Testing time for Barroso as he shows his mettle in parliament

THE events of the last few weeks have firmly established that commission president designate Jose Manuel Barroso is a gambler.

His first game of brinkmanship comes to a conclusion in the European Parliament in Strasbourg today and could well prove to be his last.

His allocation of portfolios showed he was not afraid of taking risks.

Making leading businesswoman Nellie Kreus Commissioner for Competition meant he was giving the brief to someone who knew the business from the inside. However, the portfolio is more complex than simply turning a poacher into a gamekeeper. He has been forced to acknowledge this by promising she will have nothing to do with any business with which she previously had links.

This, however, covers such a wide number of eminent European companies, the commissioner could well spend much of her time on the sidelines, kicking her heels.

He has tacitly acknowledged also that fears for the political integrity of his Commissioner for Justice could be well-founded. He has established a watchdog body inside his commission to discriminate-proof their actions. Mr Barroso's actions also point to another aspect of his personality control. Stories abound of his inclination to be something of a control-freak. His response to the parliament's fears about two of his commissioners has been to assume control and responsibility himself.

He has obviously decided to take on the parliament, and many will not blame him for that. The body of MEPs frequently shows itself to be very poor in representing those who have elected it, preferring often to be swayed by the myriads of lobbyists that cajole and persuade or by their national governments. In the case of the commissioners, it has shown itself to be less than fully professional, too. Certainly the Civil Liberties Committee that had the job of questioning Justice Commissioner-designate Rocco Buttiglione knew what buttons to push.

But they failed to do their background work thoroughly and bring to the forefront the issues surrounding Mr Buttiglione's appointment that democrats should be deeply concerned about.

The philosopher-politician has said that he is against any kind of discrimination and fully subscribes to the Charter of Fundamental Rights and to the Constitution of the Union.

He should have been asked then if he believed his role gave him the right to introduce his moral beliefs into his political programme. Because there is sufficient evidence from his behaviour as a minister in the Berlusconi government in Italy to suggest that he does. When Turkey looked like making adultery a crime, there was uproar in the EU and threats that they would not be fit to join.

In a more questionable instance when an Islamic fundamentalist party in Algeria won an election a decade ago the army moved in to apparently protect democracy with the aid of western powers.

While this may be an extreme example, the principle is the same a separation of Church and State together with the separation of democracy from undemocratic movements such as religions. Mr Buttiglione cannot be prevented from believing homosexuality is a sin and an indicator of moral disorder as he is on record as saying. But during the drawing up of the European Charter of Fundamental Rights, he submitted an amendment excluding sexual orientation as a ground for discrimination.

Mr Barroso's approach to the parliament shows he can be tough and is not afraid of standing up to the parliament. He has of course the council the member state leaders who selected him at his back.

All in all, this is a testing time for the Portuguese politician.