Maire GEOGHEGAN-QUINN: Research and Innovation Commissioner

Scofflaw

José Manuel Barroso, President of the European Commission, today announced the portfolios responsibilities for the next Commission. The President has held detailed consultations with all the Commissioners-designate in order to assign the right jobs to the right people. The President believes that this team can deliver the agenda for change he set out in the political guidelines he presented in September, following his nomination by all 27 Member States and before his approval as President of the next Commission by the European Parliament.

Responsibilities of the Commissioners-designate

- Joaqu ín ALMUNIA: Competition. Vice-President of the Commission.

- László ANDOR: Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion.

- Baroness Catherine ASHTON: High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security and Vice-President of the Commission.

- Michel BARNIER: Internal Market and Services.

- Dacian CIOLOS: Agriculture and Rural Development.

- John DALLI: Health and Consumer Policy.

- Maria DAMANAKI: Maritime Affairs and Fisheries.

- Karel DE GUCHT: Trade.

- Š tefan FÜLE: Enlargement and European Neighbourhood Policy. *

- Johannes HAHN: Regional Policy.

- Connie HEDEGAARD: Climate Action.

- Maire GEOGHEGAN-QUINN: Research and Innovation.

- Rumiana JELEVA: International Cooperation, Humanitarian Aid and Crisis Response. *

- Siim KALLAS: Transport. Vice-President of the Commission.

- Neelie KROES: Digital Agenda. Vice-President of the Commission.

- Janusz LEWANDOWSKI: Budget and Financial Programming.

- Cecilia MALMSTRÖM: Home Affairs.

- Günter OETTINGER: Energy.

- Andris PIEBALGS: Development.*

- Janez POTO Č NIK: Environment.

- Viviane REDING: Justice, Fundamental Rights and Citizenship. Vice-President of the Commission.

- Olli REHN: Economic and Monetary Affairs.

- Maro š Š EF Č OVI Č : Vice-President of the Commission for Inter-Institutional Relations and Administration.

- Algirdas Š EMETA: Taxation and Customs Union, Audit and Anti-Fraud.

- Antonio TAJANI: Industry and Entrepreneurship. Vice-President of the Commission.

- Androulla VASSILIOU: Education, Culture, Multilingualism and Youth.

Not a bad portfolio for Ireland, I think.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Nigel Farage

Would it be cosidered one of the marquee positions?

Martin 2

As you say, not a bad portfolio for Ireland but is MGQ the best person for this portfolio or was she simply the best of the nominated commissioners? I had a brief look through her Wikipedia profile and I didn't see any evidence of involvement in R&D or innovation. Maybe this highlights a problem in the method by which portfolios are allocated. Just a suggestion but maybe a portfolio should be allocated to a country and the country finds a suitable candidate. I work in the research and innovation sector and whilst I'm glad Ireland has this portfolio I'm going to withhold my joy until I know a little more about MGQ.

And in case anyone says it's not "our commissioner", yes I know.

View

Scofflaw wrote: »

Not a bad portfolio for Ireland, I think.

cordially,
Scofflaw

You mean she can bring Ireland's succesful track record in Research and Innovation to EU level? :eek:

We have one of the lowest (if not actually the lowest) patent rate per thousand people in the EU. Let's face it, if it is not construction related the Irish Government and public has has had scant interest in it...

Scofflaw

Martin 2 wrote: »

As you say, not a bad portfolio for Ireland but is MGQ the best person for this portfolio or was she simply the best of the nominated commissioners? I had a brief look through her Wikipedia profile and I didn't see any evidence of involvement in R&D or innovation. Maybe this highlights a problem in the method by which portfolios are allocated. Just a suggestion but maybe a portfolio should be allocated to a country and the country finds a suitable candidate. I work in the research and innovation sector and whilst I'm glad Ireland has this portfolio I'm going to withhold my joy until I know a little more about MGQ.

And in case anyone says it's not "our commissioner", yes I know.

I know what you mean. Quite a few of the others seem to be good matches for their posts - Hedegaard (Climate Action), for example, is the Danish Climate and Energy Minister, Kroes (Digital Agenda) has been involved mostly in transport but also communications, Piebalgs (Development) has been a Foreign Minister...but there are also those that don't.

cordially,
Scofflaw

baalthor

Maire Geoghegan Quinn, it's a bit like George Hamilton turning up on "I'm a Celebrity .." wow I thought he was dead:D

The hardest part must be thinking up the 27 different positions. Any further enlargement and they'll start to sound like patron saints rather than cabinet ministers.

bleg

Makes no sense to me to be honest. First of all she shouldn't have been nominated. Absolutely stupid call showing how selfish Brian Cowen and his cronies really are. This should have been a decision for all of Ireland, not for FF. She was also only picked due to a request for more women on the commission. Well I'm sorry Mr. Barosso but women should get more seats round the table when they deserve it, not when you get sick of looking at leather faced old men.

Now Cowen comes back to the country and says "Look! we got the innovation commissioner, just shows how innovative we are." Meanwhile the idiots over here believe him and think all is rosy despite any clear and definitive government (or opposition) policy on increasing R&D in this country.

Sure, aren't we great.

paddyland

I didn't get any say in that appointment. I would not vote for any member of Fianna Fáil the Bertie Party to represent me in Europe. I abhor everything they stand for.

I will respect a democratic vote but what was democratic about this?

By the by, Maire Geoghegan Quinn was another shafted by Bertie on his all-stampeding rise to the top, not that she might have been much better, but she could hardly have been worse.

View

paddyland wrote: »

I will respect a democratic vote but what was democratic about this?

This is a nomination for a position. When the European Parliament finishes their cross-examination of the nominees, the MEPs then take a democratic vote on whether the nominees can be formally appointed to office. Only when this vote is succesful are the nominees formally appointed to office by the European Council to be Commissioners.

So the democratic vote that you can respect should be in a couple of weeks...

PS To the best of my knowledge, a politican only formally becomes a Minister here when the President gives them their Seal of Office (That may be overstating the significance of the President's role though).

meglome

paddyland wrote: »

I didn't get any say in that appointment. I would not vote for any member of Fianna Fáil the Bertie Party to represent me in Europe. I abhor everything they stand for.

I will respect a democratic vote but what was democratic about this?

By the by, Maire Geoghegan Quinn was another shafted by Bertie on his all-stampeding rise to the top, not that she might have been much better, but she could hardly have been worse.

This will help http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representative_democracy

Tipp Man

What do people know about this guy: Dacian CIOLOS: Agriculture and Rural Development

A very big portfolio for Romania

imme

what do the asterisks signify after some of the portfolios?

ChocolateSauce

Scofflaw wrote: »

Not a bad portfolio for Ireland, I think.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Considering you're not knocking her, it kind of throws me off balance. The journalist I respect the most, Fintan O'Toole, recently published a Times article (http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2009/1117/1224258981922.html) which gave me the distinct and clear impression that she was among the lowest form of scum FF has to offer- a person who ran her own private justice system which was based on pardoning people's crimes in exchange for favours via local TD's and councillors. She was found by the high court to have abused her power.

In my opinion, anyone who did this should be in jail, although sadly she wasn't actually breaking any laws. She certainly doesn't deserve a promotion, and I think her appointment is shambolic and is an insidious rot within the EU. How can the EU hope to be credible when it has a corrupt woman like her walking around with impunity?

What's your take on this?

Furious-Dave

Your link is coming up "Not Found" Choc.
I agree. John O'Donoghue IMO should also be in prison. But what can you do, except take over the country...take over indeed :cool:

Tricity Bendix

Plus side: There's jobs to be had with this portfolio. Ireland could see more funded research positions, which should do us good in the short run and the long run.

Down side: We'll have no extra sway when it comes to the issues that impact us most (internal market, agriculture, budget etc)

View

imme wrote: »

what do the asterisks signify after some of the portfolios?

They mean will work in close cooperation with the High Representative for Foreign Affairs. They asterisked portfolios are externally focused ones so that makes sense.

View

Tipp Man wrote: »

What do people know about this guy: Dacian CIOLOS: Agriculture and Rural Development

A very big portfolio for Romania

CVs for the Commission nominees should be up on the Commission site on a day or so. You can look at the photos in the meantime

Link is http://ec.europa.eu/commission_designate_2009-2014/index_en.htm

In the meantime, you're stuck with Wikipedia which claims he is a member of the (Eurosceptic) Bruges group which would seem a bit odd. It is hard to see how he could take the Commissioner's oath if that is the case.

View

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

She certainly doesn't deserve a promotion, and I think her appointment is shambolic and is an insidious rot within the EU. How can the EU hope to be credible when it has a corrupt woman like her walking around with impunity?

First she is a nominee, she has not been appointed. Second, the EU didn't nominate her, that was our Government that did. Third, Barroso isn't going to come out and say "Will you ever send us somone better" as they would cause an unholy row...

P. Breathnach

Tricity Bendix wrote: »

Plus side: There's jobs to be had with this portfolio. Ireland could see more funded research positions, which should do us good in the short run and the long run.

Down side: We'll have no extra sway when it comes to the issues that impact us most (internal market, agriculture, budget etc)

She is to be an EU Commissioner, not an Irish Commissioner. Similarly, all the other commissioners are there to work for the benefit of all, not for their nominating states. Your points would be valid only if all commissioners ignored their oaths.

P. Breathnach

View wrote: »

First she is a nominee, she has not been appointed. Second, the EU didn't nominate her, that was our Government that did. Third, Barroso isn't going to come out and say "Will you ever send us somone better" as they would cause an unholy row...

The key phrase might be that he wouldn't "come out and say...". It is imaginable that he might say such a thing in private before a nomination is announced, although I suspect that it would be more diplomatically phrased: "I cannot imagine proposing an interesting portfolio for this candidate -- perhaps co-ordination of dog-licensing policy might suit his or her talents.".

Scofflaw

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

Considering you're not knocking her, it kind of throws me off balance. The journalist I respect the most, Fintan O'Toole, recently published a Times article (http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2009/1117/1224258981922.html) which gave me the distinct and clear impression that she was among the lowest form of scum FF has to offer- a person who ran her own private justice system which was based on pardoning people's crimes in exchange for favours via local TD's and councillors. She was found by the high court to have abused her power.

In my opinion, anyone who did this should be in jail, although sadly she wasn't actually breaking any laws. She certainly doesn't deserve a promotion, and I think her appointment is shambolic and is an insidious rot within the EU. How can the EU hope to be credible when it has a corrupt woman like her walking around with impunity?

What's your take on this?

I don't have a very strong take on her competence, which is what I would mostly be concerned with - as far as I know she's done a competent job at the Court of Auditors.

As to the 'personal justice' issue - my view there would be that that was reflective of the lack of constraints in the Irish system, and that I strongly doubt she'll have any such opportunities in the Commission. A good enough system should be able to cope with the appointment of the most corrupt person possible, rather than relying, as ours apparently does, on the personal integrity of the individual. That's damning with faint praise, obviously, since it suggests I don't think highly of her personal integrity - but there are few Irish politicians whose personal integrity I believe would stand up to a handful of votes and a well-placed pint.

However, the fact of the appointment itself speaks volumes about Fianna Fáil - if one needed those volumes spoken, that is. She's unlikely to shine, I think, but she will probably nevertheless be a useful asset, because despite the oath, each country does have a closer connection with its "own" Commissioner than with the others, and there's no denying that if we want to get out of the hole we're in, innovation is what we'll need, even if it doesn't seem as important to us as agriculture or internal markets.

cordially,
Scofflaw

ChocolateSauce

I think the best point you made was that it reflects more on FF than on her. I guess I'm being dumb to hope that people in power don't abuse it because they don't want to rather than because they can't.

Scofflaw

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

I think the best point you made was that it reflects more on FF than on her. I guess I'm being dumb to hope that people in power don't abuse it because they don't want to rather than because they can't.

I think one can hope for both - but one can only really plan for the latter. The whole existence of checks and balances in democratic systems - indeed, democracy itself - is predicated on making sure people can't abuse power even if they want to.

cordially,
Scofflaw

kangaroo

If people are interested in the issue of gender quotas (e.g. in connection with the encouragement President Barroso appeared to give to nominate a female candidate and that that is what the government did i.e. MGQ was at an advantage because of her gender), there is a thread on this at: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055731221 .

The issue with regard to MGQ has been brought up in recent posts on that thread.

Tricity Bendix

P. Breathnach wrote: »

She is to be an EU Commissioner, not an Irish Commissioner. Similarly, all the other commissioners are there to work for the benefit of all, not for their nominating states. Your points would be valid only if all commissioners ignored their oaths.

You ignore the "soft power" that comes with being a commissioner. We saw how important that was in Lisbon 1.

Martin 2

Of course MGQ can't give preferential treatment to Ireland or any other EU member nor would the Irish government want her to abuse her position (at least I hope not). However, if she achieves any increase in overall EU R&D funding then it could be disproportionately beneficial to Ireland at the moment because of our severe budgetary constraints.
MGQ wouldn't be my first choice for this role but her selection is a fait accompli and it is definitely in this country's interest to ensure that MGQ is well briefed on research and innovation and that she achieves something in her new position.

Macha

kangaroo wrote: »

The issue with regard to MGQ has been brought up in recent posts on that thread.

There is very little evidence that MGQ was appointed because of her gender. Cowen certainly referenced it but it was just a fortunate opportunity for him to hide that he wasn't willing to appoint anyone other than a member of the FF inner circle.

Tricity Bendix

taconnol wrote: »

There is very little evidence that MGQ was appointed because of her gender. Cowen certainly referenced it but it was just a fortunate opportunity for him to hide that he wasn't willing to appoint anyone other than a member of the FF inner circle.

MGQ is in the inner circle?

Het-Field

Tricity Bendix wrote: »

MGQ is in the inner circle?

FF is an inner circle in itself.

The fact that Pat Cox busted a gut for Lisbon II was irrelevant. Plus, a cowardly, and unnamed FF Minister rejected any chance of Jon Bruton getting the job as he was "not in the right camp".

Quinn's affiliation is sufficient qualification. In fact if I joined FF in October, I would have been more likely to get the job then Cox or Bruton.

kangaroo

taconnol wrote: »

There is very little evidence that MGQ was appointed because of her gender. Cowen certainly referenced it but it was just a fortunate opportunity for him to hide that he wasn't willing to appoint anyone other than a member of the FF inner circle.

The fact that both Brian Cowen and Barruso referenced it is interesting in itself.

They didn't mention calls for balance with regard to people with/without disabilities, people of different sexual orientations, people from particular racial groups (I know there is somebody from each country but race isn't the same), etc. Some people might say they should and that could be discussed also.

What was said could be said to send a signal that gender discrimination (some might say "positive discrimination") is acceptable. I think it's an interesting issue and worthy of a discussion and thought there might be other people who followed what was said about the appointment of the Irish commissioner (before and after the appointment) who might like to know about the thread http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055731221 (although the thread is quite long at this stage, I think it is interesting). It can still be discussed in this thread of course.

Macha

kangaroo wrote: »

The fact that both Brian Cowen and Barruso referenced it is interesting in itself.

I know you have an axe to grind about gender quotas in politics, kangaroo. But my opinion remains the same that MGQ's gender really had nothing to do with it.

Yes, Barroso did mention it. And yes Cowen did mention it. But from what I know of Cowen, he was just happy to have a chance to pay lip-service to Barroso . Cowen would have gone for the FFer no matter the gender. FFers know that they will almost certainly be out of power by 2012 or earlier and having a FFer as the Irish Commissioner until 2014 is a no-brainer for Cowen.

evercloserunion

The current commission are going to see Europe through its recovery. It means that in 2014 FF will be able to say they helped pull Europe out of the worst economic crisis in decades.

kangaroo

taconnol wrote: »

I know you have an axe to grind about gender quotas in politics, kangaroo..

You say you disagree with them also.

taconnol wrote: »

But my opinion remains the same that MGQ's gender really had nothing to do with it.

Yes, Barroso did mention it. And yes Cowen did mention it. But from what I know of Cowen, he was just happy to have a chance to pay lip-service to Barroso . Cowen would have gone for the FFer no matter the gender.

I don't know whether it was "lip-service" or not; MGQ is not the only possible person who could do the job.

Also I'm not sure if I'd use the phrase "lip-service" to describe something one disagrees with e.g. if somebody said, there needs more "white" people on a panel, would one say it was "lip service" if our Taoiseach echoed those words when dealing with the media and said X partly got the job because they were white (or whatever). This is relevant even if her gender wasn't a factor in this particular case for Cowen, to repeat my point (as you repeated yours), I do think it is significant when people in positions of authority (how much higher can one go?) give these reasons. If people don't raise the issue, it could become the norm to use gender as a means of selecting people for posts.

Macha

kangaroo wrote: »

You say you disagree with them also.

Yes I do. But I'm not going to talk the issue to death.

kangaroo wrote: »

I don't know whether it was "lip-service" or not; MGQ is not the only possible person who could do the job.

Politics is more complicated that who "could" do the job.

kangaroo wrote: »

I do think it is significant when people in positions of authority (how much higher can one go?) give these reasons. If people don't raise the issue, it could become the norm to use gender as a means of selecting people for posts.

Again, you have yet to prove that in this case gender was used as a means of selecting the person for the post. That's my whole point.

kangaroo

taconnol wrote: »

kangaroo wrote:

You say you disagree with them also.

Yes I do. But I'm not going to talk the issue to death.

No one is forcing you to reply to my posts.

taconnol wrote: »

kangaroo wrote:

I do think it is significant when people in positions of authority (how much higher can one go?) give these reasons. If people don't raise the issue, it could become the norm to use gender as a means of selecting people for posts.

Again, you have yet to prove that in this case gender was used as a means of selecting the person for the post. That's my whole point.

But part of my point was whether or not it was actually in this case, the signal was given by both our Taoiseach and the head of the European Commission that it was an acceptable factor to use in selecting a person.

Scofflaw

taconnol wrote: »

I know you have an axe to grind about gender quotas in politics, kangaroo. But my opinion remains the same that MGQ's gender really had nothing to do with it.

Yes, Barroso did mention it. And yes Cowen did mention it. But from what I know of Cowen, he was just happy to have a chance to pay lip-service to Barroso . Cowen would have gone for the FFer no matter the gender. FFers know that they will almost certainly be out of power by 2012 or earlier and having a FFer as the Irish Commissioner until 2014 is a no-brainer for Cowen.

I'm pretty certain that if you go through the list of possibilities, exclude everyone who's not FF, and exclude everyone whose absence would hurt Fianna Fáil's Dáil arithmetic, you wind up with Geoghegan-Quinn.

cordially,
Scofflaw

rumour

Scofflaw wrote: »

Not a bad portfolio for Ireland, I think.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Do you have any information as to what the portfolio incorporates and the budget in comparison to the other portfolio's?