Group items tagged

The increase in power of the European Parliament, which will grow further if the Lisbon Treaty is ratified by all 27 member states, has failed to increase the House's political legitimacy and runs the risk of compromising its unique position as the EU's 'democratic pillar', according to a new report.

The report, published by CEPS (Centre for European Policy Studies) research fellows Julia De Clerck-Sachsse and Piotr Maciej Kaczyński, argues that the Parliament's crucial importance as a forum for public debate is on the wane. 

On the positive side, the authors note, enlargement has not destabilised the Parliament's output, nor has it affected the strength of left-right political alignments, which remain cohesive.  In fact, the Parliament's sixth legislature (2004-2009) has boosted the institution's assertiveness, particularly under the co-decision  procedure, where Parliament and the European Council share decision-making powers.  The high cost of efficiency  However, this new assertiveness has come at a price. In its efforts to streamline decision-making and maintain efficiency, the enlarged EU assembly has moved more decisions to committees and cut down the amount of time for debate between MEPs in the plenary chamber.  In particular, the massive increase in first-reading agreements (when a legislative act is passed after only one reading in the chamber) gives the impression that "the bulk of political debate takes place behind closed doors, rather than publicly". In other words, if Parliament "adopts a compromise that is pre-negotiated by the responsible committee, there is little chance of a politicised and controversial debate," which is "crucial to capturing public attention," say the experts. Worse still, it runs the risk of Parliament being perceived as "merely rubber-stamping the Council's decisions". 

The legal problems encountered by EU-Lex, the EU mission in Kosovo, could soon be solved, with diplomats currently in talks over plans to share the leadership with UNMIK, the United Nations peace-keeping mission.

Background: The EU decided in February 2008 to deploy a 2,200 strong 'Rule of Law' mission to Kosovo under the name 'EU-Lex Kosovo'. Its deployment has already started, after having been delayed for both technical and political reasons.  The initial objective was for EU-Lex to take over from UNMIK, the civilian mission established in the Serbian province following the adoption of UN Security Council Resolution 1244 in June 1999. But Serbia and Russia strongly protest against EU-Lex, because this mission has not been endorsed by the UN Security Council (EurActiv 16/04/08). The objective of setting up an EU mission in Kosovo is highly political. The EU has ambitions to take over the post-crisis management of a territory on European soil. It previously failed to do so in 1999 when it had to resort to NATO to stop the ethnic cleansing and acts of extreme violence perpetrated by the regime of Slobodan Milosevic. 

Under plans originally foreseen by the EU, the 2,200 strong EU-Lex mission would eventually replace UNMIK as the leading rule-of-law mission in the new-born state of Kosovo.  But faced with rejection from Serbia and Russia, which have both challenged the mission's legal legitimacy, diplomats are now drawing up plans for the two missions to co-exist under joint command.  The solution would provide the EU with a face-saving trick, according to diplomats who were speaking to EurActiv on condition of anonymity. This is because UNMIK has already been accepted by Serbia and Russia, which has a permanent seat at the UN Security Council. 

The European Parliament is trying to influence the ongoing preparations for the establishment of a 'European External Action Service' (EEAS), to be set up jointly between the EU Council of Ministers and the Commission after the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty. But critics say this major novelty in the EU architecture is about to be introduced in almost complete secrecy.

On 6 May, the European Parliament Foreign Affairs Committee put forward a draft report on the Common Foreign and Security Policy, which is intended to constitute MEPs' wish-list vis-à-vis the Council and the Commission on establishing EEAS.  The report points out that the future office of High Representative/Vice-President of the Commission will derive its legitimacy directly from the European Parliament. It also stresses the need for "transparency and democratic input" into the process of setting up the planned European External Action Service, and calls for a mechanism to be set up to provide confidential information to select Foreign Affairs Committee Members. 

"The key expectation of the Parliament is that it has more to say on that and Parliament can add additional democratic legitimacy from taking positions. And we expect to be involved in shaping these decisions ex ante, and not only post factum," Saryusz-Wolsky said. 

Abstract The debate about the legitimacy of the EU and the possibilities for its democratization has addressed so far only rarely the question of the role of the media. An instrumental approach prevails towards the media, acknowledging that the so-called gap between the EU and its citizens is grounded in a communication deficit and that the EU should therefore strive towards a higher legitimacy in terms of public accountability, openness and participation, in other words of democracy. The article discusses these technical aspects of 'public-sphere building from above' in relation to the systematic constraints on mediatization that result from the inertia of the existing (national) media spheres. On the basis of this, an alternative understanding of mediatization and its ambivalent effects on the legitimacy of the EU will be developed. The proposal is that European public sphere research should focus on the more active role of the media as an independent variable that affects institutional choices and processes. Empirical results from comparative content analyses are discussed, which illustrate to what extent media have become an enabling and/or constraining factor on European integration.

In the aftermath of the most ambitious accession bargain, attention has been directed away from EU negotiations to the tricky task of selling the elite enlargement deal to the voters. Focusing on past enlargement rounds, this book explores the link between diverse elite motives for pursuing membership and relatively constant variation in EU public support. National elite attitudes to integration contain the clues to the explanation of why utilitarian and affective support has traditionally been higher in some countries than in others. EU public opinion does not simply reflect the economic interests and identities of individuals faced with an objective reality. Rather, citizens face an endogenously shaped world, filtered by elite opinions on membership. Drawing upon "flexibility," this book advances a model of "theoretical differentiation" distinguishing between rationally and affectively driven entrants. Empirically, the tenacity of "differentiation" in EU legitimacy is examined through the use of original and secondary data. Combining qualitative and quantitative methods, this study aspires to further debate on enlargement and public opinion engaging scholars and EU practitioners.

With an eye on the grassroots political campaign of Barack Obama, the communications-savvy US president, YouTube has teamed up with a European broadcaster to try and bring a similar 'Yes we can' buzz to EU politics one month ahead of the European elections. The video sharing website on Tuesday (5 May) announced it is going to collaborate with Euronews to provide an online forum for MEPs and experts to talk about the issues on voters' minds.

Later this week onwards, EU citizens from across the 27 member states can put a question to those running for office via a new YouTube channel called Questions for Europe

Can it be done in Europe They admit they are not sure what the answer to this question is, with the EU elections taking place across so many countries, involving so many languages and still largely focused on local issues. Michael Peters, managing director of Euronews, said his organisation was "really curious" about the type of questions it would get, and thought issues such as abortion could become topics debated EU-wide. The questions themselves, posted via videos on the Euronews website, will be answered either by Euronews journalists themselves, analysts or politicians.

It is universally accepted that there has been a huge growth in EU lobbying over the past few decades. There is now a dense EU interest group system. This entirely new volume, inspired by Mazey & Richardson's 1993 book Lobbying in the European Community, seeks to understand the role of interest groups in the policy process from agenda-setting to implementation. Specifically, the book is interested in observing how interest groups organise to influence the EU institutions and how they select different coalitions along the policy process and in different policy domains. In looking at 20 years of change, the book captures processes of institutional and actor learning, professionalisation of lobbying, and the possible emergence of a distinct EU public policy style. More specifically, from the actors' perspective, the editors are interested in assessing how the rise of direct lobbying and the emergence of fluid issue-based coalitions has changed the logic of collective action, and what is the potential impact of 'venue-shopping' on reputation and influence. From an institutional perspective, the contributors explore resource and legitimacy demands, and the practical impact of consultation processes on the emergence of a distinct EU lobbying relationship. It will be essential reading for academics and practitioners alike.

Kurzbeschreibung The European project has come a long way in establishing peace, creating a common market, and expanding its borders. At the same time, diminishing popular legitimacy has spurred talk about a European Union in crisis. How far has the EU really come in fulfilling its grand visions? Is the project barely half-way? Or could we say with some confidence that European integration is solidified and will continue to get stronger? This book brings together contributors from economics, political science and law to offer different perspectives on this larger issue. The questions asked include: how far has the European Union come in its creation of a Common Foreign and Security Policy; what will happen to the state monopolies; is there a common strategy at the European level for integrating immigrants; and, to what extent do national political parties cooperate with the Europarties. By investigating these and similar issues the book contributes to an assessment of how successful European integration has been to date.

On the first day of the European Council (11 December), EU leaders agreed on a package of Irish demands which pave the way for a second referendum on the Lisbon Treaty in Ireland, which will most probably be held in October 2009.

Under the compromise text, seen by EurActiv, all EU countries are expected to keep their commissioner. Ireland will receive legal guarantees on taxation policy, social and ethical issues and the Common Security and Defence Policy (CFSP), with regard to Ireland's traditional policy of neutrality among other provisions. 

Transitional accommodations  Therefore, transitional measures have been adopted with respect to the Presidency of the European Council, as well as of the European Parliament. The member state holding the EU presidency when the Lisbon Treaty enters into force (Sweden holds the presidency until the end of 2009) will continue to chair all meetings in the same manner as today's presidencies.  But the next EU presidency holder (Spain from January 2010) will make changes in conformity with the Lisbon Treaty, making room for a permanent President of the European Council and a High Representative for foreign affairs and security policy.  Also, European Parliament will be enlarged from 736 to 754 members in the course of 2010, if indeed the Irish say 'yes' to the reform treaty. The elections will take place under the Treaty of Nice, but soon the Parliament is expected to accommodate the provisions of Lisbon.  Answering questions from the press, Poettering acknowledged that the situation was not ideal, and the legitimacy of MEPs falling between the Nice and Lisbon Treaties should be preserved, as their status should not be different. He admitted that legal experts would struggle with the issue. 

How have the main institutions and decision-making processes of the EU responded to the arrival of new member states? This book assesses the actual state of the EU institutions in the years after the 2004 enlargement, examining each of the main institutional actors as well as trends in legislative output, implementing measures and non-legislative approaches. The contributors outline the key changes as well as patterns of continuity in the institutional politics of the EU. The analysis finds that breakdown has been avoided by a combination of assimilation of the new member states and adaptation of the system, without any fundamental transformation of the institutions. Nonetheless, they conclude that it is not just 'business as usual'.The streamlining and formalization of procedures, together with increased informal practices, has implications for transparency and accountability. Widening has not prevented deepening of European integration, but it has deepened normative concerns about the democratic legitimacy of that process which will remain very much on the agenda of the enlarged EU. This nuanced approach to the complexities of studying institutional politics and change contains important new and original data. As such it will be invaluable for postgraduate and advanced undergraduate students of EU politics and administrative science, as well as researchers, practitioners and journalists working in the fields of European studies more widely.

This week Switzerland holds its national elections, while in Lisbon the EU leaders agreed on a new treaty. The two events have no direct connection, because Switzerland is not an EU member. However, a Swiss would have little difficulty understanding the EU's institutional quarrels. Switzerland has been successfully dealing with the challenge of keeping a multi-confessional, multi-lingual society together for more than 150 years, while respecting a large degree of autonomy for its 26 cantons.

Writer and commentator on European affairs Kirsty Hughes and Jose Ignacio Torreblanca, senior analyst at the Elcano Institute in Madrid argue in this article, that the EU should move on following the institutional impasse and regain political confidence.

This Living Review presents an overview of the research on European identity in the context of EU governance by focussing on central debates in the political science literature. It departs from the problems of disagreement between European citizens and their elites as well as the lack of a European demos. Against this background, the article discusses the functions of collective identity including the legitimation function and solution of collective dilemmas. Here, two perspectives pertaining to these functions are depicted: first, the issue of European public space and second, the integrative workings of European citizenship. Next, the article explores the conceptual and methodological problems of the research on European collective identity. In particular, it focuses on the conceptual ambiguity of the collective identity term and problems of operationalization and measurement. Following this, the article discusses the literature on identity technologies of the EU and identifies the shortcomings of identity technologies with regard to EU governance. Keywords:European identity, governance, legitimacy, democracy, public opinion, European public space

Abstract 1 Introduction 1.1 Conceptual Basis 1.2 Significance and Relevance of this Research 1.3 State of the Field 2 Explaining Attitudes about European Integration 2.1 Instrumental self-interest 2.2 Social Location 2.3 National vs. European Identities 2.4 Institutions and Institutional Performance 3 Role of Intermediaries 3.1 Elites 3.2 Parties, Partisanship, and Ideology 3.3 Mass Media 4 Central and Eastern Europe 5 Conclusion References Footnotes

Since its inception, the European Union has stimulated many vigorous debates. This Living Review provides a state of the field perspective on the academic work that has been done to address the question of the perceptions of the European Union as a system of governance. It takes a broad scope in assessing the efforts of scholars and highlights significant theoretical and empirical contributions as well as identifying potential avenues for research. In order to understand perceptions of the EU, scholars have employed national-level frameworks of popular support, particularly partisanship and instrumental self-interest. As the number of members has increased, further research has taken a broader scope to include national identity, institutions, and attitudes regarding the normative and empirical function of both national and EU institutions. Additional works address political intermediaries such as parties, media, and elites. Finally, all of the works are fundamentally concerned with the supportive popular sentiment that underpins the EU’s legitimacy as a political institution. While there are far more works that can be practically included in this Living Review, we have attempted to construct an overview based on the dimensions that define this research as set out by significant contributions at the core of this literature.