Regional parliaments in the EU multilevel parliamentary system

ABSTRACT

European integration has created a multilevel political system that is dominated by executive actors. Despite the increasing competences of the European Parliament, a growing EU-awareness of national assemblies and an emerging attention of regional parliaments for EU affairs, the EU polity still lacks a sound parliamentary representation. As the EU presents itself as a representative democracy, the current set-up raises questions from the perspective of democratic legitimacy. The establishment of multilevel parliamentarianism may be part of the remedy. This introduction focuses on the position that regional parliaments take in such a European multilevel parliamentary system. The authors address three relevant questions: what roles do regional parliaments take up in terms of legislation, scrutiny and networking? To what extent are they empowered by the Lisbon Treaty? And what explains the variation in their activities? The authors develop hypotheses that are, to varying degree, addressed by the contributions in this special issue.     

Mandating – a likely scrutiny instrument for regional parliaments in EU affairs?

ABSTRACT

Scrutinising governments lies at the heart of parliamentary activities in EU affairs. This applies to national as well as to regional parliaments, most of which possess a toolbox of scrutiny instruments, including the power to mandate, allowing for the strongest form of scrutiny vis-à-vis governments. The article investigates the existence of mandating tools in the 70 regional parliaments equipped with legislative competences in Austria, Belgium, Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK, whose role in EU affairs has been strengthened by stipulations in the Lisbon Treaty. It is argued that mandating tools are, first, not widely used; second, they are more commonly applied in cases where national parliaments act as ‘policy shapers’ – enabling policy transfer – and if meso-level factors involving territorial politics create further incentives. In sum, the regional parliaments in six member states are still trying to find a place in the maturing EU multi-level parliamentary system.     

The Spanish Parliament and EU Affairs in the Post Lisbon Treaty Era: All Change?

The new provisions on national parliaments in the Lisbon Treaty were welcomed with scepticism by some scholars and with hope by others. Sometime after the new provisions came into force, their impact on the role of national parliaments in the EU can already be examined. This article looks into the effect of the implementation of the Early Warning Mechanism and the other provisions on the parliamentary scrutiny of EU affairs in Spain. It also reflects on the possible implications for the EU political system. Although the scope and actual effect of the new measures have been quite modest, the new regulations allow for a better scrutiny of EU law, a tighter control of the executive on EU affairs and closer cooperation with EU institutions.     

To have a voice in the matter: A comparative study of the Swedish and Danish European committees

This article deals with the issue of how the national parliaments might be strengthened in order to decrease the democratic deficit within the EU. It examines the parliamentary European committees in the Danish and Swedish Parliaments and concludes that their potential to influence and control their respective governments’ EU policies mainly depends on the Government's parliamentary base and opportunities for legislative influence open to parliamentary oppositions. Moreover, it examines various organisational aspects of the European committees, including distribution of tasks and internal co‐ordination within the Parliament, at what stage in the decision‐making process the European Committee and the Parliament are involved and information management. With some conspicuous exceptions, Denmark and Sweden have chosen the same organisational arrangements for dealing with EU affairs both in the Parliament as a whole and, specifically, in the European committees. The principal conclusion is that the European committees in Sweden and Denmark are effective means for giving the national parliaments a voice in EU matters, but the article also addresses some reforms to strengthen their positions.     

The EU PNR framework decision proposal: Towards completion of the PNR processing scene in Europe

The entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty has suspended discussions over the release of a EU PNR processing system. Plans to introduce an intra-EU PNR processing system initiated since 2007, although strongly supported by the Commission and the Council, did not bear fruit before the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty and the, institutional, involvement of the Parliament. While discussions have been suspended since October 2009 and most probably a new draft proposal will be produced, it is perhaps useful to present in brief the proposal currently in place so as to highlight its shortcomings for European data protection and suggest ways individual protection may be strengthened in future drafts.     

Regional parliaments questioning EU affairs

ABSTRACT

Since the Treaty of Lisbon, the desire of parliaments to adapt to their new powers has led to a new wave of Europeanisation. However, the early warning system (EWS) and the political dialogue with the Commission constitute only a small part of parliamentary scrutiny for regional parliaments, which still largely rely on traditional tools such as mandates, debates and questions. Therefore, this paper studies a traditional mechanism of scrutiny, parliamentary questions, in order to understand how they can be used in an EU context. The study shows that Europeanisation is progressing slowly. Interestingly, the vast majority of MPs who ask EU-related questions are not members of the European Affairs Committee. In addition, questions focus primarily on the implementation stage rather than the policy-making stage. Finally, the content of parliamentary questions shows that regional parliaments have a distinctive territorial approach to EU affairs.     

Interests,Instruments and Institutional Preferences in the EU Comitology System: The 2006 Comitology Reform

This paper seeks to reveal the institutional interests of the Council of Ministers, the European Parliament and the Commission in the comitology system. This is done by an investigation of the 2006 comitology reform, which introduced the regulatory procedure with scrutiny. This reform was the result of developments in four areas: the Lamfalussy reform in the area of financial regulation; the controversial use of comitology in the area of GMOs, food safety and the environment; the failed Constitutional Treaty; and the amending of the 1999 comitology decision. The analysis shows that the reform was the result of a two‐dimensional constitutional struggle. The first dimension concerns the relative supervisory position of the two legislative actors, the Council and the European Parliament. The second dimension concerns the relationship between the legislative and the executive branch of the EU system. In theoretical terms, the analysis demonstrates an example of T.M. Moe's ‘politics of structural choice’. The paper ends by drawing lessons for the negotiations on the new comitology system following the Lisbon Treaty.     

Regional parliamentary empowerment in EU affairs. Building an analytical framework

ABSTRACT

This article analyses the effects of the Lisbon Treaty provisions for regional parliaments in EU decentralised systems by looking at the early warning system (EWS) for subsidiarity control. It argues that the implications of this mechanism for parliamentary empowerment at the regional level should be assessed carefully and their links with political mobilisation, institutional restructuring and policy involvement in a particular context should be analysed as precisely as possible. For this reason, this article proposes a conceptual and analytical framework that allows the detection of several kinds of regional empowerment under the EWS and explains their transformative effects in different national contexts.     

欧盟区域刑事合作进程中的制度缺陷与对策——从《马斯特里赫特条约》到《里斯本条约》

从《马斯特里赫特条约》到《里斯本条约》,随着一体化进程的不断发展,欧盟逐步加强了对内部区域刑事合作的影响。但是,这种变化的＂代价＂则分别体现为：成员国全体一致的决策机制、＂框架决定＂立法中的＂民主赤字＂,以及成员国利用＂紧急刹车＂条款以规避关乎其切身利益的敏感立法的适用等。本文重点探讨这些制度缺陷,进而评析欧盟在相关问题上的对策。     

Strong parliament of a small eu member state: The Finnish parliament's adaptation to the EU

If even the minister participating in the meeting of the Council of Ministers does not know the agenda of the day, not to say anything of whether the minister has all relevant documents available, how can anyone imagine that the Parliament could influence the decisions?

The Finnish Ex‐EU minister Mr Pertti Salolainen (Cons).¹

The article gives a presentation of the Finnish Parliament's early adaptation to EU membership. Our main argument is that the Finnish Eduskunta is stronger that the other national parliaments with respect to dealing with EU issues, because the Eduskunta is pro‐active and because the whole Parliament, all standing committees included, is involved in the preparation of Finnish national EU policies before decisions are taken in the Council of Ministers. The Finnish Parliament is thus in a strong position to influence in advance, on an established routine basis, the position of the Finnish representative in the Council of Ministers. We also point out some practical and informational problems, and analyse the main procedural and organisational reforms inside the Eduskunta. Utilising interviews with the party functionaries in the Eduskunta, the article ends with a discussion on the main problems facing the Finnish parliamentarians, a way forward and some conclusions.     

Legislation, Delegation and Implementation under the Treaty of Lisbon: Typology Meets Reality

Abstract:  The Treaty of Lisbon has introduced a complex new typology of acts, distinguishing between legislative, delegated and implementing acts. This reform, the first since the Treaty of Rome, will have an impact on some of the most contested topics of EU law, touching several central questions of a constitutional nature. This article critically analyses which potential effects and consequences the reform will have. It looks, inter alia, at the aspects of the shifting relation between EU institutions, the distribution of powers between the EU and its Member States, as well as the future of rule-making and implementation structures such as comitology and agencies.     

The Missing Piece of the Lisbon Jigsaw: Is the Open Method of Coordination Effective in Relation to the European Research Area?

Abstract:  In the light of the subsidiarity principle, this article discusses the Community competence in relation to the 'European Research Area'. As such it responds directly to the question of whether the European commitment to consider research as one of the new emerging priorities of the EU, is reflected in the Member States domestic research policies. To this aim, the article outlines the Community policy to enhance European competitiveness and the goals set in the Lisbon Declaration (March 2000) and reaffirmed in the Barcelona Declaration (March 2002) shaping the European Research Area. It then goes on to investigate whether the Lisbon and Barcelona agenda targets on competitiveness are likely to be met at European level. The functioning and effectiveness of the Open Method of Co-ordination are examined as a tool to maximise synergies between national and community research and technological development activities. The article, using the Italian research policy as a case study, claims there are some inconsistencies between the Italian and the EU policies on research and technological development and transfer of best practice.     

CASES: European Arrest Warrant Cases and the Principles of Non‐discrimination and EU Citizenship

This case comment provides an analysis of the recent judgment in Wolzenburg (C‐123/08), delivered on 6 October 2009 not yet reported (Grand chamber) concerning the application of the EU principles of nondiscrimination and citizenship to the European Arrest Warrant cases. It also considers the impact of the Lisbon Treaty as well as the implications of the Citizenship Directive 2004/38/EC for this area of law.     

Accountability for Delegated and Implementing Acts after the Treaty of Lisbon

The comitology regime, the committee‐based system developed as a mechanism for controlling the Commission's exercise of its powers to implement EU measures, has been subject to severe criticism on grounds of lack of accountability and transparency. The system has recently been fundamentally reformed by means of the new Implementing Acts Regulation, which came into force on 1 March 2011. This paper investigates whether the new rules are sufficient to remedy accountability deficits as regards implementing acts and concludes that as far as accountability to the Member States is concerned, their control powers have remained static. In addition, the new‐delegated acts procedure introduced by the Treaty of Lisbon grants the European Parliament (EP) more control powers, although the EP's gains are more modest than they might appear. This change has come at the cost of reduced control powers for Member States as well as lowered standards of transparency for the public.     

Sub-Constitutional Engineering: Negotiation, Content, and Legal Value of Interinstitutional Agreements in the EU

Abstract:  This article analyses the roles and impact of Interinstitutional Agreements (IIAs) in the EU, taking into account their relationship to primary law. Concretely speaking, these roles range from (a) explicitly authorised specifications of Treaty provisions via (b) not explicitly authorised specifications of vague Treaty law to (c) pure political undertaking. Based on the distinction between the constitutional and the operational level of the political game, we challenge the assumption that IIAs usually strengthen the European Parliament. As our case study, the 1993 interrelated package of IIAs on democracy, transparency and subsidiarity, illustrates, the European Parliament is not the only institution that benefits from IIAs, especially if they lack a sufficiently precise Treaty basis. Furthermore, if Treaty provisions underlying IIAs are precise, they also tend to produce precise and thus legally relevant content. Conversely, if IIAs deal primarily with elusive concepts they are likely to be legally ambiguous or even irrelevant at all.     

Bringing European Democracy Back In—Or How to Read the German Constitutional Court's Lisbon Treaty Ruling

This article critically examines the democratic theory that informs the German Federal Constitutional Court's Lisbon Treaty ruling. This is needed because the ruling is ambiguous with regard to which type of democracy applies to which type of Union. In order to analyse the ruling we establish three models of what European democracy possibly can amount to: audit democracy based on the EU as a derivative of the Member States; a multinational federal state; or a regional cosmopolitan polity? The court's depiction of the EU does not fit as well as we would expect when labeled as a derivative entity due to the important legislative role of the European Parliament. The EU's legal supranationalism points in the direction of a federation, but the court's argumentation does not lend support to this notion. The court models democracy on a rather specific set of institutional presuppositions that are derived from the parliamentary model of democracy associated with the sovereign nation state. At the same time, the court operates with a conception of a changing state sovereignty that unfolds more in line with cosmopolitan rather than with classical Westphalian statist principles.     

Keeping national parliaments informed: The problem of European legislation

Since Maastricht there has been a growing realisation in the institutions of the European Union, that the unfettered flow of information is vital to the health of the whole European project. Some moves have been made towards more transparent decision‐making, but progress has been slow and is limited by a culture which values confidentiality, particularly in intergovernmental negotiations. The free flow of information is especially important to national parliaments if they are to exercise any influence in the EU. The House of Commons Select Committee on European Legislation has recently pronounced the scrutiny system to be ‘in deep crisis’ because of chaotic decision‐making and a disregard for the rights of national parliaments. Many Westminster MPs feel frustrated by the difficulty of keeping track of EU legislation. The paper suggests that the ingredients of an improved information system already exist. A wealth of current information can be derived from EU‐related electronic databases and through direct links between the European Parliament and national parliaments. It proposes that a new current awareness service for the House of Commons, distributed via the parliamentary network and as hard copy, could focus information for MPs in a much more accessible way.     

EU Constitutionalism in Flux: Is the Eurozone Crisis Precipitating Centralisation or Diffusion?

The Lisbon Treaty was supposed to mark the end of an almost‐decade‐long period of treaty reform. After the tumult of the failed Constitutional Treaty, the settlement it imposed struck a sustainable balance between the competing forces of centralisation and the diffusion that characterise European integration. Yet this constitutional settlement is now threatened by the Eurozone debt crisis and official responses to it, most notably the proposed fiscal compact. A prevalent view regards the crisis as an opportunity to complete the process of political and economic union that the Maastricht Treaty began. However, this article cautions against such a view, which would jettison the post‐Lisbon Treaty constitutional settlement in favour a peculiar kind of German‐led, intergovernmental centralisation. Whether the crisis response measures achieve their stated aims remains to be seen, but the integration project will be reconfigured in the process. Thus, EU constitutionalism is bound to remain in a state of flux.     

Limits of Participatory Democracy in European Governance

The Lisbon Treaty (Article 11) recognises the provision on participatory democracy as a democratic principle of the European Union (EU), thus constitutionally legitimising the involvement of civil society in European governance. However, at least three issues relating to the democratic dimension of this practice remain unresolved. First, it is not possible to specify precisely how the participation of civil society relates to democracy. Second, having established representative democracy as the founding democratic principle of the EU (Article 10), the Lisbon Treaty does not allow assessing the provision on participatory democracy as an independent source for democracy. Third, the putative democratising potential of participation would not be construed independently, not only because representative democracy is defined as the founding principle of the EU but also because participation cannot be thought of as independent from the form of the consultation regime, the constitutional framework and the managerial and technocratic styles of policy‐making.