The European Union
THE EUROPEAN UNION Institutions,decision-making, politics
The European Union
The CommissionTypes of EU decisions• regulations (= laws) directly applicable after publication in OJ• directives (= framework laws) need to be implemented by national legislation within acertain period, content mandatory– ‘direct effects’ doctrine: may be applicable despite nonimplementation• decisions adressed to individual recipients (e.g. state aids)• recommendations and resolutions non-binding(Art. 288 TFEU)
Commissioners I• distinction between Commissioners (politicallevel) and administration (civil servants)• 27 Commissioners– until 2005: large countries had 2 Commissioners– now: 1 per country -> state representation (increaseswith enlargement), not functional needs– after 2014: number of Commissioners = 2/3 of MS• major political and distributional issue -> shift entryinto force to future.• European Council may decide otherwise
The European Union
Commissioners I
• distinction between Commissioners (political level) and administration (civil servants)• 27 Commissioners– until 2005: large countries had 2 Commissioners.– now:1 per country -> state representation (increases withenlargement), not functional needs.– after 2014: number of Commissioners = 2/3 of MS• major political and distributional issue -> shift entryinto force to future.• European Council may decide otherwise• Art 17 TEU
The European Union
Commissioners II• collective responsibility (defense against state influence)• no political responsibility of Commissioner for single DG – Commissioners are not Ministers– but trends to have 1 Commissioner for 1 DG (e.g.environment)• increase of President powers in Lisbon Treaty– set guidelines for Commission work (Art. 17 (6) a TEU)– ask individual Commissioners to resign.• Cabinets: very powerful; French system –strengthens Commissioner, resented by administration; needed for coordination
The European Union
27
7
30
490million
Member States
Combined population of
EU Member States
Percent of world’spopulation
Percent of global GDP
55Percent of combinedworldwide OfficialDevelopment Assistance
Appointment of Commissioners• past practice: each MS nominated 1-2 candidates, others agreed-> de facto individual national appointments• now:– President proposed by European Council by QMV, elected by EP– Council chooses Commissioners by common accord with President-elect– formally: Commission as a whole elected by EP, reality: individual hearings• trends: EP has achieved more influence by informal practice– threat of Commission censure, block budget– invite Commissioners for hearings, discussion of Commission work programme• trends: state decision-making moves more towards collective choice (including majority decisions), away from individual national appointments.
The European Union
European Parliament in session
Profile of Commissioners• independence required, should serve European public interest– very few cases of direct national representatives; national ways of thinking more important– Commissioners become more independentduring office.– but have to think about possible return• political weight has increased (esp. COM President) Commission administration• hierarchical structure: Directorate-Generals – Directorates –Units• no direct responsibility to Commissioner (but collectively toCommission)• sectoral segmentation weaker than in MS but increasing(strong collective identity of some DGs, e.g.competition,environment, agriculture)• European civil service– strong task expansion, personell remains largely constant at quite low level– consequence: reliance on temporary contracts, consulting, lack of oversight capacities -> puts independence and effectiveness into question– development of comitology• nationality becomes more important in higher ranks
The European Union
Tasks• initiate policy– monopoly of legislative initiative in many fields– huge freedom (lack of political guidance), often takesinitiative (green and white books)– has to respect Council veto power: mutual dependency• control implementation– legal implementation, now with substantial sanctions(infringement procedure, Artc. 258 TFEU)– information problems (often has to rely on third parties)• manage budget – fraud cases (lack of politicalcontrol and personell?)
Tasks II• independent regulatory activity– control state aids (Art. 107-109 TFEU)– merger control (Merger Control Regulation)• needs independent decision-making in order to avoid competitive state aids or mergers (but not very popular in ‘target states’)• external representation of EU– missions in and from most countries– conducts trade negotiations (exclusive EU competence)• mediation among MS: COM as neutral arbiter(more credible than Council).
The European Union
Trends• task expansion, increased importance, increasingly prominent Commissioners– but: Council develops independent structure• Foreign and Security Policy, JHA• increasing EP involvement (but no directpolitical responsibility), break-up of old alliance COM-EP against Council• COM has lost its ‘technocratic innocence’ (e.g. ‘liberal Barroso Commission’)Problems and issues• task-staff mismatch– reliance on many external actors (independence)– lack of information about national conditions (both poliy making and implementation)• control of the Commission– runaway technocracy?– independence from direct state influence may be good, but how to ensure link to European common good?– is politicization the answer?
The European Union
Council + Europe• European Council– Heads of State or Government from EUMember States• Council of Europe– distinct international organization, not EU• EU Council/Council of Ministers– “the” Council– legally distinct from European CouncilEuropean Council• evolved out of informal gatherings in the 1960s, nowat least 4 meetings per year, new building inconstruction …• Heads of state/gov + Pres + COM Pres + HR• President: Herman van Rompuy (former PM Belgium)– elected by Europ. Council by QMV, 2,5 year term of office,renewable once– chairs and prepares European Council sessions• functions– strategic guidelines– shape foreign policy– some decision-making on Community matters– extra-treaty decision-making– open discussion– amend treaties (IGCs)
The European Union
Functions of the Council ofMinisters• Executive– with COM – Comitology– Foreign and security policy, J`HA significantexecutive and operational functions– EMU• Legislative– interaction with COM (initiatives) and EP (esp.ordinary legislative procedure, Budget)• Other– Steering; act as a Forum; Mediation
The European Union
Working Mechanisms I• General Secretariat of the Council– headed by Secretary-General (Pierre de Boissieu)– assisted by Deputy SG for day-to-day management– tasks: management and organization of meetings,committee servicing (agenda, minutes, procedural &legal advice)• Presidency– rotates every 6 months between MS• Foreign Affairs Council: chaired by HR– tasks: evolved from just chairing meetings toorganization of Council working programme (includingall meetings); representation (of the EU to other states,of the Council to other EU institutions); internalpromotion of initiatives and mediation
The European Union
Working Mechanisms II• Internal hierarchy leaves only the most difficultquestions to the Ministers.• top: nine Council configurations (e.g. agriculture,environment, ECOFIN)– legally 1 Council!• next: Coreper II and I– II more senior, I for technical issues– they work in practice for different Council configurations• middle: sector-specific Senior Committees, e.g.SCA, PSC• ground: specialized Working Parties• around 250 WPs and Committees– Officials are socialized into the EU
The European Union
Reality of Council Meetings• place: usually Brussels (sometimes Luxembourg)+ informal sessions in the country holding thepresidency• 70-80 per year• MS representatives, COM, Council Secretariat,presidency => 150-200 persons in the room• procedure: intro by Presidency, COM on theproposal, mini-tour de table, discussion• breaks for informal deals
Voting in the Council• types: simple majority, QMV, unanimity– QMV now dominant mode– weighted voteshttp://www.consilium.europa.eu/App/calculette/default.aspx?lang=en&cmsid=1690 (voting calculator)• but QMV not often actually applied:– consensus orientation (super-majorities)– explicit voting was rare (about 14%, half inAGFISH)– expected to increase• past obstacles to the use of QMV:– Luxembourg Compromise (1966) (most important )• what happens if a state refuses to obey the rules?
The European Union
Negotiation in the Council• recurrent forum– interdependence, shared norms• restricted multilateralism– a degree of intimacy, mutual familiarity– but: recent enlargements -> extended multilateralism?• multi-issue forum– issue linkage possible, but restricted due to separatenegotiating forums– gains in one issue may offset losses in others• multiple layers of negotiation– national, sub-national & transnational players involved
Accountability Problems• Accountability– national ministers/officials – domestic control?– EP?– other mechanisms?• Transparency– agendas and minutes of Sessions available, but notinformative– parts of Sessions televised, but not the bargaining– access to documents• Legislative decisions– taken by executives; effectively by non-elected officials
The European Union
The European ParliamentParliamentary and presidentialdemocracy
Parliamentary democracy
– parties are elected on the basis of
programs
– parties rather coherent
– parties control government
Presidential democracy
– direct elections of president => high degree of presonalization
– relative independence of president from parties
– parties often rather heterogeneous
Position of parties towards theEU
• two-dimensional: left-right and proanti-EU
• huge variation of position towards EU between MS even within same political camp, shifts over time •consequence: coalitions = difficult (but necessary due need to achieve absolute majority) result: centrist coalition of SPE, EPP and ELDR
• but: depends on outcome of elections
The European Union
Party organization at EU levelparliamentary groups (factions)
• EPP-ED, SPE, ELDR, ...
• trend towards integration of smaller groups
• highly formalized and organized
transnational parties
• heterogeneous, weak formalization,
consolidation post-Maastricht
• relationship factions-parties weaker than in MS
• membership extends beyond EU
Voting patterns in the EP• Increasingly coherent but no rigid party discipline
(possible)
• coherence better in larger groups (EPP, SPE-ELDR)
– but EPP has problems of integration (conservative parties)
– coherence of smaller parties also increasing but anti-EU groups increasingly incoherent
– overall: better than in US, not as good as in most MS
• important for absolute majority and ability to
have clear position against Council
The European Union
EP organizationmax 750 members (now 736), smallerstates overrepresented, 3 seats:Strasbourg, Brussels, Luxembourg• parliamentary leadership (President, Vice-Presidents, Presidents of Political Groups)• political groups (relatively fluid andheterogeneous; concentration)• committees (very important for legislation;esp. committee chairs)• MEP recruited from national parties;problem: career pattern
Role in legislative process• long fight for right of legislative initiative – ‘own initiative reports’, influence COM annual workprogramme, pressure via budget, support by ECJ rulings (e.g. ‘Isoglucose’), • no formal right to legislative initiative!• increasingly important as co-player in legislative process– EP has become a veto player (George Tsebelis)->Council incentive for accepting EP amendments– absolute majority required in second reading (relativemajority in 1st and 3rd reading-> tendency to EPP-PESalliance– no stable coalition (no government support) but issuespecific alliances (EPP, PES, ALDE)• legislation adopted either by Council alone or by Council and EP – never by EP alone
The European Union
Committee work• most of the work is done in committees– standing (40-60 members) and ad hoc committees– most MEPs are member of one standing committee ->specialization– examine legislative proposals– absolute majority of plenary needed to makeamendments in second reading or reject proposal• structure– committee chairs = important– rapporteurs deal with individual proposals; stronginfluence, flexible organization.– shadow rapporteurs are from a different political group but follow the same dossier.
The European UnionProblems of EP influence• no formal right of initiative.• no full grip on legislation (Council still adopts legislation without EP• no full budgetary control.• no control of COM (only indirectly via vote on Commissioners)• what is the appropriate measure?– presidential or parliamentary systems?– new type – strong role of territorial interests (Council)
Trends and issues• from consultation to co-operation to co-decisionI and II -> increasing EP influence.• highly complex (but more complex thannational legislation?)• comparable to US-system, checks and balancesinstead of majoritarian democracy (no parliamentary support of government).• huge impact of procedural rules• system of checks and balances without strongexecutive -> no precedence in MS• strong territorial dimension: consociationalSystem.• weak integration across levels through politicalParties.• slow-moving process (half-century) of polity building