IT would be safe to say the European Parliament hearings of the EU commissioners-designate have not generated many headlines this side of the North Sea, or indeed anywhere outside the EU Brussels bubble, but that does not mean they are not an important and useful process.

Each EU member state nominates a commissioner, the EU Commission President having agreed to roughly reflect the outcome of the elections to the European Parliament. The incumbent Ursula von den Leyen was confirmed earlier this summer as returning president so she worked out which of the other 26 people would get which portfolio.

The relevant committees of the European Parliament then vet each commissioner-designate and then approve, or not, all 26 in a single vote.

The hearings are high drama – within the walls of the European Parliament at least – but they are also revealing. What are the commissioner’s priorities? What does he or she get excited about? What do they want to achieve in the next five years?

The hearing is also preceded by an exchange of letters in which the committee members pose questions to the prospective commissioner, then their response forms the basis of the three-hour grilling.

I remember participating in the hearings myself, they’re usually quite civilised affairs. One year the Irish commissioner-designate Phil Hogan had been tapped for the agriculture portfolio, so was before the agriculture committee. I had already been in touch that he had my support as he was a credible candidate and having an Irishman in charge of EU agriculture suited me just fine.

So when it came to my question as well as a bit on his view on Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) reform, I was sure to have a bit of craic on who has the best whisky. We agreed to disagree!

He went on to be a good commissioner and many of his reforms to the CAP are still benefitting EU farmers to this day.

So the hearings over the last few weeks generated much copy which is all on the public record and the commissioners-designate will be held to account for their comments in due course.

READ MORE: Neal Ascherson: Scotland needs to take an 'as if' approach

The political groups of the European Parliament have agreed to back all of them, in a surprise to me, I have to say, usually there is at least one sacrificial lamb who doesn’t make it but this year they’ve all been approved.

Some controversy was, however, attached to Teresa Ribera, the Spanish commissioner, tapped for the mega Climate, Economic Transformation and Competition portfolio.

She is from the Socialist and Democrat political family and was attacked by the right-wing EPP MEPs on her suitability for the job (a huge remit combining roles that had previously been covered by three people) as well as on her record as a Spanish government minister.

She holds the environment brief in Madrid so was quizzed on the recent tragedies in Valencia after flash floods claimed a number of lives.

One particularly silly MEP from the far-right Patriots’ Group tried to link the EU’s nature restoration law to the floods but she batted him away with some panache.

Another commissioner who had a rougher time than most was Italian nominee Raffaele Fitto, nominated for the powerful Regional Development portfolio, overseeing some €400 billion in funding to the EU’s regions, a subject guaranteed to get the MEPs motivated.

Being the Italian nominee, he is a bit right-wing for the tastes of some MEPs, and looks more to the ECR Group than the mainstream.

His Brothers of Italy Party also vocally opposed the nomination of von der Leyen as president in the first place which presumably made for an interesting first meeting with her. But, in a competent performance, he won over most MEPs and was broadly viewed as one of the winners of the hearings.

Another key portfolio for Scotland is the Enlargement brief because finally, EU enlargement is on the agenda after about 20 years in the deep freeze in the Barroso, Juncker and indeed first von der Leyen commissions.

READ MORE: Gerry Hassan: The battle for our future

In a big win for Ljubljana, Marta Kos the Slovenian nominee has been tapped for the role, and gave a particularly impressive performance in her hearing.

She will be heading up discussions with Ukraine, the western Balkan countries and enlargement in general so will be a key figure going forward.

One nice touch was when she spoke Ukrainian in the hearing, though Ukrainian not being an official language of the EU there were no interpreters on hand to actually interpret what she said, but the thought was there and presumably it went down well in Kyiv.

An agreement was reached across the political groups with the EPP, Socialists and Democrats and Renew Europe Groups cobbling together a majority, so the Commission will start work formally on December 1, just in time to head off for Christmas.

With a new Trump presidency, there is a lot of soul-searching under way in Brussels.

The EU’s “strategic autonomy” in defence, energy and everything else is top of the agenda.

There’s a risk the EU turns in on itself as domestic preoccupations on the economy distract attention from events elsewhere, but I’d argue this all makes action by the EU all the more important.

Much as we’re outside the EU, it is of crucial relevance to us too. Decisions made in Brussels will hit us whether we’re part of them or not and with an unpredictable White House, the UK could find itself isolated and between two big beasts without any real allies.