Happy New Year! The holidays are a distant memory. The Commissioner hearings have been the dominant event so far of the New Year.  The first casualty has been Mrs Juleva who seems to have been the cause of her own demise. Lesson one: never be defensive in a hearing with MEPs in particular if you are at fault. The hearings themselves have been an interesting observation in human psychology. Some candidates have gone for the safe option – say as little as possible, make no commitments. For example, in Oli Rehn’s hearing, where he chose to play safe, the most memorable moment was when he actually was himself, speaking about his father starting his own business. Lesson two: always be yourself. The key criticism of these hearings has been that candidates have been too scripted and therefor have failed to be clear about their own vision for their portfolio. It has led many people to ask what is the value of the process? What do we learn from this experience? For some candidates who are more technocrats than politicians, the experience has shown that their strengths are not in facing political scrutiny yet this is what they will have to face if they are to work well with the Parliament.  Those candidates who have had past experience in national politics, such as Almunia, Barnier and Geeghan Quinn, illustrated how comfortable they were facing elected representatives. Barnier was comfortable quipping back to the  UKIP MEP who said he represented the City of London by saying that he thought he was there to represent his constituents! Now the hearings are over, the committees have drafted their letters on the whole the process has gone quite smoothly. For the first time all the hearings have been properly and effectively webstreamed. Yet has there been a wider public debate on the hearings outwith the Brussels bubble? Not in the way MEPs would have liked. We need to learn that public debate and scrutiny of the process brings legitimacy to the hearings which is in both Parliaments and the Commission best interests.