Parlement grijpt voorzittersverkiezing aan om hervormingen te bepleiten (en)

EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS - With a vote on the new European Parliament president just around the corner, several MEPs are already gearing up for political wheeler-dealing over what they can get from the next president in return for their support.

Although a centre-right (EPP)-socialist 2004 agreement means that a conservative candidate will almost certainly replace the outgoing socialist Josep Borrell, MEPs from other groups are going to try and make the new president work as hard as possible for each vote.

The gloves are set to come off on 14 November when the EPP formally nominates its candidate - expected to be German MEP Hans-Gert Poettering, a parliament veteran who been knocking around the assembly's corridors since 1979.

The cosy agreement between the parliament's two biggest groups - between them enough to secure Mr Poettering's presidency - means the smaller groups have to play a delicate political game in order to get what they want.

The main weapons in their armoury are abstaining from the vote or putting up alternative candidates - either of which would largely be a protest act designed to highlight what one insider called the "unfairness" of a situation where the president wins an uncontested election.

"We think Mr Poettering would like to have as many votes as possible so this does not look like done deal," said an official from a smaller political group adding it "won't look well" if swathes of MEPs abstain from the vote.

For their part, the Liberal group is hoping to win key concessions on parliamentary reform from Mr Poettering - something which will determine whether they run their own candidate.

"Assuming Mr Poettering is nominated, we will be looking for him to support our initiatives," said a Liberal insider.

The main item on their wishlist is more flexible speaking rules in the House. At the moment speaking time is rigidly allocated according to the size of the group. In practice, this means a long line of MEPs trotting out their opinion but no actual immediate floor debate giving the plenary sessions a staid, choreographed air.

The Independence and Democracy group, meanwhile, are planning similar tactics.

Jens-Peter Bonde, co-president of the group, says that high on his list of demands is scrapping the current system for allocating committee chairs and vice-presidencies to MEPs, which he says favours the big groups too much.

His group is already preparing a reform platform and intends to announce a counter candidate on 15 November.

All stitched up?

As for the vote itself which will take place on 17 or 18 January, some socialists have a very pragmatic view of the matter.

Dutch Socialist MEP Edith Mastenbroek told EUobserver that she is "in general not in favour of deals like that" adding that they "are not good for the image of the parliament."

But she noted that Liberals should not be too morally high-handed about their position, referring to the fact that they have benefitted from exactly the same power-sharing arrangement in the past.

Ms Mastenbroek recalled a meeting to discuss the deal soon after she started as an MEP in which one of the arguments for hopping into politcal bed with the EPP was that "if we don't do it, [the liberals] will."

Reform of the parliament will have to come through "principled" position-taking where other parties do not all dance to the tune of the biggest group in the parliament, she indicated.

But no mattter what grumblings from come from cynical socialists or other quarters in the assembly, as one insider noted, Berlin is likely to be unequivocally happy with the deal - Mr Poettering comes from the same party as German chancellor Angela Merkel.