iredo (GUE/NGL ).
    Mr President, between July and November, Mr Durão Barroso has followed a tortuous route strewn with obstacles such as the October crisis, which meant that he had to change the membership of the Commission, thereby demonstrating that pride comes before a fall.
There remains a major bias towards neoliberal capitalism in this Commission, firstly in view of some of its Members’ known links with large European business groups, and particularly in view of the proposals that they intend to put forward, which will mean that serious issues such as social and economic problems, unemployment, massive social and territorial inequality, poverty and social exclusion will still not be addressed.
Accordingly, our position is clear and remains as it was in July. We shall vote against – not because we know Mr Durão Barroso and his disastrous policies in Portugal, but because we are fighting for fresh policies to establish jobs with rights, high-quality public services and major commitments towards peace, by which we mean peace throughout the world, including Iraq. 
Sinnott (IND/DEM ).
    Mr President, there has been much talk these last few weeks about unfit Commissioners, so much, in fact, that the public could almost believe that it was the real issue. Not so. Sifting through the detritus of the last few weeks, it is clear to me that this crisis with the Commission was about power. Who controls our lawmakers, the nations or Parliament?
If you had had the courage to put the nations' Commission before us in October, you would have had my vote. As it is, be in no doubt that Parliament holds that power now. The nations' loss is this Parliament's gain. We might at first use it sparingly, but imagine a time when we do not. What would then prevent the two largest groupings in the European Parliament from using their combined majority to demand Commissioners with political beliefs more similar to their own? Or let us take it a step further. What would stop them from making a list of 25 names and informin