den Vorschlägen der einzelnen Mitgliedstaaten" - "einzeln" is more like "individual" or "separate". So Nice is clear and unambiguous: "each" "individual/separate" member state "proposes" its commissioner and the Council votes on the resulting list of nominees in toto.

This would have completely changed under Lisbon: member states would have made "suggestions", there was nothing to restrict them from making "suggestions" about commissioners of other nationalities, and the list would only be based on rather than be in accordance with those suggestions.

And, if the Council took up allowing Member States to propose each others nationals, there'd be no end to that, why would it just be people proposing Irish Commissioners? Smells like victim spirit to me - any such move would cause a huge breakdown in trust.

Under QMV some member states will have many more votes than others. Malta is unlikely to try to suggest who the German commissioner should be. The reverse, however, is quite conceivable.

The reverse is really not a realistic poltical possibility, except in the fantasy-paranoia land where small states like Ireland are beaten up in the Commission locker-room - something which has amazingly failed to happen over the last 35 years. If a large state proposed a Commissioner for a smaller state, that large state would find itself blocked on every piece of legislation by all the small states - almost certainly with the assistance of at least another large state - because it's easier to block than to pass. If the EU became the eurosceptic sub/dom fantasyland you already appear to think it is, it could be completely paralysed by the small states simply walking out.

Finally, for the umpteenth time - the Council doesn't operate by QMV, it operates by consensus. QMV votes only happen in 25% of the cases they should, and those are there primarily as a way of registering dissent.