MEPs are expected to give the European Commission President, Mr Jacques Santer, a rough reception tonight when a debate opens which could lead to the sacking of the whole EU executive in Brussels later this week.
However, there are doubts if supporters of this action will be able to command the two-thirds majority necessary in the European Parliament to take the unprecedented step of dismissing all the European commissioners.
The censure motion was sparked last month when the parliament, flexing its muscles ahead of next June's European elections, refused to clear the EU's 1996 accounts, saying it was unhappy at lax financial management and cronyism within the Commission.
Such claims have been strengthened by the more recent release of documents by a Commission "whistleblower", Mr Paul van Buitenen, whose suspension has angered MEPs. Over the past few months the executive has faced a string of damaging fraud and mismanagement allegations, but Mr Santer, who has admitted failures in the past, says the Commission has dealt with them, most recently by making its anti-fraud unit independent. He has annoyed some MEPs, however, by insisting that the Commission will not resign if the vote against it is any less than the required two-thirds majority.
A desperate game of bluff and counter-bluff is being played out in the European Parliament here ahead of Thursday's motion of no-confidence in the European Commission over the allegations of fraud and mismanagement.
Although seasoned observers of the parliament's complex machinations predict the Commission will survive, there are concerns in the Commission and the bureaux of the larger groups that the so-called "nuclear option" of sacking the whole 20-member EU executive may be triggered by accident in the escalating tactical war.
On Thursday the Socialist leader, Ms Pauline Green, threatened that her group, which ostensibly backs the Commission, would switch its votes to back the no-confidence motion if it appeared that a lesser, but illegal, attempt to target two commissioners appeared likely to succeed.
The latter move, proposed by the Liberal group leader and Irish MEP, Mr Pat Cox, singled out the French Commissioner, Ms Edith Cresson, and the Spanish, Mr Manuel Marin, over claims of cronyism and favouritism in awarding contracts in the former case, and failure to tighten anti-fraud procedures in the latter. Mr Cox had sought to provide MEPs with an alternative to the "all-or-nothing" rule set down by the treaty. The dispute has become deeply politicised, with a Socialist spokesman accusing conservative MEPs of specifically targeting Socialist commissioners.
Last night the Dublin Fianna Fail MEP, Mr Niall Andrews, called for an amendment to the treaty to allow a vote by a majority of all MEPs to sack individual commissioners.
The increasing tension in the Commission was evidenced last week when Mr Santer accused journalists of being involved in a conspiracy to target him personally over ostensible links with an offshore company established in Ireland. Off-Shore Ecologies Ltd, now delisted, had been established to provide consultancy work in decommissioning oil rigs.
Last night the Socialist leader, Ms Green, set three conditions as the price of saving the Commission: An independent review of monitoring and eradicating of financial abuses; a new code of conduct on the relationship between Commissioners, their staff and Commission civil servants; and a new role for the parliament alongside the Commission to reform management structures.
