The college directs the commission's civil service, sets the policy agenda and determines the legislative proposals it produces.

[9][10] Von der Leyen assumed office on 1 December 2019, following the approval of her nominated College of Commissioners by the European Parliament.

[14] Hallstein knew the proposals would be contentious, and took personal charge of drafting them, over-riding the Agriculture Commissioner.

He aimed to demonstrate how he thought the Community ought to be run, in the hopes of generating a wave of pro-Europeanism big enough to get past the objections of member states.

France eventually withdrew its representative from the council, triggering the notorious "empty chair crisis".

Although he was a little-known (outside France) finance minister and former MEP, he breathed life and hope into the EC and into the dispirited Brussels Commission.

Before he came to power, the Commission president still was a position of first among equals; when he left office, he was the undisputed icon and leader of the Community.

When President Romano Prodi took office with the new powers of the Treaty of Amsterdam, he was dubbed by the press as Europe's first Prime Minister.

This became evident when numerous candidates were put forward in 2004, and a centre-right vote won out over left-wing groups, France and Germany.

However, in exchange for approval, Parliament forced some concessions from Barroso in terms of Parliamentary representation at Commission and international meetings.

[32] On 7 September 2010, Barroso gave the first US-style State of the Union address to Parliament, which focused primarily on the EU's economic recovery and human rights.

The Parliament then votes on the commission as a whole; if approved, the European Council, acting by a qualified majority, appoints the president and their team to office.

[34] Qualified majority in the council has led to more candidates being fielded while there has been greater politicisation due to the involvement of Parliament and the change of policy direction in the EU from the creation of the single market to reform of it.

During the appointment of Santer, discussions were kept in camera ("private" from Latin "in chamber"), with the media relying on insider leaks.

[40] This was sharply criticised by MEPs such as the ALDE group leader Graham Watson who described the procedure as a "Justus Lipsius carpet market" producing only the "lowest common denominator"; while Green-EFA co-leader Daniel Cohn-Bendit asked Barroso after his first speech "If you are the best candidate, why were you not the first?

[citation needed] Further criteria seen to be influencing the choice of the Council include: which area of Europe the candidate comes from, favoured as Southern Europe in 2004; the candidate's political influence, credible yet not overpowering members; language, proficiency in French considered necessary by France; and degree of integration, their state being a member of both the eurozone and the Schengen Agreement.

that there is a rolling agreement along these lines,[citation needed] that a president from a large state is followed by a president from a small state, and one from the political left will be followed by one from the political right: Roy Jenkins (British socialist) was followed by Gaston Thorn (Luxembourgish liberal), Jacques Delors (French socialist), Jacques Santer (Luxembourgish Christian democrat), Romano Prodi (Italian left-wing Christian democrat) and José Manuel Barroso (Portuguese Christian democrat).

Delors was chosen following a Franco-British disagreement over Claude Cheysson, Santer was a compromise after Britain vetoed Jean-Luc Dehaene, and Prodi was backed by a coalition of thirteen states against the Franco-German preference for Guy Verhofstadt.

[50] This was partly put into practice in 2004 when the European Council selected a candidate from the political party which secured a plurality of votes in that year's election.

[54][55] The European Liberal Democrat and Reform Party indicated, in its October 2007 congress, its intention to forward a candidate for the post as part of a common campaign but failed to do so.

The Spitzenkandidat of the largest party (or the one able to secure the support of a majority coalition) would then have a mandate to assume the Commission Presidency.

This process was first run in 2014, and its legitimacy was contested by some of the members of the European Council (with the UK and Hungarian Prime Ministers voting against the nomination of the EPP's Spitzenkandidat Jean Claude Juncker (see below)).

[59] This alignment has led to a closer relationship between the elections and the president themself with the above-mentioned proposals for political parties running with candidates.

The president of the European Commission is the most powerful position in the European Union,[61] controlling the Commission which collectively has the right of initiative on Union legislation (only on matters delegated to it by member states for collective action, as determined by the treaties) and is responsible for ensuring its enforcement.

[59] The work of the commission as a body is based on the principle of cabinet collective responsibility; however, in their powers they act as more than a first among equals.

The membership is now so large the president is increasingly unable to garner the support of all the states, even though the job is supposed to try to keep everyone happy.

[65] For the European Civil Service the president has a very high status, due to their immense authority and symbolism within the body.

[68] The MEP and author of several EU text books Richard Corbett has suggested that, instead of every EU institution having a "president", it would have been clearer if they had been named differently, with a "Speaker" of the Parliament, a "Governor" of the Central Bank, a "Chairman" of the (ordinary) Council of Ministers, a "president" of the European Council, and a "Prime Commissioner".

Despite the presidential style, the president has also lost ground to the larger member states as countries such as France, Italy, the UK and Germany sought to sideline its role.

Although there are concerns that this competition with the European Council president would lead to increased infighting,[72] there are provisions for combining the two offices.