European Integration and Democracy Exam Notes PDF

European Integration and Democracy 111121082Y Topic Page Number ------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------ Introduction [Page 2](#intro) History of European Integration [Page 6](#history_of_european_integration) Seminar 1 [Page 10](#seminar_1) European Council [Page 13](#european_council) Single European Act and the European Union [Page 19](#sea_and_the_eu) From the Customs Union to the Single Market [Page 27](#from_the_customs_union_to_the_sm) The European Commission and the Council [Page 34](#the_ec_and_the_com) Seminar 3 [Page 43](#seminar_3) The European Parliament [Page 48](#the_ep) European Court of Justice and European Central Bank [Page 57](#ecj_and_ecb) Seminar 4 [Page 68](#seminar_4) European Union Policy Making Process [Page 73](#eu_policy_making_processes) European Union Competences and Legislative Procedures [Page 81](#eu_competences_and_legislative_procedure) Seminar 5 [Page 87](#seminar_5) European Union Foreign Policy [Page 91](#eu_foreign_policy) Democratic Deficit and Legitimacy [Page 95](#democratic_deficit_and_legitimacy) []{#intro.anchor}**Introduction** European Institutions - \"Who do I call if I want to call Europe?\" (Henry Kissinger, US Secretary of State) - Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission - Josep Borrel, High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy - Charles Michel, European Council President - Roberta Metsola, President of the European Parliament The European Commission - Roles of the European Commission - Supernational - Proposes legislation to the Parliament and the Council - Manages and implements EU policies and budget - Enforces European law with the Court of Justice - Represents the EU on the international stage - Should not have national interest - Commission President, the political leader of the Commission - Currently Ursula von der Leyen - Has permanent secretariat, Secretariat-General - Power to reject Commissioner nominees - Power to re-allocate portfolios and reshuffle - Primus supra pares - Structure of the European Commission - College of Commissioners - Commissioners\' Cabinets - Directorates Generals (DGs) and Services The European Council - Defines EU\'s general political direction and priorities, no legislation - Meets at least 4 times per year - Heads of state or government - President of the European Council - Charles Michel (former prime minister of Belgium, member of Renew Europe) - Predecessors: Donald Tusk (Poland), Herman von Rompuy (Belgium) - Stepping in on 1 December 2024: Antonio Costa (former prime minister of Portugal, social democrat) The High Representative - The High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy - Currently Josep Borrel, as of 1 December Kaja Kallas (former prime minister of Estonia) - European Council appoints the High Representative for a 5-year term - Visible international legal personality - Blurs boundaries between Council and Commission - Boosts EU as a credible global actor - High-level diplomacy through European External Action Service The European Parliament - The voice of the people - Where is it? - Strasbourg (plenary sessions) - Luxembourg (secretary-general) - Brussels (plenary, committee sessions, most offices) - EP President Roberta Metsola - In office since 2022, after the death of Davide Sassoli - Youngest EP President and the third woman - Member of the European People\'s Party - Current political groups (2024-2029) - 720 seats - Most far-right parliament (around 1/3) - EP elections are every five years - First elections in 1979, last in 2024 - Regional or national lists - Proposal for transnational lists - Steady decrease in turnout until 2019 - Power and influence in three key areas - EU budget - Commission, right to scrutinize, dismiss, and appoint - Law-making, right to amend and reject Commission proposals - Hearings of the European commissioner candidates, 4-9 November 2024 Summary - No single person or institution to call - Institutions cooperate, but at times they are in competition - Power balance shifts []{#history_of_european_integration.anchor}**History of European Integration** Details of European integration history - Council of Europe - Headquarters in Strasbourg - 1949 after the Congress of the Hague - Failed attempt to establish a European federal state - Not directly related to today\'s EU, includes 46 member states, mostly known for the European Convention of Human Rights and the Eurovision - Council of the European Union - Established together with the ECSC, 1951/1952 - European Council - Body of the heads of governments and states in the EU - 1974, but the meetings back then were not official - The European Union (1992/1993) - Created through the Treaty of Maastricht - ECSC (Treaty of Paris, 1951), EEC (European Economic Community, Rhome Treaties, 1957), Euratom (European Atomic Energy Community, Rhome Treaties, 1957) became a part of the EU Plans for European Integration before 1945 - 1923, Coudenhove-Kalergi\'s Pan-Europa Plan, never realised - Initiated the thinking about European Integration - Fear in Western and Central Europe that communism will spread over Europe - In response, this plan was born - Europe had to unite economically in order to counter the new rising forcefields of America and South-East Asia - Included the European colonies, but not the British Empire (a forcefield of its own) - High import tariff walls around Europe - But the Great Depression resulted in economic nationalism and economic warfare, \"beggar-thy-neighbour\" policies, trade wars - Isolation inside Europe - 1930, Briand Plan, never realised - 1940, Nazi Funk Plan, never fully realised - Rejected the ideas of Coudenhove-Kalergi, but the Nazis had similar ideas of European economic cooperation - Walther Funk (Nazi Reichsminister) had a plan for European economic cooperation, but Hitler was not that interested - Some begun to think about European integration as inevitable - German resistance against Hitler (Carl Goerdeler, Kreisauer Kreis) - Italian anti-fascist resistance (Altiero Spinelli\'s Ventotene Manifesto) - Nationalism was the cause of the outbreak of the Second World War, therefore uniting nations would bring peace The economic importance of West Germany for Western Europe - Germany sat in the middle of the see-saw between East and West - Germany had always gained from this geopolitical position, e.g. Rapallo fear - Tehran Conference (1943) - Second front against Nazi Germany in Western Europe - No compromise peace between the Soviet Union or Western Allied forces with Nazi Germany - Morgenthau Plan (1944/1945), US plan for postwar Germany - De-industrialisation, re-agriculturalization and partition of Germany - However, Germany was extremely important for the European economy, making it smaller would lead to European ruin - West German chancellor Konrad Adenauer: No flirtation with Moscow but Westintegration or Westbindung via European Communities and NATO - On the other hand, e.g. Schumacher wanted to be a neutral country between the East and West Postwar Western European integration - Lord Ismay (British Secretary General of NATO, early 1950s): The purpose of the NATO (1949) from a Western European perspective is to \"keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down\" - Similarly, one of the main purposes of Postwar Western European integration was to keep (West) Germany \"in\" and to keep it \"down\", even now, this still holds true - Timeline of European institutions after 1945 - 1947-1952, Marshall Aid, OEEC/OECD - 1949, Establishment of the Council of Europe - 1950-1952, Establishment of the European Coal and Steel Community - 1950-1954, European Defence Community/European Political Community (never realised) - 1955-1958, Establishment of European Economic Community and Euratom - Postwar recovery - The Bretton Woods system, fixed national currency exchange rates with the USD, which was anchored to the price of gold - Call for the establishment of welfare states and social security in the late 1940s - Communist threat - Poverty as a consequence of the Great Depression and the cause for the Second World War - Forms or types of European integration - Intergovernmentalism: different countries cooperate while keeping their own sovereignty - Federalism: the development of a European federal state with a supranational government and parliament - Functionalism: the pooling of sovereignty in a relatively undisputed field (economic areas, like coal and steel, or agricultural policy), which potentially in the future wouls lead to more political cooperation (Monnet-method) - Zurich speech of Winston Churchill (1946) contributed to the formation of the Council of Europe (1949) in Strasbourg - Schuman Declaration, 9 May 1950 - Schuman Plan - To create the ECSC (a supranational cooperative community) in a \"sectoral community\", which created a common market for coal and steel between France, West Germany, Italy, and the Benelux states, which made war between these nations virtually impossible - Relatively unpolitical, so that national politicians would not object to the transfer of power []{#seminar_1.anchor}**Seminar 1** Class notes - History of European Integration - Schuman Plan - Treaty of Rome - Empty Chair crisis - Luxembourg Compromise - 1, What was the Schuman plan? What factors contributed to its success? What are the similarities and differences between the European Coal and Steel Community that emanated from the Schuman Plan and the European Union as it exists today? - Proposed by French foreign minister Robert Schuman (but drafted by Jean Monnet), a form of supranational organisation that aimed to prevent further European conflict and tie economies of rival nations - Supranational organisation: unlike intergovernmental organisations (e.g. NATO), where the member states have the final say, in a supranational organisation, the leadership is a higher authority - The basis is that both Germany and France needs steel and coal, if we take steel and coal from both of them and give them to the High Authority, they will become interdependent - ECSC, creating a common economic interest in West Germany and France by pooling steel and coal - Neither of the countries could start a war without the other knowing - Both the ECSC and the EU are economic-based alliances causing an interdependency, a combination of intergovernmental institutions (e.g. Council of Ministers) were present in both the ECSC and EU - ECSC had six signatories, today the EU has 27 Member States, freedom of movement (Schengen Area), Treaty of Lisbon (Common Economic Development), even though the institutions are similar in nature, they are very different (e.g. citizens of the MSs can vote for the members of the European Parliament; they used to be assigned) - 2, What was the European Defence Community (EDC, 1954)? What model of integration of Europe did it entail? What factors contributed to it being rejected? What model of integration was pursued by the 'European Six' instead? - The EDC was an attempt (by Jean Monnet and René Pleven) to counterbalance the Soviet Union by creating a European Army to be placed under supranational authority and to be funded by a common budget (unlike e.g. NATO, the MSs send soldiers who respond to NATO officers and to their national government; in the EDC, the soldiers were supposed to respond to a higher authority only) - It was rejected because the French did not want it because it would involve the rearmament of Germany, also it was too much sovereignty to give up, as well as distrust (e.g. a situation where a French soldier has to answer to a German commander could occur); another reason is that the NATO already existed, which would bring very little benefit but large risks (rivalry with the USA) - Ironically enough, Macron now wants a European Army because of Russia and the instability related to the US election, but also because France has always wanted to distance itself from the USA - Instead of supranational integration, Europe chose the intergovernmental route to integration (mostly economic treaties instead of military alliances) - Western European Union (1955) consisting of 10 countries: Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain and the United Kingdom - 3, What were the main successes and challenges of the European Economic Community (EEC)? How did the EEC differ in terms of institutional structure from the earlier established ECSC? - Successes: dropping trade barriers, in 1968 the customs union goes into effect (to get rid of tariffs because of the tariff war), because of this trade boomed and economic growth, reduce in inflation, the Glorious Thirty Years (increase in quality of life), reduce in unemployment, many countries that relied on agriculture could export their goods, countries were able to specialise in fields that were ideal for their countries (e.g. agriculture, and they could import any other material because of the customs union) - Challenges: initially it created unemployment because smaller countries were dependent entirely on tariffs, brain drain (professionals from underdeveloped countries moved to developed countries which created inequalities between countries), tension between the national and intergovernmental leadership, Empty Chair Crisis (1965), Charles de Gaulle was opposing the admission of Britain to the ECC, France sought an independent Europe from Britain (they have a tendency to take over, and they were too close to the US, which would have drained resources to the US instead of Europe), the Empty Chair Crisis therefore is the absence of Britain - 4, What problem did the Luxembourg compromise solve, and what (resolutions) did it entail? []{#european_council.anchor}**European Council** Empty Chair Crisis, 1965/1966 - Question whether or not the European Economic Community should become more supranational - Commission of EEC - First step towards European government (Chairman Hallstein) or body of \"civil servants\" (French President De Gaulle) - Expansion of competences of the supranational Commission and Parliament - Should decisions in the Council be taken by unanimity (intergovernmental) or taken by Qualified Majority Voting (supranational) History of European Integration vs. Theories in Political Science About the Driving Forces Behind the Process of European Integration - History is about singular processes in the past - About undercurrents becoming mainstream and vice versa - Continuities and discontinuities - Political science theories are about the repetition of patterns - Theories describe the likely outcome of an ongoing process - They define the relevancy of details - Neofunctionalism (Ernst B. Haas, 1957) - Main actor is the supranational centre in Brussels - Spillover, the integration of particular economic sectors will lead to the integration of related economic sectors, and eventually it will lead to political integration - Liberal intergovernmentalism (Andrew Moravcsik, 1998) - Main actors are the governments of the member states - European Communities and EU are the product of a series of negotiations between nation states with conflicting economic interests - There are no internal dynamics and there is no spillover - Liberal intergovernmentalism assumes that each national government \"first formulates national preferences, then engages in interstate bargaining, and finally decides whether to delegate or pool sovereignty in international institutions\" - National governments keep control of the process Britain and Europe Before and After 1973, Around 1984, Around 1990, and After 2016 - Brexlit - New genre of literature after the Brexit referendum (2016) - Post-Brexit global Britain - The (imagined) incarnation of the British Empire - Hostility towards the EU (from citizens and politicians) - Interpretation of British Euroscepticism by Robert Gildea - \"The loss of empire \'out there\' seemed to coincide with the arrival of former colonial peoples, threatening their jobs, their communities, their \'way of life\'. The response in the metropolis was to reimpose (...) colonial segregation.\" - British membership of the EC in 1973 \"felt like a defeat. It had swapped a world empire for membership of a European empire that was controlled by France and then, after reunification in 1990, by Germany.\" - \"We didn\'t win two World Wars to be pushed around by a Kraut\" (Leave EU referendum poster with Ursula von der Leyen) - Fundamental differences between the political culture of the UK and of other EU countries - Applications for accession of the UK - \"Failure\" of European Free Trade Association (EFTA) - Applications of UK with Ireland and Denmark in 1961 and 1967 (Norway in 1962 and 1967) - Veto by De Gaulle (in 1963 and 1967) - Hesitations on the British side because of their special relationship with the USA, strong opposition to \"federalism\", and the Common Agricultural Policy - Spirit of The Hague, 1969 - De Gaulle replaced by Pompidou, 1969 - Reorganisation of the Common agricultural Policy - Counterbalancing of West German Ostpolitik - 1970 negotiations, 1973 membership - Enlargement of the European Communities - United Kingdom, 1973 - Ireland, 1973 - Denmark, 1973 - Norway had voted against accession several times - Greece, 1981 - Spain, 1986 - Portugal, 1986 - British 1975 referendum (after accession) - Labour Party: out - Conservative: stay in EC - The UK as an \"awkward partner\" - Britain did not participate in the most successful period of the history of the Communities (1960s), and so membership did not come to have the popular connotations in Britain that it did in the other founder states - Role of the tabloids and media - Use and abuse of the European issue by British politicians for domestic purposes - British national politicians and the European Communities - Thatcher in 1979 - Brexiters in 2016 British Conservatives, the Labour Party, and the \"Elastic Europe\" - \"Elastic Europe\" - Is the EC/EU the engine of a Social Democratic and Christian Democratic mixed economy or the engine of capitalism and free trade? - Bruges Speech by Thatcher to the College of Europe (1988): \"We have not successfully rolled back the frontiers of the state in Britain, only to see them re-imposed at a European level with a European super-state excercising a new dominance from Burrsels.\" - Left-Right polarisation in the European British Parliament - But compromise in the European Parliament - Euroscepticism - Criticism of the EC/EU because the integration process is expected to weaken the national state, or because of its \"socialist\" overregulation, or because of its \"neoliberal\" socio-economic \"race to the bottom\" The Re-Nationalisation of the European Communities in the 1970s and Early 1980s and the Growing Importance of the European Council - Changes in the world economy from 1970 onward - 1970-1973, collapse of the Bretton-Woords system (1944, international monetary system tied to gold through the US dollar), the US is forced to evaluate the US dollar as a result of its \"imperial overstretch\" in Vietnam - Establishment of the European Monetary System and Exchange Rate mechanism in 1979 - Oil crisis in 1973 and 1979, unemployment, economic nationalism (1970s-1980s), national protectionist support for national industries (mines, shipyards, factories) - Transformation of the economy, shift from industry to the service sector - The first meeting of the European Council in Dublin, 11 March 1975 - The first direct elections of the European Parliament, 1979 - To satisfy the supranational demands to counterbalance the establishment of the intergovernmental European Council - Still relatively powerless institution after 1979 - New initiatives MEPs: \"Crocodile Club\" (1980), 1984 design new Federalist Treaty, as a part of a new \"European Spirit\" Conclusions, 1970s-1980s - Decisions nearly always watered-down compromises - Direct elections for the European Parliament (1979), Fontainebleau (1984) - Should the EC/EU be regarded as a meddlesome \"EUSSR\" or as one of the main actors in the neoliberal shift for the protection of the financial markets since the 1980s? - EC/EU had, and has, features of \"Left wing\" and \"Right wing\" politics - Neoliberals emphasise central planning, while anti-marketeers criticise neoliberal features - The European Communities and the European Union were/are about rules and regulations regarding boring \"low politics\" (such as energy), not about the colelctive response to highly geopolitical events - Until recently, because this Commission wants to be a \"geopolitical Commission\" - National political leaders often turned against the EC/EU in an attempt to gain domestic popularity []{#sea_and_the_eu.anchor}**Single European Act and the European Union** Creation of the EU - The creation of the EC/EU can be compared to the constitution of a cathedral, each time a piece was added or something was changed - Output legitimacy (prosperity growth) was more important than input legitimacy (democratic elections) in the 1950s - Resistance to supranational decision-making had created an Unidentified Political Object that does not resemble democracy within the Member States - Strong identification of the EC with democracy only came in the 1960s and 1970s through Southern Enlargement, from that moment on, criticism of \"democratic deficit\" in Europe also began - Supranational integration is considered the real thing nowadays, and intergovernmental cooperation is second best, but from the 1940s to the 1970s it was not a foregone conclusion which form of Europeanisation would prove most successful Schengen Treaty, 1985 - Created the Schengen Area - The Council of Europe - Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Georgia, - European Economic Area - European Union + United Kingdom, Iceland, Norway, Lichtenstein - EU Customs Union - European Union + San Marino, Monaco, Moldova, Türkiye - Schengen Area - European Union + Switzerland, Iceland, Norway, Lichtenstein, Monaco - European Union - Cyprus, Ireland, Bulgaria, Romania - European Free Trade Association - Switzerland, Iceland, Norway, Lichtenstein - Agreement with EU to mint Euros - Vatican City, San Marino, Monaco - European Union - Eurozone + Czech Republic, Denmark, Hungary, Lativa, Lithuania, Poland, Sweden - Eurozone - Cyprus, Ireland, Austria, Belgium, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Bulgaria, Romania The \"triumph\" of capitalism and the neoliberalisation of the European Communities, especially in the EEC - Neoliberalisation of the European integration process from the 1980 onwards - Neoliberalisation: - Conspiracy of \"global capital\" or sensible response to postwar \"neo-corporatist\" economic system running aground in the 1970s and 1980s - The Washington Consensus, international economy (e.g. the International Monetary Fund) - Deregulation, liberalisation, privatisation - Neoliberalisation \"making\" markets - Market mechanism introduced in sphere of public utility services (e.g. health care, education) - Citizens were first consumers - State no longer seen as chair of negotiations between employers and employees, but as market regulator - State run as corporate business, citizenship as consumership or \"shareholdership\" of the national state - Less focus on social rights of groups, more focus on individual rights of consumer - Growing political aversion against neocoeporatism and protectionist support for unprofitable mines, shipyards etc. - Trade unions supported by the working classes forced the government to support these unprofitable industries (e.g. British coal industry) with taxpayer money - Worship against neocorporatism and the influence of trade unions - E.g. 1984-1985, a year-long strike of the British coal miners against the closure of Britain\'s collieries, which ended in a decisive victory for Thatcher\'s Conservative government - François Mitterrand (1916-1996), intellectual (unlike Helmut Kohl) with a keen eye for political trends, from right-wing corporatist and \"maréchaliste\" (he worked with the Vichy government), to left-wing leaning member of the \"Résistance\", to left-wing Socialist président, to one of the \"founding fathers\" of today\'s neoliberal European Union, he promised to nationalise the necessary industries but his policies almost led to the bankruptcy of France The Single European Act, 1986/1987 - Signed in Luxembourg in 1986 - Background - Enlargements required reform decision making - Dooge report, 1985, institutional reform - White paper Delors 1985 (liberalisation, competition of the Internal Market) - Institutional modifications of the Single European Act - QMV (qualified majority voting) Council into force - Cooperation procedure (predecessor co-decision/ordinary legislative procedure), real powers for the EP - It explicitly mentioned the European Council - Stronger position of the Commission - The EEC after the Single European Act - EEC now called an \"Internal Market\" - An internal market is a customs union plus free movement of persons, goods, services and capital, as well as dismantling of non-tariff trade restrictions - After the Treaty of Maastricht (1992), the newly established EU was called an \"economic and monetary union\", an \"internal market\" plus common economic and monetary policy (introduction of the Euro in 2002) Did the European Economic Community start as the economic middle ground? - Political scientist Peter Mair: because the people had brought Hitler and Mussolini to power, they were no longer trusted after 1945, one of the purposes of European integration was to protect some parts of the decision-making process from national representative democracy (Mair, Peter. Ruling the Void: The Hollowing-out of Western Democracy. London: Verson, 2013) - Sociologist Wolfgang Streeck: today\'s EU\'s aim is to protect the international financial markets from what are for them the vagaries of democratic politics (Streeck, Wolfgang. Buying Time: The Delayed Crisis for democratic Capitalism. Translated by Patrick Camiller and David Fernbach. London: Verso, 2014) - Historian Quinn Slobodian: around 1957, some neoliberals advocated the establishment of supranational institutions like the European Communities to protect the financial markets from redistribution of income and wealth by national democracies (Slobodian, Quinn. Globalists: The End of Empire and the Birth of Neoliberalism. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 2018) - Ambivalence of the EEC/EU: shield against, or catalyst of, neoliberal globalisation? - Are Europeanisation and neoliberal globalisation contradictory or complementary? - Did it start in 1958 as the economic middle ground between right-wing negative integration (removal or trade barriers) and left-wing positive integration (economic planning, e.g. Common Agricultural Policy), or as a purely right-wing \"free trade project\"? The end of the Cold War (November 1989) and the establishment of the EU - Fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 - Return of the German question, 1990 - On 25 March 1990, Thatcher invited historians and politicians to a discussion at Chequers (the Prime Minister\'s country house) about Gemran reunification - After reunification \"there would be a growing inclination to resurrect the concept of Mittel-Europa, with Germany\'s role being that of a broker between East and West\" - \"The structure of the EC tended to favour German dominance, particularly in the monetary area\" - The introduction of the European Monetary Union (a consequence of the German reunification?) - André Szász (former UvA ES professor), who had been involved in the negotiations as foreign policy director of De Nederlandsche Bank claimed that the EMU can be regarded as a \"French demand\" and a \"German concession\", accepting EMU and giving up dominant monetary position, was the price that West Germany had to pay for its reunification with the GDR - However, Joachim Bitterlich, former head of the European Policy Department at the (West) German Federal Chancellor\'s Office (1987-1993) stated in 2022: \"German unification and Euro were two parallel processes, not one following the other.\" - However most agree that it was a French plan with a German design, ECB should be a non-political organisation with price stability as its task, modelled on the Deutsche Bundesbank - Summit of the European Council in Rome, October 1990 - Maastricht Treaty (1992) - The UK opted out of the \"third stage\" of the European economic and monetary union as a condition for its adoption of the Maastricht Treaty, the UK followed an independent monetary policy and maintained the pound sterling - Three pillars of the European Union (1992/93) - EEC (1958), Euratom (1958), ECSC (1952) - supranational decision-making - Justice and Home Affairs - intergovernmental cooperation - Common Foreign and Security Policy - intergovernmental cooperation Geopolitical consequences of the establishment of the EU - Copenhagen Criteria (1993), rules that define whether or not a country is eligible to join the EU - \"... institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights, respect for and protection of minorities\" - But also a functional economy, able to compete, etc. - Enlargements of the EU - Original ECSC members, Europe of Six: France, West Germany, Italy, Belgium, Luxembourg, Netherlands - First enlargement: UK, Ireland, Denmark - Second enlargement: Greece - Third enlargement: Spain, Portugal - Third-and-a-half enlargement: East Germany - Fourth enlargement, 1995 - Austria, Sweden, Finland - Many former communist countries were now considered European countries as the Eastern Bloc became \"Central Europe\" Conclusions of part 1 and 2 - Economic paradigm shift and the emergence of contemporary neoliberalism - Triumphalism of shareholders\' capitalism after the end of the Cold War - Claim of ever more critics today that the European Union has been taken over by neoliberals Neofunctionalism and Liberal Intergovernmentalism - Neofunctionalist (Ernst B. Haas, 1957) - Spill-over: the integration of particular economic sectors will lead to the integration of related economic sectors, and eventually will lead to political integration - Main actor is the supranational centre in Brussels - E.g. ECSC, starting with coal and steel and affecting other resources - Liberal Intergovernmentalism (Andrew Moravcsik, 1998) - Main actors are the governments of the member states - European Communities and the EU are the products of a series of negotiations between nation-states with conflicting economic interests, there are no internal dynamics and there\'s no spill-over - Neofunctionalism was inspired by the Monnet Method, but they are not the same - Monnet\'s Functional Method: a strategy to create the conditions for the Europeanisation of political decision-making, ECSC and Euratom examples of functionalist or sectoral communities - Neofunctionalism: theoretical description of process of European integration - Neoliberalism and liberal intergovernmentalism are also not the same - Neoliberalism: political aim of rolling back state power by establishing IMF, World Bank and also the C/EU after Single European Act in order to protect the market system - Liberal intergovernmentalism: theoretical []{#from_the_customs_union_to_the_sm.anchor}**From the Customs Union to the Single Market** Three trends over the past thirty years - Enlargement rounds - From 12 to 28 (and to 27) member states - Ever wider - EU Treaty reform towards constitutionalisation - Ever closer - Politicisation of the EU and euroscepticism - Even more contested union Ever Wider Union: Enlargement - Enlargement after the end of the Cold War - Different geopolitical situation - Neutral Western European states joined (Austria, Finland, Sweden) in 1995 - From 12 to 15 member states and a wish to integrate former communist countries - Copenhagen Criteria for EU membership, 1993 - Political criterion: \"Institutional stability as a guarantee of a democratic and constitutional system, of the protection of human rights and of respect for and the protection of minorities\" - Economic criterion: \"A functioning market economy as well as the capacity to cope with competitive pressure and market forces within the Union\" - Acquis criterion: candidate\'s ability to take on the obligation of membership, meaning the whole law as well as policies of the EU (the \"Acquis communautaire\"), including adherence to the aims of political, economic and monetary union - 1997 Luxembourg, compliance with political criterion as necessary condition for the candidate status and the opening of negotiations - New approach launched in 2011, restricted application of conditionality, greater attention to rule of law issue (lessons learnt for 2004 enlargement) - Eastern enlargement in two phases - 2004: Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia - 2007: Romania, Bulgaria - Strong symbolic dimension in \"returning to Europe\" - Strong asymmetry of power and sensitive elements - Impact on EU in the form of an institutional and policy reform, as well as transnational arrangements (e.g. free movement) - Rule of law enlargement - Political membership is a great incentive to democratise in candidate countries - However, no incentive to stay democratic once they have joined (democratic backsliding in Hungary and Poland) - Future enlargement - Enlargement off the table for a long time - Changing geopolitical situation and Putin\'s invasion of Ukraine is a stimulus for new enlargement - The plan is for Ukraine and 9 other countries to join by 2030 - Current and potential member states - Current: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Republic of Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden - Past: United Kingdom - Candidates: Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia, Moldova, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Serbia, Türkiye, Ukraine - Three stages of membership accession - Official candidate status: when a country complies with the political criterion, but no negotiations yet - Formal accession negotiations: adoption of established EU law, reforms to meet all membership criteria - Membership: once all negotiations and reforms are completed Waves of enlargement Ever Closer Union: EU Treaty Reform - 1986 Single European Act (SEA, entered into force 1987) - 1992 Maastricht Treaty (entered into force 1993) - 1997 Treaty of Amsterdam (entered into force 1999) - Consolidated existing treaties - \"Baby steps\" of integration - Discussion about differentiated integration, opt-outs for UK, Ireland, Denmark - Strengthening foreign policy - Preparing for enlargement - High Representative for common foreign and security policy - 2001 Treaty of Nice (entered into force 2003) - 2001-2003 Constitutional Process (failed) - European Convention for Developing a Constitutional Treaty - Aim: simplify structure, terminology and operation of EU - Innovation in reaction to critique of democratic deficit - Strengthen citizen\'s rights - Rejection of the Constitutional Treaty: France (29 May, 2005, turnout 70%, rejection 55.6%), the Netherlands (1 June, 2005, turnout 62%, rejection 61.8%) - \"Period of reflection\" 2005-2007 - 2007 Treaty of Lisbon (entered into force 2009) - Reform Treaty - 90% of the reforms foreseen in European Constitutional Treaty - But not named \"constitution\", only amending existing treaties rather than creating entirely new legal order - Additional opt-outs for UK and others - Since only reform, no referendum necessary in most MSs - Rejected by Irish voters in 2008, but approved in second vote - Last ratification: Czech Republic, November 2009 - In effect since 1st December 2009 - Replaced the 3 pillars within EU as overall legal structure - Extended the use of QMV instead of unanimity, double majority (55% of MSs representing 65% of the EU population) - Democracy: more powers to EP and national parliaments, citizens initiatives, Charter of Fundamental Rights - Permanent president of European Council - EU External Action Service - Article 50, the \"Brexit Clause\" - Future reforms? - Amid new enlargement round, ambitions for treaty reforms - MEPs submitted proposal for treaty reform, towards a more bicameral system, more powers to the EU, paneuropean referendums Politicisation of the EU and euroscepticism - Public opinion on European Integration - \"Permissive consensus\" in early years - Since the Maastricht Treaty, shift to \"Constraining Dissensus\" - EU support varies across countries and within countries - Diffuse vs. specific support - Regime vs. policy support - Euroscepticism - First used for British PM Margaret Thatcher - Originally coined by mass media, today also in academic research - \"Doubt and distrust on the subject of European integration\" (Flood, 2002: 73) - Party-based euroscepticism vs public euroscepticism - Party-based euroscepticism has risen - Public euroscepticism existed before but less relevant - What is politicisation? - \"Increase in polarisation of opinions, interests, or values and the extend to which they are publicly advanced towards policy formation within the EU\" (de Wilde & Zürn), three indicators: awareness, mobilisation, polarisation - Three-dimensional concept (de Wilde et al, Kriesi): salience (visibility) of the EU and its policies, expansion (range) of actors involved in monitoring/debating EU policy (executives, parties, civil society, mass publics), polarisation (intensity, direction) of actors and opinions - Can vary independently, but fully politicised issues are politicised on all three dimensions - How citizens can influence EU politics - Voting in national and EU elections - Referendum on the EU - European Citizens\' initiatives - No-votes in European referendums - Norway (1972, 1994) - accession - Switzerland (1992) - accession - Denmark (1992, 2000) - Maastricht and Eurozone - Ireland (2001) - Nice Treaty - Sweden (2003) - Euro - The Netherlands (2005) - European Constitution - France (2005) - European Constitution - Ireland (2008) - Lisbon Treaty - The Netherlands (2016) - Ukraine Agreement - UK (2016) - Brexit - The Brexit referendum, 2016 - December 2013: PM Cameron promises referendum if conservatives win elections - Nationally, 52% vote to leave - A divided country: Scotland and Northern Ireland and the young and better educated vote to remain, along with London - The young people voted remain - The Brexit Leave campaign: supported by UKIP and right-wing newspapers, focused on immigration, extra funding of NHS, freedom to forge less onerous (\"a contract or lease that has more obligations than advantages) international trade agreements, \"Project Fear\", rejection of expert opinions - The Brexit Remain campaign: supported by main political parties and some national newspapers, focused on negative economic implications of leaving, down-played immigration issue, proposals to limit migration from EU in the future at odds with the principle of the free movement of people enshrined in the EU Treaties - The Brexit negotiations under Article 50, EU Council delegated Brexit negotiations to the Commission, led by Michel Barnier, negotiating principles (EU to speak with one voice, phased approach, ensure the integrity of the internal market, commitment ot the Good Friday agreement and peace in Northern Ireland) - Outlook: EU in \"polycrisis\" and \"permanent emergency\" - Eurozone crisis - \"Refugee crisis\" - Brexit - Covid-19 - Russia\'s war on Ukraine - \"Europe will be forged in crises, and will be the sum of the solutions adopted for those crises\" (Jean Monnet, 1967) []{#the_ec_and_the_com.anchor}** The European Commission and the Council** Supranationalism vs Intergovernmentalism Interest Decision making procedure Example ---------------------- -------------------------- --------------------------------- ---------------------------------- Supranationalism Of the overall community Qualified Majority Voting (QMV) Institution: European Commission Intergovernmentalism Of the member states Unanimity (veto) Institution: European Council The European Commission - Promoting the Common Interest - Overview - \"Guardian of the Treaties\" - Executive of the EU - Distinct from Council, innovative - Ex-High Authority of the ECSC - Embodies Jean Monnet\'s vision of a \"functionalist bureaucracy\" - Role of the Commission - \"The Commission shall promote the general interest of the Union and take appropriate initiatives to that end.\" Article 17(1), TEU - \"In carrying out its responsibilities, the Commission shall be completely independent. (...) The members of the Commission shall neither seek nor take instructions from any Government or other institution, body, office or entity. They shall refrain from any action incompatible with their duties or the performance of their tasks.\" Article 17(3), TEU - Roles of the European Commission - 1, Agenda setting and Proposing legislation to the Parliament and the Council - 2, Manage and implements EU policies and budget - 3, Enforce European law (with the European Court of Justice) - 4, Represent the EU on the international stage - Functions of the Commission - Political executive wing, Commissioners and staff - Administrative wing, Commission directorates generals (DG) and services - Commission President - The political leader of the Commission - Has permanent secretariat: Secretariat-General - Power to re-allocate portfolios and reshuffle - Primus supra pares (one over equals?) (primus inter pares - first among equals) - The college of commissioners - One Commissioner per member state - Each with a portfolio (sectoral: Trade, Energy, Home Affairs etc., functional: budget) - Plans to reduce to 2/3 by 2014, but not implemented - Consensus reached through debate & bargaining - Principle of collegiality, voting rate - The structure of the European Commission - College of Commissioners, Commissionary Cabinets, Directorates General (DGs) and Services, units - Appointment of the Commission - Appointment of the Commission\'s President - Appointment of the Commissioners (2a, Proposition of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy; 2b, Proposition of the other Commissioners; 2c, Appointment of the Commission) - The Cabinet: the Commissioner\'s private office - Key role in forwarding Commissioner\'s ideas - Monitors work in other Commissioners\' departments - Staff interact vertically and horizontally - Regular Chefs de cabinet meetings chaired by SG - Interface with outside world - Traditionally national clusters but increasingly supranational composition and culture (redefinition of relationship between national governments and Commission) - DGs and Services - Part of the admin/bureaucratic level - Divided among departments called \"directorate-generals\" (DG) or \"services\" (e.g. the Legal Service) - Each DG is in charge of a particular area, a Director General is responsible to the respective Commissioner - DGs prepare legislative documents, these documents only become official after being \"adopted\" by the College - DGs manage the adopted programs and policies - Organisation of the Commission - Commission administration, in total, c. 30,000 Commission officials, c. 12,500 AD officials - Most prestigious, involved in policymaking and policy management, competitive recruitment process based on merit, \"Concours\", national quotas - Geographical balance, multi-national chains of command, nationality historically and issue for appointment to higher levels, now much less - How \"supranational\" are Commissioners really? - 1 commissioner/member state, battle over portfolios - Reliable national politicians with national careers - G. Verheugen (Commissioner for Enterprise) repeatedly opposed Commission proposal to reduce new cars\' carbon dioxide emissions in 2007-2008 - External relations - Special case: Foreign Affairs and Security Policy represented by the High Representative (Article 17(1), TEU) - Until Lisbon, the High Representative was a part of the Council - Now, in CFSP still under mandate of Council - Intergovernmental influence of the Commission - National governments are motors of integration - Commission\'s authority is delegated - Commission facilitates IG cooperation - Power decided by treaty negotiations - Commission actors pursue national interests - Supranational influence of the Commission - Commission influences European Council and IGC outcomes - Day-to-day, Commission interprets vague treaty-based frameworks - Commission actors tend to have a supranational identity Council System - European Council - Defines EU\'s general political direction and priorities, no legislation - Meets 4 times a year - Heads of state or government - With President Charles Michel - Council of the EU (/Council of Ministers) - Representing the governments of MSs - National ministers - Legislative body - Both representing member states, intergovernmental - Council of Europe - Conseil de l\'Europe, Europarat - International human rights organisation - Not an EU institution - Seat in Strasbourg - 46 member states, all signed European Convention of Human Rights (Russia was a member of CoE until 2022) European Council - Founded in 1974, 1987 first mentioned in the Treaties (SEA) - Since 2009 official institution of the EU - Heads of state and government, director\'s club - Founding idea: no civil servants, no papers - Meet at least four times a year - \"General political directions and priorities\" (Article 15(1), TEU) - Agenda setter, no legislative function - European Council meetings - High profile summits of political leaders - Attended by European Commission President and High Representative - Breaks deadlock over politically charged issues - Key role during two decades of eurosclerosis - President of the European Council - Role exists since 2009 - Elected by the European Council with qualified majority - For 2.5 years - Renewable once - Article 15(5) TEU - Currently Charles Michel (former prime minister of Belgium, member of Renew Europe) - Predecessors: Donald Tusk (Poland) and Herman von Rompuy (Belgium) - As of 1st December 2024, Antonio Costa (former prime minister of Portugal, social democrat) - The High Representative - The High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy - Visible international legal personality, blurs boundaries between Council and Commission, boosts EU as credible global actor, high-level diplomacy through European External Action Service - European Council appoints High Representative for 5-year term - Currently Josep Borrel - As of the 1st of December Kaja Kallas - Rotating presidency - Every six months, other MS has presidency, plans, schedules and chairs of Coreper and working groups - Highly coveted, balances power between big and small countries, great agenda setting possibility, however, huge workload - Enigmatic identity, collective European solutions vs national interests - Permanent president of European Council, loss of power - Council of the European Union - Legislative body - Formerly \"Council of Ministers\" - Meetings of national ministers - e.g. ECOFIN council, Foreign Affairs council, etc. - Frequency varies by the importance of the portfolio and EU competence - Meetings of over 100 people - Council of the European Union - General Affairs (GAC) - Foreign Affairs (chaired by the High Representative) - Economic and Financial Affairs (Ecofin) and the Euro Group - Agriculture and Fisheries - Justice and Home Affairs Council (JHA) - Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer Affairs Council (EPSCO) - Competitiveness - Transport, Telecommunications and Energy - Environment - Education, Youth, Culture and Sports - Decisions in the Council - Culture of consensus, voting is uncommon, no \"push for vote\" - Qualified Majority Voting (QMV), weighted vote broadly based on population size (55% of MSs and 65% of EU population, at least four member states as \"blocking minority\" to avoid 3 countries blocking) - 1.5 years for legislative proposal to go through Council - COREPER - Committee of Permanent Representatives, two permanent representatives per MS (diplomats) - Preparatory body of the Council, intense negotiations, de-facto decision makers, weekly meetings to prepare work of the Council - Unique vantage point, horizontally 8work across all EU affairs) and vertically (work between ministers and experts) - An example of the Council\'s hybrid identity - National interests vs collective European solutions - Permanent representatives \"eat, drink, and breath EU issues seven days a week\" (Lioner Barber, 1995) - Criticised for lack of transparency, collusion Inter-institutional relations - Interactions with Commission - Main pulse and dynamic of European integration - Both strained and smooth - Empty chair crises of 1965 - Interactions with European Parliament - Originally one-sided and at arm\'s length - New dynamic in context of co-decision/OLP - Towards a bicameral federal political system (Lewis) Conclusion - Commission - Predominantly supranational - Agenda setter and guardian of treaties - Council - Predominantly intergovernmental - European council, heads of state or government providing guidance - EU council, national ministers as legislative body (with EP) []{#seminar_3.anchor}**Seminar 3** From Rome to Maastricht - 1, What priorities of European integration (for the European Economic Committee) did each of these entail: completion, deepening, widening. How did the Single European Act (1985/1987) contribute to the project of completion and deepening of European integration? - Completion refers to the goal of achieving a fully functional single European market - By e.g. minimising tariffs, free movement of people, goods, services and capital etc. To create an economic area without borders where customers and services are operating freely - Completion removed internal barriers between the coutnries and creating a functional common market (completion) - Common agricultural policy - Deepening the integration between member states, building upon the old agreements, like the Schengen Area and the euro as a single currency - Economically, Europe is already integrated, the goal is to create a more cohesive Europe with stronger political institutions - Labour regulations in individual member states - Copenhagen criteria - Widening is the expansion of the EU, enlargement, but also integration spilling over to areas that are not the economy (e.g. ) - The goal is peace, stability, security, economic growth - Democratic peace theory, a democracy is very unlikely to fight wars against another democracy - Also the argument that democracy leads to wealth and vice versa (Acemoglu ad Robinson) - 2, What steps for creating the EMU (Economic and Monetary Union) did the Werner plan envision? Why was the Werner plan abandoned? What model of European integration did \"the Six\" member states go for instead? - Federalism, central decision making body, common currency, cooperation - Abandoned because of the economic crisis and the fight over fiscal sovereignty - More lenient model instead, e.g. fixed exchange rates between European currencies - Another thing is the common central bank, \"your protection benefits me\" - Bretton-Woods (a conference held in 1944), before the conference the value of every currency depended on the US dollar which depended on the value of gold, it was decided to remove the gold standard, now only the US dollar determined the value of currencies - 3, What changes to the European structure (institutional and decision-making) did the Maastricht Treaty introduce? Has the deepening of the process of European integration and the transition towards a more political union through the Maastricht Treaty been a positive development in your opinion? - The EU was founded - The European Central Bank was established - EU citizenship, free movement of goods, people, services and capital in the EU - The Three Pillars (European Communities, common foreign security policy, justice and home affairs) - European communities, focusing on the same economic, environmental policies - Common foreign security policy, e.g. France has its own policy on Africa, but the EU is going to have a common policy, with France as a part of it, national policies and EU policies also rarely contradict each other (e.g. Hungary on the Ukraine-Russia war hihi és haha) - Justice and home affairs, deciding on immigration, asylum, police and judiciary matters, e.g. right now it is illegal to deny someone who seeks asylum - Introduction of the euro, the EMU and the Eurozone were achieved - Fortified the European Parliament\'s role in decision making, it gave rights to EU member citizens to influence policy by voting for EP representatives - European Council as an institution was formalised, it gave council ministers more powers - Definitive majority, QMV (qualified majority vote), no definitive veto power for one country (except for issues like the membership of Türkiye, which would never be approved by Cyprus as it is occupied by Türkiye, in this issue they can veto), two criteria for QME, the states voting for have to be at least half of the total number of member states (15 out of 27), and the countries together have to represent at least 65% of EU population From Maastricht to Lisbon - Single European Act (1985/87) - All the treaties signed between the Member States to prepare for the common market - Customs union was achieved, it dismantled tariff restrictions - Freedom of movement of people, goods, services and capital - Introduced qualified majority vote in the Council - Cooperation procedure was instituted - The EP got 3/4 of the Council\'s policy areas - Maastricht Treaty (1992/93) - EMU - Establishment of all the aforementioned institutions and the Three Pillars - Copenhagen Criteria (1993) - Entrance requirement for new member states (political and economic criteria, compatibility with EU policies) - Free market, no communism - Democracy, free, fair and regular elections - Human rights - Amsterdam Treaty (1997) - Very little institutional change - However, it brought some very important agreements, such as the parliament having the right to approve the commission president - The introduction of the Schengen Area - Extended QMV, more policy areas were being ruled under QMV - Nice Treaty (2001) - Prepare for expansion and the former Eastern Bloc countries - Triple Majority Voting, three criteria to pass, the two criteria of QMV and the majority of representatives - The Charter of Fundamental Rights of European Union - Lisbon Treaty (2007/2009) - Abolished the Triple Majority, instead Double Majority (55% of representatives and 65% of the population) - Abolished the Three Pillars system (mostly integrated into other institutions) - Article 50, exiting the Union orderly was made possible - It was made possible for some member states to opt out of some policies - The President of the European Commission was changed to be elected through the EP - European External Action Service (EEAS), new diplomatic service Questions - 1, To what extent can the European Commission be compared to a national government? - It can propose laws, but it cannot pass and implement them - 2, What is the role of EU expert Committees and EU agency networks in the formulation and implementation of EU policy? - To close the gap between knowledge and policy making, e.g. experts in medicine give consultation so that more realistic policies can be made - Soha nem hallott olyanról hogy az egészségügyi miniszter nem egy orvos lmao - 3, Which body adopts policy proposals in the European Commission? - College of Commissioners - 4, Both the EU Council (or \"Council of Ministers\") and the European Council are part of the Council system - True - 5, COREPER refers to the expert working groups at Council level - False, the members of COREPER are permanent representatives - 6, The President of the European Council is responsible for the coordination of EU foreign policy - False, the responsibility belongs to the Representatives of Foreign Affairs and Security Policy - 7, The European Council must give explicit consent to all legislative acts - False, the European Council does not have power to adapt and amend legislation (with QMV adopted in Lisbon) - 8, Commissioners help to mediate between member states if there is a disagreement in the EU Council - False, commissioners do not need to mediate, the responsibility belongs to the presidency of the Council Weekly news analysis (Panagiotis) - Europe\'s single market moves green and digital goals centre-stage in 2024 (euronews) []{#the_ep.anchor}**The European Parliament** The Evolving EP - Common Assembly of ECSC (1951) - Added democratic legitimacy - 78 members appointed from national legislatures - Power limited to dismissal of High Authority - 1957 Treaty of Rome - Coverage extended to three Communities - Increased right of consultation but Council is not obliged to take account of Assembly\'s position - Right to propose elections by direct suffrage - Until 1979, double mandate of MEPs - National parliamentarians that were sent to the EP - Part-time parliament - Limited power and influence - First direct elections to EP in 1979 - EP used direct elections to ask for more power - Today: equal legislative and budgetary partner to the Council - Scrutinise and hold the Commission to account Power and Influence in Three Key Areas - EU Budget - Commission: Right to scrutinise, dismiss, and appoint the Commission - Law-making: Right to amend and reject Commission proposals The EP and the EU Budget - Budget Treaties of 1970 and 1975 - Right to amend and reject and sign off books - Consulted regarding appointments in Court of Auditors - Power regarding non-compulsory spend only (20%) - Persistent conflict between Council and EP - Resolution via multi-annual financial perspective - Lisbon removes non-compulsory distinction - EP and Council as bicameral budgetary authority - EU budget - Central tool: priorities, direction, and how money is spent - Multi-annual Framework (MMF) result of long political process - 2021-2027 MMF and NextGenerationEU (total 1.8 trillion euros) (first proposal by Commission in May 2018, revised in 2020 due to COVID, July 2020 agreed by member states, December 2020 agreed by EP) - EP and the Commission - Dismissal (EP enjoy right to dismiss whole Commission, never happened, but Santer commission resigned, 1999) - Appointment (1992 Maastricht and 1997 Amsterdam: formal right to veto, President-designate and whole Commission, 2007 Lisbon: direct role in appointing President, EP interviews and approves individual CoM candidates) - Scrutiny (limited to invitation to explain and justify decisions, commission submits annual programme to EP) The EP\'s Increasing Legislative Powers - Consultation procedure, 1979 - Cooperation procedure - Introduced b y1986 SEA - Second reading and conditional veto - Closer collaboration with Commission - Co-decision (renamed Ordinary Legislative Procedure by Lisbon Treaty) - Introduced by 1992 Maastricht Treaty - Third reading, unconditional veto, conciliation process - From 15 Articles, today it covers 85 policy areas - EP and Council as co-legislators - The EP has shaped legislation via the OLP - e.g. increasing environmental standards, promoting civil liberties, improving consumer rights - Changing inter-institutional relations - Small negotiating teams from EP and Council - Trilogues (EP, Council, European Commission) - Legislation concluded on first reading - However, implications for transparency - Efficiency versus legitimacy Internal Politics of the EP - Strong committees and weak parties - Political groups - Link between Brussels and national level parties - Need 23 MEPs to create a group - Seven cross-national groups - Largest groups: European People\'s Party (EPP, centre-right), Social & Democratic Alliance (S&D, centre-left) - Key positions - President, chairs Plenary and represents the EP, allocation decided by party elites - Vice-Presidents, support the President and help run the Parliament - Committee chairs, set calendar and agenda of meetings, participate in OLP inter-institutional negotiations - EP President Roberta Metsola - In office since 2022 - After death of Davide Sassoli - Youngest president, third woman, first Maltese - Member of EPP - Committees - Over 20 standing committees - Divided functionally into policy areas - Repository for policy expertise - Legislation mainly discussed in committees - Appoint teams for intra/inter-institutional negotiations - Rapporteurs and \"shadow\" rapporteurs, Draft Committee reports (subject to amendment), shape positions adopted by their political groups, central to negotiation team for talks under OLP - Legislative process, Trilogues - Commission + EP + Council together - Lack of transparency, but much faster - Parliament at work, Plenary - Multilingualism, 24 languages, 552 combinations, effects on debates and the public - Plenary for public position taking specifics already discussed within committees - Keeping check on committees - Final say about legislative reports Voting in the EP Elections - EP elections every five years - First elections in 1979 - Last elections in 2024 - Regional or national lists - Proposal for transnational lists - Steady decrease in turnout until 2019 - EP elections, who can vote/stand as candidate - Be a citizen of the EU - Be resident in the EU country in which they propose to vote or to stand as candidate - Citizens residing abroad can choose - Satisfy the same conditions as a national of the EU country where one wishes to vote or to stand as a candidate (the principle of equality between national and non-national voters) - Example: Daniel Cohn Bendit (former co-president of the Greens-EFA Group, MEP successively for France and for Germany) - Turnout levels in EP elections, 1979-2024 - Decreased from 61.99% (1979) to 42.61% (2014), decreased steadily every year - But then increased to 50.66% (2019) and 50.97% (2024) - Low turnout - Problem for legitimacy - EP plays important role in the legitimacy of the EU - Its democratic credentials have underpinned the EP\'s calls for increased power - However, since 1999, less than 50% voter turnout - Then slightly above 50% - Possible explanations for low turnout - Second-order to national elections - Campaigns organised around national parties (exception: Volt Europa) - Campaigns run on national platform - Little media reporting on EU politics - How do people decide in EP elections? - Two theories - Issue voting approach: EU preferences dominate, national politics and party identity play a minor role - Second-order election approach: low salience, national issues dominate, decisions based on national government satisfaction and party loyalty (Reif/Schmitt, 1980) The EP After the 2024 Elections - Consolidation of the far right - Very successful in France, Italy, Austria, Germany, and the Netherlands - Significant losses in Denmark, Finland, Sweden, and Hungary - East-West divide (proximity to Russia) or cyclical (incumbency) effect? - Seats in 2019-2024 - The Left, 37 - S&D, 139 - Greens/EFA, 71 - Renew Europe, 102 - EPP, 178 - ECR, 69 - ID, 49 - NI, 62 - 705 seats - Seats in 2024-2029 - The Left, 46 (radical left) - S&D, 136 (social democrats) - Greens/EFA, 53 (greens) - Renew Europe, 77 (liberals) - EPP, 188 (Christian democrats and conservatives) - ECR, 78 (national conservatives) - ID, 58 (radical right) - NI, 45 - Others, 55 - 720 seats - The EP is progressively moving to the right - EPP - European People\'s Party - Largest group - Centre-right, conservative and Christian democratic parties - VIPs: Ursula von der Leyen, Manfred Weber, Roberta Metsola - Dutch members: CDA, NSC, BBB - S&D - Socialists & Democrats - Second largest group, historically in \"grand coalition\" with EPP - VIPs: António Costa (president-elect of the European Council), Frans Timmermans (until 2023), Iratxe García Pérez (president of the party) - Renew Europe - Liberal parties - In coalition with EPP and S&D - VIPs: Emmanuel Macron, Valerie Hayer, Kaja Kallas - Dutch parties: VVD, D66 - Patriots for Europe - Hard eurosceptic, for a Europe of the nations, far right - Founded in 2024 by Orbán - Parties: Lega, Rassemblement national, PVV, FPO, Fidesz - ECR - European Conservatives and Reformists - \"Eurorealists\", alternative agenda for Europe - Founded in 2009 - VIPs: Giorgia Meloni - Dutch member: SGP - Europe of sovereign nations - Founded in 2024, smallest group - AfD and friends - Greens/European Free Alliance - Green parties, Volt Europa, pirate parties and EFA (for stateless nations and minorities) - VIPs: Bas Eikhout - Dutch parties: Groen Links, Volt - The Left - Die Linke, Podemos, France Insoumise movimento 5 stelle - Co-chairs: Manon Aubry, Martin Schirdewan - Dutch party: Partij voor der Dierne - Still second order elections? - National elections are first order - Judged as less important by voters (lower turnout, national topics dominate, popularity vote) - Far right and eurosceptic parties gain - Summary - EP as \"rising star\" of EU institutions - From powerless consultation body to equal partner in EU law making - Increasingly eurosceptic composition - Claims about democratic legitimacy undermined by low turnout European Union Council of Europe United Nations --------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------- European Court of Justice, Luxembourg European Court of Human Rights, Strasbourg International Court of Justice, The Hague International Criminal Court, The Hague European General Court, Luxembourg Settles legal disputes by states Independent I.O., 120 MSs European Civil Service Tribunal War crimes European Court of Auditors []{#ecj_and_ecb.anchor}** European Court of Justice and European Central Bank** The European Court of Justice - Composition of ECJ - 1 judge per member state - 8 Advocates General - Judges hear cases and adopt decisions - \"Male, pale and stale\", first female judge in 1999, high average age, no retirement age - Appointed for 6 years, can be reappointed - Lisbon Treaty addressed secretive and political appointment - Advocates General: deliver non-binding opinions to judges, 5 from 5 largest member states, 3 rotating, Lisbon increased number to 11 - Registar: procedural and administrative duties, 6 year term - Chambers: chamber of 3-5 judges, Grand Chamber of 13 judges, full court in exceptional cases - Procedure - Written and oral stage, written is most important - Final decision adopted by a majority - No mention of dissenting opinion to maintain anonymity and independence of judges - Judgement published in the EU\'s Official Journal - Decisions are final - European General Court - Formerly Court of First Instance - Independent status since 2001 Nice Treaty - Aim to reduce workload of ECJ - Focus on legal issues and fact finding - Administrative law, not political or constitutional - Judges appointed as per ECJ, no Advocate Generals - European Civil Service Tribunal - Created in 2004 - To reduce the workload of the EGC - For cases involving European administration - 7 judges - Number of judges varies per case - Cases can be appealed to the EGC on points of law only - Activities of the ECJ - Aim: to ensure that EU law is observed in interpretation and application of treaties - Jurisdiction: two main tasks, direct actions and references for preliminary rulings - Judicial activism, exploit gaps and vagueness of law to expand its own powers and role - ECJ as a driver of European integration - Direct actions - Brought by natural and legal persons, member states or EU institutions - Infringement proceedings (if MS fails to fulfil EU obligation) - Actions for judicial review (annulment procedure, reviews the legality of acts, judicial scrutiny and control) - Actions for damages (compensation for individuals or member states dur to EU\'s illegal activity) - References for preliminary ruling - Authoritative interpretation of EU law from ECJ - National courts use interpretation to decide case - De jure: co-operative and non-hierarchical relationship - De facto: hierarchical relationship - Used to issue important political decisions (central in shaping legal order of EU, including EU relationship with MSs) - Important in development of key legal principles (e.g. direct effect, supremacy, state liability) - Teleological approach (concerns that the ECJ is too political) - Judicial politics - Treaties and constitutions as incomplete contracts - Courts can exploit the vagueness to shape policy outcomes - Judges should be neutral and independent, but mostly have political and ideological bias - EU especially prone to judicial politics as EU law is vague, no constitutions, and EU decision making process involves many actors - Other example is the US supreme court - ECJ rulings are often in favour of consumer rights, gender equality and democracy - Special case: integration through law - ECJ therefore acts as policymaker - Concerns that the ECJ is too political - Weakens separation of powers - Integration through law - In \"Eurosclerosis\", the ECJ emerges as motor of integration - Landmark rulings like Van Gend en Loos (1963, direct effect), Costa vs Enel (supremacy of EU law) and Cassis de Dijon (1979, mutual recognition) - Often seen as de facto constitution of the EU - Van Gend en Loos ruling, 1963 - Direct effect - Dutch company invoked EU law against Dutch customs authority - ECJ was asked for preliminary ruling: does EU law apply? - ECJ decided that individuals can invoke EU law because \"the community constitutes a new legal order (...) subjects of which are not only member states but also their nationals\" - Against the will of majority of member states - EU law is more like domestic law than like international law - EU law as \"law of the land\" in member states - Costa vs Enel ruling - Supremacy of EU law - Italian court asked ECJ for preliminary ruling in case with clear contradiction between EC and Italian law - ECJ ruled that EU law is superior to national law - Argument: be creating the EU, MSs have limited their sovereignty - Today, supremacy applies to all EU norms - Cassis de Dijon ruling, 1979 - Mutual recognition - French blackcurrant liqueur (15-20% alc.) - German company wanted to import and sell it, but according to German law, liqueurs must have more than 25% alcohol to sell it as liqueur - Argument: this is like an import barrier, which is against the free market - ECJ made \"mutual recognition\" ruling - A product that may be brought to the market in a Member State also may be brought to the market in all other MSs if there are no specific reasons against the common welfare - Current challenges - Neutrality vs Judicial politics (separation of powers, however, judicial politics has decreased due to workload) - Eastern enlargement (new judges from diverse legal traditions, increased workload) - Accession to European Court of Human Rights (HR not strongest aspect of ECJ\'s work, external treaty with court, political and legal autonomy will be compromised) Economic and Monetary Union - Single currency, the euro - Single monetary authority, the European Central Bank - Responsible for the euro - Determines monetary policy - Single monetary policy - Sets key interest rates - Money supply - Credit conditions - Institutional asymmetry of EMU - Developed monetary union (role of ECB) - Less developed economic union, no economic government - European Central Bank - Founded 1 June 1998 - Located in Frankfurt am Main - After German Bundebank - Eurozone - 20 EU MSs - Used in Austria, Belgium, Croatia, Cyprus, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, and Spain - Do not yet comply with convergence criteria: Bulgaria, Czechia, Hungary, Romania, Poland - Makes sure not to comply with convergence criteria: Sweden - Has an opt-out: Denmark - Also used in European micro-states, such as Kosovo, Andorra, Monaco, San Marino, Vatican City and Montenegro, but they have no representation in any eurozone institution - European System of Central Banks - European Central Bank (ECB) responsible for single currency and sets short-term interest rate - Existing national central banks - Article 127 of the Treaty of the Functioning of the European Union: \"1. the primary objective of the ECSB shall be to maintain price stability.\" - Conditions for Optimal Currency Area (OCA) - Countries are sufficiently integrated economically - Transfer payments (redistribution is in plays) - If sufficient labour market mobility across countries, then it makes sense to have one currency - Economic explanations for EMU - EMU suitable if OCA - Most argue that EU is not an OCA, EMU is a bad move - Some take broader view of OCA, less critical - Endogenous OCA theory, self-fulfilling prophecy - EMU is dependent on central bank credibility (financial markets must have confidence, some argue that ECB has full independence and has clear treaty-based mandate, more confidence than individual central banks) - Political explanations for EMU - Neo-functionalism, spillover from ERM and single market to EMU, importance of supranational actors, e.g. Commission President and DG ECFIN - Intergovernmental, interests and bargaining of largest member states, France keen on controlling German hegemony, Germany benefited form regime similar to national, UK sceptical but could not isolate itself - Development of EMU - Stages of economic integration theory - Free trade area - Customs union - Common market - Economic union (coordination of economic policy) - Monetary union (fixed exchange rate or single currency) - Full economic union - Full political union (con/federation) - Economic and Monetary Union - Two schools of thought - Economists: coordinate economic policy before fixing exchange rates, e.g. West Germany, the Netherlands - Monetarists (early 1960s, late 1970s): economic cooperation is natural by-product of fixing exchange rates, e.g. Belgium, France, Luxembourg - Creation of EMU - Bretton Woods agreement (1944-1971), USD fixed to gold standard, other currencies pegged to USD - Aim for financial stability after the end of the Bretton Woods system - Quest for further economic integration in the EU - Also political project - Werner Plan, 1970 - Pierre Werner, Luxembourg\'s Prime Minister and Finance Minister - Implement EMU by 1980 - Recommended two supranational institutions, the Community System for the Central Banks (monetary) and the Centre of Decision for Economic Policy (macroeconomic) - Most proposals adopted but integration stalled, conflicting visions on reaching EMU, changing international situation - Exchange Rate Mechanism - Exchange rate of euro to national currency - Fluctuation band, +/- 2.25% from agreed parity, +/- 6% for some countries (e.g. Italy) - Automatic intervention at band margins, buying/selling currency, Monetary Committee could intervene - Stable system after difficult take-off - Symbol of successful integration in late 1980s - Delors Report, 1989 - Path for implementing EMU - Step one (1990-1993), capital mobility, economic convergence - Step two (1994-1998), rule definition, institutional architecture - Step three (1999-), introduction of the euro - Convergence criteria theory - Agreed in Maastricht Treaty - Price stability: inflation rate at most 1.5% above best performing member state - Budget deficit at most 3% of GDP - Accumulated public debt at most 60% of GDP - Successful participation in ERM for the past 2 years - Interest rate for government bonds at most 2%-points above rate of three best member states - Stability and Growth Pact, 1997 - Aim: to ensure stability in the eurozone - Monitor and coordinate national fiscal and economic policies - Enforce the deficit and debt limits established by the Maastricth Treaty - Preventive aim: prevent excessive budget deficits - Corrective aim: financial penalties in case of excessive deficits - Convergence criteria practice - In reality MSs regularly breach these rules - Excessive deficit procedure November 2024: Belgium, France, Hungary, Italy, Malta, Poland, Romania, Slovakia - Double standard - Implementing the SGP - Breach of SGP in 2003: France and Germany had excessive budget deficits but no sanctions, change to account for growth - Euro crisis: stricter surveillance - COVID crisis: rules temporarily suspended - 2023: debate about reform of SGP - Criticism of SGP - Too rigid (not enough flexibility for varying economic conditions) - Corrective aim makes economic woes worse - Focus on deficit reduction hampers economic growth - Inconsistent enforcement, low credibility - Political - Criticism of EMU - Poor institutional design - Legitimacy and accountability problems (more independent than any other central bank, difficult to change ECB mandate, few checks and balances regarding national preferences, no institutional counterbalance for ECB policy results) - EMU is incomplete, no equivalent supranational economic institution, budgetary and fiscal policies at national level - Discussion about economic government - Euro crisis - Global financial crisis of 2008 - US mortgage crisis, global banking crisis - Countries in recession by 2009 - Problems securing money to refinance their debt - 2009: economic bailouts for several member states in exchange for strict austerity measures - Supervised by ECB, IMF and world bank - Creation of new institutions (e.g. European stability mechanism in Lisbon Treaty) - Substantial changes to SGP (December 2011, rules regarding debt and deficit, QMV to stop sanctions, expanded role for European Commission []{#seminar_4.anchor}**Seminar 4** EU institutions +-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+ | EU Commission | The Council system | European Parliament | +=======================+=======================+=======================+ | Mandate: | | | | | | | | - Drafts, | | | | formulates and | | | | initiates the | | | | policy creation | | | | process | | | | | | | | - Monitors the | | | | implementation of | | | | EU legislation | | | | (within MSs and | | | | by EU | | | | institutions), | | | | watchdog of the | | | | treaties | | | +-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+ | Composition: | | | | | | | | - 27 Commissioners | | | | | | | | - President, and | | | | Vice Presidents | | | | | | | | - Cabinets | | | | | | | | - DGs | | | +-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+ | Election | | | | | | | | | | | +-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+ Separation of powers and the EU - Trias politica - Executive branch - European Commission - The Council System - Delegated acts, the reason why the Council System is considered a part of both the executive and legislative branches (rules and guidelines to avoid the lengthy process of policymaking) - General rules that may need to be followed to link the procedures to pass a proposal into laws within the EU system - The Delegated Acts concept was introduced in the Lisbon Treaty - Legislative branch - The Council System - European Parliament - Bicameral legislature - Judiciary branch - European Court of Justice Cycle of policymaking - Agenda-setting - Identifying problems - Prioritising issues - Policy formulation - Identifying what is causing the problem and what the consequences may be - The EU consults with experts to create a policy to solve the issue - Policy decision - Voting on the policy as a legislative act - Implementation - If the legislation is passed, it is implemented - e.g. in Iceland the constitution had an article that made it legal to kill a Turk (left over from the 17th century, British corsairs under Turkish flag), and however legal it is, it has not been used, therefore it has not been implemented - Evaluation - Going by the former example, evaluation is looking at how many Turks have been killed in Iceland - Coming to the realisation that the policy has not been implemented, or was unsuccessful/successful Ordinary Legislative Procedure Competences in the EU - Exclusive competencies - Legislative competencies exclusive to the EU - Member states have completely given up their right to legislate in these policies - Member states solely implement the act adopted under these competences of the EU - Member states act together (with the EU) or they do not act at all - Shared competencies - Competences shared between the EU and the member-states - Primary acting mandate lies with the member states - EU may act, subject to the principle of subsidiarity - Including harmonising measures - May include parallel competences (for some policy areas only) - Supplementary competencies - Competences of the EU that supplement primary national actions/competencies - Incentives, financial, technical and other Main policy instruments - Regulations - Binding on the part of member states and individuals (citizens of the member states) - In their entirety, as to result to be achieved, form and methods of implementation - Directly applicable - In all member states - General application - Directives - Binding on the part of member states and individuals - Partially, as to the result to be achieved - To be transposed into national law(s) - In selected member states (to which it addresses) - Vertically directly applicable - Indirectly applicable - Framework rules - Decisions - Binding, on the part of member states and individuals - In their entirety - Country-specific (binding on their addressees only) - Singular acts - Opinions and recommendations - Non-binding - Indirect effect on member states (discretionary power if to act) - It is the obligation of the member states to consider them - Interpretation acts Soft law instruments - Opinions and recommendations - Non-binding - Voluntary - To mitigate political conflicts in a less aggressive way []{#eu_policy_making_processes.anchor}**EU Policy Making Processes** Understanding EU Policy Making Processes - Intergovernmental bodies - European Council (Council of Heads of States) - Council of the European Union (Council of Ministers) - Supranational bodies - European Commission - European Parliament - European Central Bank - European Court of Justice - The Policy Pendulum - Helen Wallace, 1996 - National political arenas of EU member states, national solutions - Transnational political arenas, European solutions - But many in-between arenas, such as health (e.g. COVID-issue), where solutions are mostly case-by-case national or transnational - EU policy making is always based on the notion of proportionality and subsidiarity - \"From the conception of policy to its implementation, the choice of the level at which action is taken (from the EU to local) and the selection of the instruments used must be in proportion to the objectives pursued. This means that before launching an initiative, it is essential to check systematically (a) if public action is really necessary; (b) if the European level is the most appropriate one and (c) if the measures chosen are proportionate to those objectives.\" - Competence - Stated in the Treaty of Lisbon - Categories and Areas of Union Competence - Exclusive: the EU may interfere, has complete competence to come up with e.g. regulations around the monetary union - Shared: supranational law, binding regulations by both the EU and member states, but the actions always have to be negotiated and justified by subsidiarity - Coordinated: \"The Member States shall coordinate their economic and employment policies within arrangements as determined by this Treaty; which the Union shall have competence to provide\", mostly seen in social and employment policy - Exceptions - Exclusive competences - Customs union - The establishing of the competition ruled necessary for the functioning of the international market - Monetary policy for the Member States whose currency is the euro - The conservation of marine biological resources under the common fisheries policy - Common commercial policy - Shared competences - Internal market - Social policy - Economic, social and territorial cohesion - Agriculture and fisheries, excluding the conservation of marine biological resources - Environment - Consumer protection - Transport - Trans-European networks - Energy - Arena of freedom, security and justice - Common safety concerns in public health matters - Coordinated competences - Protection and improvement of human health - Industry - Culture - Tourism - Education, vocational training, youth and sport - Civil protection - Administrative cooperation - Policy-making instruments - Primary legislation - Treaties with direct effect -

European Integration and Democracy Exam Notes PDF

Document Details

Tags

Related

Summary

Full Transcript

Upgrade to continue