Image: Jennifer Jacquemart, European Commission
The commissioner-designate backed academic freedom, open science and increased investment in R&D
Politicians and commentators have praised Mariya Gabriel (pictured)—the woman nominated to become the next EU commissioner with responsibility for research, innovation and higher education—for her performance in her parliamentary hearing for the role on 30 September.
Gabriel did an “excellent” job, said both Kurt Deketelaere, secretary-general of the League of European Research Universities, and Jan Palmowski, secretary-general of the Guild of European Research-Intensive Universities. She demonstrated “impressive knowledge” of her portfolio, said Thomas Jørgensen, senior policy coordinator at the European University Association.
Adina-Ioana Vălean, chair of the European Parliament’s Committee on Industry, Research and Energy, which grilled Gabriel for three hours alongside the Committee on Culture and Education, indicated after the hearing that her committee would endorse Gabriel’s appointment. “I would say the atmosphere was overall satisfactory,” Vălean said.
One of the few critical voices was Alberto Alemanno, a professor of EU law at the HEC Paris business school, who expressed scepticism at a promise from Gabriel to “defend academic freedom with my full strength”. He flagged that the political group to which Gabriel belongs, the European People’s Party, has not ejected Fidesz, the party of Hungary’s prime minister Viktor Orbán, even though Fidesz has been widely criticised for undermining academic freedom.
In her hearing, Gabriel outlined her vision to “preserve Europe’s position as a world leader in science” if she secures the Innovation and Youth portfolio. She and her fellow commissioners-designate will face a vote of confidence from the Parliament on 23 October.
Gabriel said she would be “clearly on the side of the European Parliament” rather than the Council of the EU during negotiations on the budget of the EU’s 2021-27 R&D programme Horizon Europe. The Parliament wants a budget of €120 billion in 2018 prices instead of the €83.5bn proposed by the European Commission, while the Council is likely to push for a budget reduction.
She attempted to reassure MEPs that they would have a big part to play in the strategic planning process that will determine how the Horizon Europe budget is spent—a topic her questioners turned to repeatedly. “I would want Parliament to be fully involved on the key points of the strategic plan, as well as the missions, partnerships and international cooperation,” she said.
She also stressed that the EU needed to invest more in R&D overall, saying: “If we don’t invest, our major competitors will.”
Another subject raised by several MEPs was the low participation of some countries in the EU’s R&D programme. Gabriel said that this “fragmentation” within the bloc was “gradually being reduced”, but that a “vicious circle” of low local investment, low wages and brain drain remained a problem.
There would be “no easy fix” for this, she warned. But she said she would be in favour of new instruments for overcoming it as well as better communication of existing programmes such as the Policy Support Facility, which evaluates member states’ national R&D systems. “We need to spend more time and money if possible on technical assistance,” she said.
Synergies between Horizon Europe and other EU funding sources—another frequently raised topic—would also help increase participation, she suggested, but she said that the Commission must take time to consider how such synergies could be identified and monitored. She said she would take a “country-by-country approach” to convince member states to spend more of their regional cohesion funds on R&D.
As in her written statements provided to MEPs before the hearing, Gabriel stressed the importance of breaking down silos between parts of her portfolio that were being combined for the first time, such as R&D and education. She said the different parts formed a “consistent whole”, although she acknowledged concerns raised several times that these areas were lacking from her portfolio title.
She said that open science was “close to my heart”, adding: “Today more than ever before, we need researchers to be able to share the findings from their projects with others so that they can capitalise on other people’s research.”
At the close of the hearing, Gabriel said it had enabled her to “take the pulse” of the committees’ expectations and sensitivities, including “a number of points that keep coming back”. She praised the “atmosphere of openness and honesty” and said that she would follow through on the commitments she had made.