Block 5.1.pptx

Alma Mater Studiorum Universitá di Bologna Freie Universität Berlin The University of Edinburgh University College Dublin Universiteit Leiden Helsingin yliopisto Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne KU Leuven Uniwersytet Jagielloński w Krakowie Universidad Complutense de Madrid Universität Zür...

Alma Mater Studiorum Universitá di Bologna Freie Universität Berlin The University of Edinburgh University College Dublin Universiteit Leiden Helsingin yliopisto Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne KU Leuven Uniwersytet Jagielloński w Krakowie Universidad Complutense de Madrid Universität Zürich BA European Integration: BLOCK 5 DYNAMICS OF EUROPEAN INTEGRATION – INSTITUTIONS AND POLICY PROCESS Structure of the Block: 3 Lectures + 2 Seminars Lecture 1) EU institutional triangle, political power and democratic control Lecture 2) EU Policy making and the policy cycle; key internal policies Lecture 3) EU Policy making in a wider context: enlargement, external policies and other forms of regional integration – Who makes policy in the EU? Seminar 1) Discussion: Feedback on Poster Projects Seminar 2) Different actors + institutional dynamics in EU policy making UNA Europa presentation 2 Lecture 1: EU institutional triangle, political power and democratic control Structure of the lecture - Questions: 1) What is the EU and what does it do? (brain-storming) 2) Key features and principles of the EU system: •Main EU principles •Main EU activities •Main EU institutions •Main EU procedures 3) Who decides (what) in the EU? 5) What different modes of policy making/policy instruments exist? 6) Example of an ‘ordinary legislative procedure’ (EU climate law) 7) How democratic is EU policy-making? Brainstorming: What is the EU? 1. A LEGAL system (based on Treaties between Member States, producing legislation (regulations, directives, decisions) and non-legislative guidelines, governed by a set of procedures and reviewed by a system of courts 2. A POLITICAL system (based on general agreement that certain aims should be pursued together, but requiring permanent negotiation on compromises between a large number of different interests), taking decisions on legislation and general political direction 3. A COMMUNITY of VALUES (based on agreement on certain core values/ principles enshrined in the Treaties, but also in informal practices, requiring permanent re-balancing/re-negotiation, which has both legal and political elements), trying to ensure values are respected (through legal, political and other means) 4. A CULTURAL space (based on shared ideas about elements of European identity and culture as distinct from ‘others’, not really formalised, but important as a basis for all three elements above, under permanent discussion/ construction, hotly contested (‘culture wars’), supporting both common EU culture AND respect cultural diversity 5. An ECONOMIC system/area (based on EU Treaties and other agreements, supposedly open the world (‘free trade’) but with distinct interests/values/procedures, adopting legislation UNA Europa towards presentation for a common framework, supporting particular economic activity, negotiating at global level 4 Basic structure: EU competencies, institutions and decision- making EU Treaties set out: 1) WHAT the EU is supposed to do (cp legal block 3): • TEU: Overall aims, values and principles (TEU preamble, Arts 1-6) • Specific policies: special case CFSP (TEU Art 21-22), CSDP (TEU Art 42) • TFEU: other policies: Arts 2-6 + general provisions Arts 7-17 TEU) • Detailed policies (TFEU Arts 18-196, 206-214 (External relations) 2) HOW the EU is supposed to do it • Democratically: Democratic principles (Arts 7, 9-12 TEU), through ‘sincere cooperation between MS’ (Art 4 TEU) • ‘within the limits of the competencies conferred’ + subsidiarity+proportioality (Arts 4, 5 TEU) • Through a set of institutions (Arts 13-19 TEU + 223-309 TFEU) • By adopting ’legal acts’ (Arts 288-292 TFE) • By spending money (EU Budget) (Arts 310-325 TFEU) • By creating an ‘open, efficient and independent European administration’ (Art 298 TFEU) 3) HOW Decisions are to be taken in/by “the EU”: • Involving citizens (TEU Arts 10-12) and respecting fundamental rights (Arts 2, 6 TEU) • Different forms of cooperation between the EU institutions, varying according to different policy areas (and specified in the relevant policy article • In most policy areas except external relations: by the ”ordinary legislative procedure” (Art 284 TFEU) Key EU Institutions/ Organs 7 • • • • • • • EU Institutions (as listed in Art 13 TEU): European Parliament (EP) European Council The Council (of Ministers) The (European) Commission (EC) The Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ-CJEU) The European Central Bank (ECB) The Court of Auditors 7 ‘Bodies’: European External Action Service (EEAS) European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) (European) Committee of the Regions (COR) European Investment Bank (EIB) European Ombudsman (inter-institutional), European Data Protection Officer, European Data Protection Board +/- 35 Decentralised Agencies + 10-15 Executive Agencies/ Joint Undertakings/ Serices/ inter-institutional structures Key EU Institutions I 1) European Parliament (Art 14 TEU) - elected by EU citizens (representation) - ‘jointly with Council’ exercises legislative and bugedtary functions - political control - consultation - Max 750 members (currently 705) - 5 year electoral term - degressively proportional representation - minimum 6 MEPs/country – max 96 - Council (unanimity!) decides on composition of EP 2) European Council (Art 15 TEU) - provides ’necessary impetus’, ’general directions’, ’priorities’ for the EU - ‘shall not exercise legislative functions’ - composed of ‘heads of state or government - ‘normally’ decides by consensus - elects president for 2,5 years by QMV Key EU institutions II 3) Council (of Ministers) (Art 16 TEU) - ‘jointly with EP’ exercises legislative and budgetary functions - policy-making and coordination functions - composed of one member/ state at ministerial level - ‘normally’ acts by QMV (55% of members, 65% of popultation) - ‘blocking minority’ = at least four Council members (countries) – protection of small MS! - meets in 10 configurations - Genral Affairs Council (GAC) (foreign ministers) coordinates - supported by Committee of Permanent Representatives (COREPER) - rotating 6 months presidency (except for Foreign Affairs) 4) European Commission (Art 17 TEU) - promotes ‘general interest of the Union’ - composed of one Commissioner/MS (Art 17.5 not applied) - COM president proposed by Europ. Council (QMV), ‘taking into account the EP elections’ – EP elects (Art 17.7) - COM president (with Council) proposes list of other Commissioners incl. HRFA (to be approved by EP) - ensures the application of the Treaties/ EU law - executes the budget - coordinating, executing, management of programs - represent EU externally (except CFSP) - has the monopoly on proposing EU legal acts 5) Court of Justice of the EU (Art 19 TEU) - Court of Justice, General Court, Specialised Courts - one judge from each MS + Advocates General - rules on actions brougth by MS, an institution, a natural or legal person - gives preliminary rulings on interpretation of EU law at request of national courts EU decision-making: Key Questions 1)WHO decides? 2)WHAT is being decided? 3)HOW are decisions taken? 4)WHAT is necessary to make decisions acceptable/ legitimate (esp. to those who do not get (everything) they want? ÞThe EU is a compromise system to balance many different interests ÞEVERY decision has ’winners’ and ‘losers’ ÞDemocratic Structures and Processes need to ensure that decisions: ÞAre based on a right of all (relevant) voices to be heard ÞCan be understood ÞAre taken by transparent procedures ÞRepresent the majority view ÞProtect minority positions Þ DIFFERENT ways of taking decisions with different constellations of actors according to what needs to be decided EU decision-making: key principles EU System is built upon: 1) Compromise -> between Member States, between + within institutions, between individuals, groups, stakeholders 2) Voluntary Commitment (when joining) -> Member States can leave - > tend to seek consensus (but ‘differentiation’ is possible, for ex. Euro-membership, Schengen) 3) Loyal cooperation -> between Member States AND between institutions 4) Dual logic of representation and democratic control: EP represents citizens, Council represents (democratically elected) governments => Union of States and People(s) 5) ‘Special’ separation of powers (compared to idealtype at state-level) Council has legislative and some executive functions (in CFSP) EP has legislative role (jointly with Council) BUT so far no right of initiative, confirms (but does not propose) Commission president Commission proposes legislation AND executes policies/budget – relies for much of executive powers on Member States Europeaen Council provides general orientation BUT is not subject to parliamentary control EU decision-making: change over time Special “nature” of EU decision-making is partly linked to historical development: ‘Original’ structure set-up for European Coal&Steel Community (cf. Blocks 2/3): A High Authority (Supranational) + A Council of Ministers (inter-governmental) + A (weak) Parliamentary Assembly (of national MPs) + A Court (to arbitrate conflict) =>Special element: Delegate a narrow set of (important) executive decisions to a new kind of structure beyond direct national control (High Authority) Þ This structure is given the task to “develop the system further” = right of initiative-> Commission Þ Council was taking the main ‘political’ decisions in a Community of 6 member states (3 large, 3 small, but all liberal market economies in post-war boom) Þ Consensus is possible, ‘diplomatic traditions’ (face-saving decisions behind closed doors) prevail CHANGES: 1) Growing number of players (widening) 2) Growing complexity and ‘sensitivity’ of decisions for national sovereignty (deepening) 3) Growing need for democratic legitimacy  Continuous need for adapting, improving, reforming the system (informally and formally)  inter-institutional competition  Permanent debate about “effectiveness”, “democrarcy”, “transparency” = THE FUTURE OF EUROPE? Key modes of ‘policy-making’ What does the EU ’DO’? 1. Defining common objectives and how to reach them (Treaty making, general priorities (strategic agenda) (MS/European Council, EP. Commission) 2. Adopting Common ‘rules’ for all Member States ( = legislation: Commission EP, Council,) • Different instruments (regulations, directives, decisions, recommendations) • Execution/implementation largely dependent on MS (controlled by COM) 3.Coordinating policies essentially done by Member States (Council, Commission) • ’comparing’ policies, ‘peer-review’, ‘naming-and-shaming’ • facilitating learning 4. Spending/ redistributing money (investment) through the EU Budget (Council, EP, Commission) (lect II) • Raised through some own resources, but mainly MS contributions • Principle of co-financing for EU projects (big change: NGEU) 5. Representing the MS towards the outside world and/or facilitating common positions of Member States in the international arena (Commission, Council) • Common EU role/position in international trade • Different system for CFSP/ external action (lecture III)  For each of these activities, different ways of taking decisions, different actors involved! Different EU decision procedures (EP) (see Reh & Wallace, Box 4.1) Consultation Procedure (Art 289 TFEU) -> Commission proposes, EP is just consulted - Areas where Commission has strongest powers (for ex. Competition policy) Ordinary Legislative Procedure (ex-Co-Decision) -> Commission Proposes, EP and Council decide together (in compromise) [main focus of today] - Most areas of legislation, unless specified otherwise Consent Procedure (ex-Assent) -> Commission proposes, EP has to say ‘yes’ or ‘no’, cannot change the proposal - Association/trade agreements, enlargement / withdrawal agreements, serious breaches of fund. Rights, decisions that the EU should act where there is no legal basis (Art 352 TFEU) Budget Procedure - Commission Proposes, EP approves Multi-Annual Financial Framework; EP & Council jointly agree on annual budget (Arts 312-19 TFEU) Installation of the new Commission - Council proposes (‘taking into account EP elections’), EP approves Censure of the Commission - EP starts the procedure, needs 2/3 majority to force Commission to resign EU decision-making in practice Main focus of this first part: Decision-making when the EU adopts legislation ( = ‘ordinary legislative procedure’. Art 294 TFEU) -> Who is involved, according to what procedure, what are the access points, how does it work? -> example from a recent legislative file (European Climate Law 2020-2021): where is information available? what are the issues at stake? how does the process work? how effective/ democratic is the system? Other instances of EU decision making => lectures II and III - The EU budget - ’Special’ policy areas Cohesion policy, CFSP/ external relations - ’constitutional politics’ (enlargement, Future of Europe debate) - cooperation with other organisations? EU decision-making: ordinary legislative procedure Steps in the process: 1) Identifying a ‘problem’ to be tackled at EU level: • Treaty objectives – the EU should do something about X, Y, Z • Member States ask the EU to do something • European Parliament asks the EU to do something •Citizens ask the EU to do something (ECI) • Other ‘forces’ push the EU to do something (ext. partners, corporate…) • Circumstances/events require (re)action • COM proposes Þ Always worth asking: WHY - ‘cui bono’? 2) Identifying how to react -> is legislation the right tool? 3) Key role for the European Commission (‘monopoly of initiative’ – BUT as part of a political context) 4) IF legislation is the right tool, the ‘formal’ process begins: a) COM consults (formally/informally/publicly/experts…) b) COM choses legal basis (=> determines the scope and the procedure for legislation) c) COM puts forward a legislative proposal d) proposal goes through ‘legislative procedure’: EP and Council co-decide e) legislation is communicated to MS + implemented (jointly by MS & EU level) f) legislation is ‘evaluated’ and (possibly) reviewed, revised (= policy cycle) The ordinary legislative procedure Formerly known (until Lisbon-Treaty) as ‘co-decision procedure’ because: Commission proposes, EP has ‘first’ reading and proposes changes, Council has first reading and decides if it wants to accept changes proposed by EP Þ If YES, legislation is adopted Þ If NO (or not all), EP and Council negotiate, Commission trys to ‘broker’ compromise Þ Trilogue = negotiation of the three institutions in the institutional triangle: Court of Justice European Commission facilitates agreement Proposes Economic & Social Committee Committee of the Regions European Parliament Co-decide Council Ordinary legislative procedure Art 294 Formally: Commission (after having consulted) makes a proposal to EP and Council (informs also Nat Parliaments, consultative Committees etc) First reading: 1) EP adopts its position at first reading+ informs Council 2) If Council adopts = act adopted, IF Council wants changes, it adopts its first reading position (including reasons) 3) Commission comments (yes/no on proposed changes) In most cases, trilogue starts Second reading: 5) If EP a) accepts (within 3 months) Council decision or does not decide => act adopted b) If EP rejects (by majority of members) => act falls c) If EP proposes changes => proposal goes back to Council/ Commission 6) Within 3 months, Council (by QMV) a) can adopt all proposed changes (‘amendments’) => act adopted as changed b) does not want to not adopt all changes => 7) Conciliation Committee (within six weeks) [equal No of MS representatives + MEPs = 27 + 27 + COM] Third reading => EP and Council both need to agree to conciliation text: IF a joint text is approved: Ordinary Legislative Procedure: Commission COM works according to set of legilslative priorities (adopted jointly by EP, Council and Commission) for full mandate (2020-24) AND for each year (Joint Declaration) From this, (after annual state-of-the-Union speech Sept), COM drafts the Annual Work Program (new legislation, revision of legislation, withdrawal of legislation) On this basis, responsible Directorate General (led by a Commissioner) prepares new proposals: Choses legal basis, choses level/duration of consultation (may start with Green or White paper to test ideas, formal/ informal conslutations etc) Formal consultation includes MS (experts), stakeholders, civil society, the general public (Have-your-Say) Follows Commission own rules on “better regulation” + inter-institutional agreement on Better Law Making Proposal contains: - Clear description of the problem to be tackled, why and how (which instrument is chosen, why, possible alternatives?) - roadmap for following steps - impact assessments according to various criteria (economic, social, territorial etc) - projections of cost - subsidiarity/ (proportionality) - draft legislation (very often: changes to existing legislation!) - possibly Staff-Working-Document / annexes Draft is discussed first internally (inter-service consultation) – then made public (for consultation), then ‘officially’ tabled + send to the co-legislators ‘Collegiate’ decision-making –’officially’ all 27 Commissioners support each proposal (BUT Commission does vote!) Ordinary legislative procedure: EP De facto: Increasing use of “informal” agreement at First Reading -> in 1999-2004 EP cycle, still 22% of legislative files (pre-Lisbon!) adopted in Conciliation/3rd reading, in 2014-2019: 0! Þ Growing importance of Trilogues = negotiations between EP and Council, moderated by COM after EP adopts a ‘preliminary’ 1st reading position/ Council adopts a ‘general approach’ Þ COM tries to ‘anticipate’ positions/ conflicts + gives view on EP proposed amendments Þ Council votes by QMV on amendments on which COM is positive, by unanimity on amendments on which COM is negative Þ ‘advantage’: time limits (3 months/ 6 weeks for 2nd reading) do not apply (BUT: this means first readings take longer) Þ Less formal BUT also less transparent? What happens in the EP? Commission makes proposal – depending on legal basis & content; file assigned to EP committee (in case of ‘conflict’/ overlapping competencies: Conference of Committee Chairs decides: either joint responsibility or stronger advisory role) Lead-Committee can have impact on the angle taken/ chance of majority/ likely conflicts EP appoints rapporteur (+ shadow rapporteurs from other political groups) Committee (secretariat, with input from political groups, MEPs (offices), possibly EPRS, hearings with external stakeholders etc.) prepares draft Committee report ( -> proposals for changes to the Commission proposal); co-responsible / consultative committees prepare their input (‘opinions’) => Lobbying! Other MEPs in Committee can table amendments -> vote in Committee -> Ordinary Legislative Procedure: Council Council Presidency / Council Secretariat decide on the appropriate Council Formation + convene working parties Rotating Council Presidency chairs discussions (can prioritise files, sets agenda, tries to broker compromises) Council Working Parties/ Committees (representatives of national ministries) with help of Commission prepare proposals for response to Commission/EP (more than 150!) Proposal is then passed up to the Committee of Permanent Representatives (COREPER) for approval/ adoption (depending on level of ‘conflict’ (Part I COREPER agenda = nodding through, Part II = discussion) -> Can pass it back down or up to political level (Council configuration) Council adopts about 2/3 of proposals without discussion – 1/3 with further debate (occasionally reaches out to European Council…) All Council configurations can act on behalf of Council! Council acts in public when exercising legislative function (= votes are publicised, some debates are web-streamed) Ordinary legislative procedure: factors Key Information Sources: EurLex: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/advanced-search-form.html?action=update&qid=1700474039525 Oeil: https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/search/search.do?searchTab=y EP-Legislative Train: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/legislative-train/ Civil Society/think tanks/ research/corporate/ media: sources and resources? Understanding the process bearing in mind: 1) Stage of the Procedure pre-legislative/ consultation, new or revised legislation, which documents already public 2) Actors/ institutions involved: EU institutions (major/minor, formal role in the process) National institutions (Governments, Parliaments) Brussels ‘bubble’: stakeholders, lobbyists Media/ the public Third parties (global partners/competitors, international institutions) 3) Issues at stake: Policy area(s) + related level of competence (pre-)history of policies/politics, conflicts, salience general interest or individual concern Timing (electoral cycle, institutional cycle, individuals…) Openness to influence/ exchange – Transparency Democratic Control, legitimacy Ordinary legislative procedure: Examining a legislative procedure (looking back): Starting point: EP legislative train – presentation of ‘priorities’ grouped into six areas Under each area items listed according to time-line: announced, tabled, blocked, in process, adopted, withdrawn At this stage, no distinction according to legal instrument, procedure etc (but filters can be aplied) General information on the background to the policy, main events, reference to the work program Green Deal example: 159 initiatives in total (legislation, individual measures, financing etc) Selecting one from “adopted/completed’ category (53 so far) Themes: includes proposals on CAP, on Trans-European Networks, Transport, nuclear policy, Investment instruments, energy Instruments: includes communications, strategies, individual instruements, new +revised legislation (regulations, directives etc) OLP example: EU climate law EU regulation on binding common CO2 reduction target with aim to reach climate neutrality by 2050 Political context: European Green Deal (Commission Communication of 11 December 2019 COM(2019)640) - indicative roadmap/ planning for several dozen legislative/ non-legislative initiatives - included in the annual work programme European Council December on 12 December 2019 confirmed goal of climate neutrality 2050 (Doc. EUCO 29/19) Commission proposes draft climate law (regulation proposal) on 4 March 2020 (COM (2020) 80 final): Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL establishing the framework for achieving climate neutrality and amending Regulation (EU) 2018/1999 (European Climate Law) (which includes the revision of the existing regulation on the Governance of the European energy union, which in turn is the revision/repeal of six other regulations and directives…) CoR and EESC adopt their opinions in summer 2020 Important: On 17 September 2020 the Commission decides itself to review it’s original proposal (while first reading report in EP was being adopted) to increase the level of ambition (from 50% to 55% CO reduction by 2030)! EP (formal vote in Plenary in Oct) demands 60% CO2 reduction! OLP on Climate Law: Consultation prior to original proposal (09. Jan – 06 Feb 2020) European Commission ‘Have-your-Say’ (931 contributions received) https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/12108-European -climate-law-achieving-climate-neutrality-by-2050_en BUT also previous consultations (on green deal, energy union etc) After publication of official proposal (04 March 2020): Steps in the legislative procedure EP legislative observatory: https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/ficheprocedure.do?reference=2020/0 036(COD)&l=en - Key players - especially detailed for European Parliament - Documentation gateway: all publicly available docs (incl. link to national Parliament contributions, EPRS background briefing) Commission revises its own proposal in September 2020 to increase CO2 reduction target. Duration of the procedure: March 2020 – July 2021 (1 st proposal - publication in Official Journal) OLP on Climate Law: proposal Structure of the Proposal 2020/0036(COD) of 04.03.2020: 46 pages in total Pp 1-8: explanatory memorandum: 1) reasons/objectives, consistency 2) legal basis, subsidiarity, proportionality, choice of instrument 3) results of ex-post evaluation (of old legislation), stakeholder consultations and impact assessment 4) budgetary implications 5) other elements: implementation, monitoring, reporting Pp 9 20: Proposal: draft regulation, including changes to the Existing legislation (Art 10)! 1) Legal/institutional references (‘Having regard to…) 2) Political considerations (1-23 ‘Whearas…’) (pp 9-14) 3) Scope and objective (Arts 1+2) 4) Trajectory to reach objectives (Art 3) 5) Adaptation to (inevitable) climate change (Art 4) 6) Monitoring: Assessment of progress and measures (EU and national!) (Arts 5-7) 7) Public participation (Art 8) 8) Exercise of delegation (COM to adopt delegated acts for details) (Art 9) 9) Amendments to existing regulation EU 2018/1999 10) Entry into force (signature) (Art 11) Pp 21-46: Legislative Financial Statement (for EU as a whole and on the Agencies) OLP Climate Law: debates (for mor info, see EPRS briefing https://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document/EPRS_BRI(2020)649385) Items in the Political Debate: - goal as such (climate neutrality 2050) – wide support, but: - debate focussing on intermediate targets: - 2030: 55% or 60% or 65% CO reduction - 2040: which pathway towards more stringent targets (binding intermediary targets?) - concept of ‘net’ target (= counting CO2 removal through carbon sinks)? - concept of ‘carbon budget’ (how much can we still ‘safely’ emit) - scope of the legislation: each MS, or only EU as a whole to be climate neutral by 2050? - negative emissions after 2050 (but what technologies?) - which sector(s) need to be covered: role of agriculture, aviation & maritime transport…? - role and scope of ETS? - social, economic, environmental impact of CO2 reduction – how to ‘balance’? - how to measure progess and how (often) to check whether MS deliver (partly obligation under Paris agreement)? - Creation of a European Council on Climate Change? - European Climate Pact to involve citizens, local and regional authorities, civil society? Input from National Parliaments: 9 Parliaments expressed themselves, three raised subsidiarity concerns ( => not enough to trigger an official ‘orange card’) Input from advisory Committees (EESC/CoR) Input from lobbyists, NGOs, think tanks OLP Climate Law: negotiations Negotiations between EP and Council: Debate in the EP: Lead Role for ENVI, ITRE (‘industry and energy) associated (+ 5 other Committees) Rapporteur: Jytte Guteland (S&D, SE) + ‘shadow rapporteurs’ ->original draft asks for 65% reduction (ITRE suggests 55%) ca 1100 amendments in the ENVI Committee! First debate Plenary Oct 2020, gives ENVI mandate for Trilogue - narrow vote on 60% target (352 to 328 with 18 abstentions) Council adopts general approach (including the 55% target) 17 December 2020 (European Council 11.12.20 had confirmed) -> EP and Council start trilogues (running Jan and April 2021): - > Portoguese Environment Minister leading for the Council: Informal Environment Ministers’ Meeting March 21.2021: - so far, 4 trilogue meetings, still many outstanding issues -> 5th Trilogue meeeting (26 March) – ‘stalemate’, ‘little progress’, 2030 target = main stumbling block (see euractiv 30.3.21) -> time pressure: PT presidency (ending in June) wants results; COM had announced “June package” for follow-up legislative measures; Easter break => need to reach agreement by end April -> 6. Trilogue meeting (20-21.4.21, 14 hours!) progress is made, because: Council confirms agreement on 05. May, EP puts a compromise text to the vote in ENVI on 09. May 2021, plenary 24 June 2021 Council approves on 28. June 201 Act is signed (by EP president and Council (PT presidency) 30. June => Publication in Official Journal 9 July 2021, entry into force 29 July 2021 OLP Climate Law: outcome ‘Volume’: from 46 to 58 pages… In particular: Considerations (’Whereas…’) from 23 to 40! => more extensive (restrictive?) interpretation, ‘creative’ solutions? Key Content changes: 1) target: from original “explore increasing the target towards 55” (March 2020 COM proposal) to “…at least 55%” (revised COM proposal of Sept 2020) 2) New intermediate target 2040 (art 4) 3) Including carbon sink contribution, but limiting how much they can count (separate agreement on level of ambition for sinks) 4) Including the concept of greenhous gas budget (Arts 3 and 4) 5) Agreement to set up European Scientific Advisory Board on Climate Change 6) MS need to report annually on progress 7) Not “won” from EP/ rapporteur point of view: 60% (or even 65%) target, binding neutrality target for each MS (not just EU as a whole) 8) Resistance from both extreme right/ extreme left and Greens for too much/ too little ambition => 442 votes in favour, 203 against, 51 abstentions 9) COM publishes ‘fit-for-55%’ package for implementation in July 2021 OLP Climate Law: evaluation Complex procedure – part of an ongoing process (permanent policy cycle) Climate Law file: relatively quick DESPITE change of proposal during the process and DESPITE restrictions due to Pandemic: From March 2020 –June 2021 ÞShows political ‘urgency’ / political will (of all/ majority of actors) -> international/global contexts (Paris agreements) ÞShows how ‘compromise’ can be constructed in the EU system_ A) By ‘splitting the difference’ (% of CO2 reduction) B) ‘playing’ with language (‘towards…’ => ‘at least 55%) c) Bringing in new ideas/ concepts (carbon budget) D) Package deals Þ‘Price’ for compromises: increased complexity? Þ‘Price’ for efficiency: decreased transparency? ÞKEY challenge: implementation (=> next steps at EU level, role for the Commission/ new scientific advisory body), depends on Member States commitment ÞSubject to external constraints (Ukraine war/ energy crisis, changing political landscape, EU Policy Making I: Summary EU system is based on Compromise Characterised by mix of different policies for different purposes, with different levels of ‘power’ to act for the EU institutions Changes from policy area to policy area, but also over time Different policy instruments mean different involvement/roles of the institutional players Key element of EU policy making: adopting legislation (in fields where the EU shares competencies with the Member States) ÞNeed to understand the what-who-how to assess policy process (and possibly influence it) + the outcome ÞExample of EU climate law under the ‘ordinary legislative procedure’: ÞEU institutional triangle COM-EP-Council ÞWhat role for citizens, organised interest, the media… ÞHow democratic is the EU? Based on dual legitimacy of national and European elections (2024!)– COM is responsible to EP, but COM president selected indirectly, weak role for national parliaments, limits of representative democracy