That was the week that was

Where should I begin? Last Monday, as soon as I arrived in Strasbourg, I was told by some of my closest friends in the Socialist Group that maybe we would be in for one of the most exciting weeks in the history of the European Parliament.

A majority of Liberals had decided to stick with the Left in voting against the Barroso Commission. The main reservations were on commissioners designate Kroes, Udre, Boel and, obviously, Buttiglione. But that was a known fact and José Manuel Durao Barroso and the European Popular Party were banking on the assumption that at least 30 members of the Socialist Group would be endorsing the group put forward by the former Portuguese Prime Minister. All eyes were on the delegations from member states where there is a Social-Democrat government in office, mainly Germany, the United Kingdom, Sweden and Hungary.

On Tuesday we had what was described by many of my senior colleagues as a historic meeting of the Socialist Group. Margot Wallström, Joaquim Almunia, Laszlo Kovacs, Vladimir Spidla and Günter Verheugen, who are all members of Socialist parties, attended the meeting. Many thought they were there to convince us to vote in favour of the Commission of which they form part. Instead they explained their last minute efforts to save the day and made it clear that they would understand the group's position. This was followed by impassionate statements by all delegations saying they would be voting unitedly against the Barroso proposal. The Socialist Group managed to get unanimity on one of the thorniest issues ever.

"We should send a card to Barroso thanking him for making us as united as ever," cracked a Dutch friend of mine.

The message was loud and clear and Mr Barroso got it. On Wednesday morning he came to Parliament to ask for more time. He seemed to be much more open to dialogue than 24 hours before when he had come across in a very arrogant manner in the style "I know best what is good for you".

Mr Barroso will not put forward a new proposal. Some commissioners, possibly Neelie Kroes, might be ditched but Rocco Buttiglione could still form part of his team. Nevertheless, it is obvious that he will not be allocated the same portfolio. Many see this as the main stumbling block while others would still be adamant against the Italian professor following his statements.

That brings me to another point: The stand taken last week by the majority of members of the European Parliament cannot be described as some anti-Christian crusade, as some tried to depict it. Many of the members of both the present and proposed Commissions are active Roman Catholics and did not find any problem with their endorsement. Both Romano Prodi and Mr Barroso are active Roman Catholics.

To me, the explanation is obvious. Prof. Buttiglione has every right to express his points of view on whatever subject he wants. Nevertheless, he cannot expect to be put in charge of the civil liberties portfolios where he is meant to protect the rights of homosexuals and single mothers which he so harshly criticised.

Let me give you another example. Imagine that in the years to come we might have a Muslim commissioner coming from one of the present or future member states. Imagine if this commissioner states his conviction that women should wear headscarves all the time and that their role in society should be somewhat more limited. He would have every right to express his point of view but I do not think that one could concur with giving him the gender equality portfolio.

The final lesson from last week is that not even the largest group in the European Parliament can think of getting its way all the time. A far cry from what was being said some time ago.

Mr Muscat is a Labour member of the European Parliament.

www.josephmuscat.com