If you look at the state of European politics today, there is chaos. France has been in a caretaker state for two months after legislative elections in which no party achieved a decisive victory. In Germany, the far right came out on top in a series of state elections on September 1. Federal Chancellor Olaf Scholz appears destined to lose the national election this time next year. The less said about Hungary and its strongman prime minister, Viktor Orban, the better. From Spain to the Netherlands, coalitions of parties with little in common have kept governments in power with slim majorities. Then there’s Belgium, a country where politicians often bargain for a year or more before forming a government (current count: 88 days). Part of the appeal of democracy is that it is chaotic, but Europe has elevated chaos to high art.
Even amid voter-induced unrest, in rainy corners of northern Europe, some of the continent’s government machinery continues to function. A new list of 27 EU commissioners is currently being assembled in Brussels and new tasks are expected to be assigned in the coming days. From immigration policy to trade, regulating big tech, strengthening European defense, monitoring national finances, setting green rules and more, every aspect of EU life is beyond the purview of the EU’s administrative giants. The technocratic approach it favors begs questions around democratic accountability. But it’s been so effective that the “let the experts do it” approach to governance has become popular outside Brussels. When politicians are unable to form a national government, they sometimes turn to outside “experts”.
The march of Europe’s technocrats is due in large part to a shift in “capacity” (to use a bit of Brussels dialect) from the 27 member states to the EU. . Since then, officials in Brussels have accumulated more influence, and more and more of the EU budget has been allocated to countries that meet conditions set by EU officials, whether it is reforming courts or labor laws. The natural desire to pursue bottomless budget deficits.
Another big dose of nagging is brewing. On September 9, former European Central Bank President Mario Draghi is expected to release a report on how to revive the EU’s sclerotic economy. The book, rumored to be 400 pages long, has been viewed as an oracular blueprint for what governments must do to continue to win the EU’s favor. There is no doubt that Mr Draghi’s report – whose decrees will be included in the briefing notes for new commissioners – will be full of smart moves. But who gets to decide whether that’s the case? Politicians need to worry about how their policies will play out at the ballot box. Draghi, the EU’s newest technocrat, doesn’t care. That’s tough luck for voters who think he’s been misled about the future of industrial policy, he said.
Unfortunately, the report was mainly prepared before but published after the European elections and its recommendations have not been reflected. This would confirm the claim that the EU is irresponsible to voters. This is often exaggerated. The 720-member European Parliament keeps a close eye on the commissioner and will interview every aspirant for the post in the coming weeks (Ursula Vonder, who has chaired the commission since 2019) Ursula von der Leyen was re-elected by parliament in July). National governments have a big say in how EU institutions use their powers, not least in deciding who leads them. But those who claim Brussels is a fountain of uncensored red tape have a point. Regulations that usually affect Europeans are set by a bureaucracy of 32,000 people, who don’t have to worry about how public opinion will view their latest move.
Technocracy has also taken hold at the national level. European politics has become even more chaotic. Gone are the days when the two major parties duked it out in elections. There are now a dozen, including Greens, liberals and nationalists. The compromises required to form alliances are even more elusive, especially if far-right parties are seen to have overstepped their bounds in forming alliances (as they often do). In the ensuing impasse, hiring an uncontroversial expert is often the only obvious solution after months of stagnation. Draghi will become Italy’s prime minister in 2021, the fourth technocrat to hold this position since the 1990s. The new Dutch prime minister, who until recently was a civil servant in the Ministry of Justice, was elevated to the top job after squabbling politicians failed to find a figurehead acceptable to all. In recent days, French President Emmanuel Macron was said to be considering an unknown mutual insurance manager to serve as prime minister. Kui?
Experts are coming to see you now
When politicians get their act together, a little technocratic hiccup might not be such a bad thing. But the whole point of politics is making decisions. In practice, that means someone balancing expert advice with electoral realities. As former European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker said, politicians around the world know what needs to be done but don’t know how to get re-elected after doing it. Democracies stay alive by weeding out existing ones, leaving room for new blood who might listen to different types of experts. Technocrats will always have a place in a well-functioning polity, but it should be behind the scenes.
To stay up to date with Europe’s biggest news, sign up european coffeeour weekly subscriber-only newsletter.
© 2024, The Economist Newspapers Limited. From The Economist, published with permission. Original content can be found at www.economist.com
