Policymaking in the EU PDF

Policymaking in the European Union/ Notes Table of Contents Section 1 - General.................................................................................................. 2 Section 2 – Treaty Reform........................................................................................ 5 Section 3 – Enlargement and Neighbourhood Policy................................................. 10 Section 4 - The European Council & The Council of the EU........................................ 15 Section 5 - The European Parliament & Decision-Making.......................................... 20 Section 6 - The European Parliament & Elections..................................................... 24 Section 7 - The European Commission.................................................................... 29 Section 8 - Interest Groups & Lobbying in the EU...................................................... 34 Section 9 - Inter-Institutional Relations in the EU..................................................... 38 Section 10 - Compliance with EU Law & The Court of Justice.................................... 42 Section 11- Euroscepticism in the EU...................................................................... 47 Section 12- Democratic Backsliding in the EU.......................................................... 52 Section 13 - Sample Question................................................................................. 57 Section 1 - General TEU vs TEFU The Treaty on European Union (TEU) and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) are the two primary treaties that form the legal foundation of the EU. They serve different but complementary purposes: 1. Treaty on European Union (TEU) – "The Constitutional Treaty" Purpose: Establishes the fundamental principles, values, and overall framework of the EU. Focus: Broad political structure, objectives, and governance. Key Contents: Defines the EU’s core values (democracy, human rights, rule of law). Establishes the main EU institutions (European Council, Commission, Parliament, Council). Outlines decision-making processes and the relationship between member states and the EU. Defines key principles such as subsidiarity (EU acts only when necessary) and proportionality. Sets the process for membership (Article 49) and withdrawal (Article 50, used for Brexit). Analogy: The TEU is like the EU’s constitution—it lays out the foundational rules and high- level structure. 2. Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) – "The Operational Treaty" Purpose: Provides detailed rules on how the EU operates in specific policy areas. Focus: Policies, competences, and legal mechanisms for the EU's functioning. Key Contents: Specifies the powers of the EU (exclusive, shared, supporting). Regulates key policies like: Single Market & Competition (rules for trade, business, and economic policy). Monetary Policy (especially for Eurozone countries). Social Policy (labor laws, environmental policies, consumer protection). Justice & Home Affairs (asylum, immigration, judicial cooperation). Outlines the EU’s legislative process (ordinary and special legislative procedures). Details the role of EU institutions in policy-making. Analogy: The TFEU is like the EU’s rulebook—it provides the specifics of how policies work and how institutions implement them. TFEU (Treaty on the Functioning of Feature TEU (Treaty on European Union) the EU) Establishes the EU’s principles and Details how the EU’s policies and Purpose governance structure institutions function Specific policies, competences, and Focus High-level political framework mechanisms Key EU values, institutions, decision- Internal market, competition, monetary Topics making, enlargement, withdrawal policy, social policy, justice, security Legal Outlines fundamental legal principles Implements those principles in practice Basis 2 How They Work Together The TEU provides the framework and guiding principles. The TFEU provides the details and operational rules. Together, they form the legal foundation of the EU, replacing previous treaties (e.g., Maastricht, Rome). Primary vs Secondary Law In the EU legal order, the distinction between primary law and secondary law is fundamental to understanding how the EU functions. 1. Primary Law – The Foundations of the EU Definition: The highest legal authority in the EU, consisting of the fundamental treaties agreed upon by member states. Sources: Mainly the EU treaties, which establish the EU’s structure, institutions, and competences. Key Examples: Treaty on European Union (TEU) Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU Treaties of Accession (when new countries join the EU) Protocols & General Principles of EU Law (e.g., proportionality, subsidiarity) Analogy: Primary law is like a country’s constitution—it defines the rules of the system and sets limits on what the EU can do. 2. Secondary Law – Laws Made Based on Primary Law Definition: Laws made by EU institutions under the authority granted by primary law. Forms: Includes various legal acts that implement policies, enforce treaties, and regulate member states. Key Types: Regulations – Binding on all member states and directly applicable (e.g., General Data Protection Regulation - GDPR). Directives – Binding as to the result but allow national governments to choose how to implement them (e.g., Working Time Directive). Decisions – Binding on specific parties (e.g., an EU ruling on a competition case). Recommendations & Opinions – Non-binding guidelines. Analogy: Secondary law is like ordinary legislation in a national system—it provides the detailed rules and policies under the framework of primary law. Key Differences Feature Primary Law Secondary Law The foundational treaties and Laws and legal acts created by EU Definition principles of the EU institutions Supreme authority in the EU legal Hierarchy Must comply with primary law system 3 Who Creates EU institutions (Commission, Member states via treaties It? Parliament, Council) TEU, TFEU, Charter of Examples Regulations, Directives, Decisions Fundamental Rights How They Work Together Primary law grants power to the EU to legislate. Secondary law implements policies within the framework set by primary law. If a secondary law conflicts with primary law, EU courts can invalidate it. The EU treaty reform process has evolved over time, reflecting the need to adapt to political, economic, and institutional changes. There are several types of treaty reforms that the EU can undertake, depending on the level of change required and the procedures followed. 4 Section 2 – Treaty Reform Treaty reform procedures 1. Ordinary Revision Procedure (Major Treaty Reform) Purpose: Used for major reforms that affect fundamental aspects of the EU, such as expanding powers, restructuring institutions, or modifying decision-making rules. Process: Proposal: A member state, the European Parliament, or the Commission submits a proposal to the European Council. Convention or Intergovernmental Conference (IGC): Usually, a Convention (with representatives from national parliaments, governments, the European Parliament, and the Commission) is held to discuss the reform. An Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) then finalizes the text. Unanimous Agreement: All member states must agree on the new treaty. Ratification: Each member state must ratify the treaty, usually through national parliaments or referenda. Example: Treaty of Lisbon (2007): Major institutional reforms, strengthening the role of the European Parliament and creating the permanent President of the European Council. Summary of the Process Step What Happens? Who Decides? 1. Proposal A member state, EP, or Sent to the Council of the Commission submits a treaty EU and European change proposal. Council. 2. Initial Examination European Council examines Simple majority in the whether deeper discussion is European Council. needed. 3. Convention? If needed, a Convention is Simple majority in convened to draft proposals. European Council. 4. Intergovernmental Government representatives Unanimous agreement by Conference (IGC) negotiate and finalize treaty all member states. changes. 5. Ratification All member states must ratify National parliaments (or the treaty. referenda in some cases). 2. Simplified Revision Procedure (Limited Treaty Reform) Purpose: Used for smaller reforms, particularly those affecting internal EU policies (e.g., how policies are implemented) but not expanding EU competences. Process: Proposal is submitted to the European Council. The European Council decides by unanimity after consulting the Commission and the European Parliament. Ratification by all member states is still required, but there is no need for an Intergovernmental Conference. 5 Example: European Stability Mechanism (ESM) Treaty (2012): Amended the TFEU to allow for the creation of a permanent bailout fund. Key Takeaways Type of Reform Scope Approval Required Example Ordinary Revision Major reforms IGC + Unanimity + National Treaty of Lisbon Procedure Ratification (2007) Simplified Revision Limited internal Unanimity (European Council) + ESM Treaty Procedure reforms National Ratification (2012) Who Has the Most Power in Treaty Reform? Actor Role Can They Veto? Decides to open European Council (Heads of negotiations, approves final ✅ Yes (Unanimity) State or Government) treaty changes Intergovernmental Negotiates and finalizes ✅ Yes (Unanimity) Conference (IGC) treaty text Must ratify treaties through National Governments ✅ Yes (Unanimity) national procedures ✅ Yes (Unanimity or 6- Ratify treaties, can reject National Parliaments month veto for Passerelle Passerelle Clause changes Clauses) Consulted, must approve ❌ No (but has growing European Parliament Passerelle Clause changes influence) Proposes reforms, provides European Commission ❌ No (advisory role only) expertise Examines proposals and Convention (if convened) ❌ No (drafting body only) drafts treaty changes European Central Bank Consulted on monetary ❌ No (advisory role only) (ECB) policy reforms Final Takeaways The European Council and national governments hold the real power because they must unanimously agree on treaty changes. National parliaments are decisive in ratification—they can veto changes by refusing to ratify. The European Parliament is growing in influence, especially in decision-making shifts under Passerelle Clauses. The European Commission is influential in setting the agenda but cannot block or approve treaties. 6 If treaty reforms are “hard” to achieve, what does this imply for the ability of the EU to adapt to new challenges? If treaty reforms are “hard” to achieve, this has significant implications for the EU’s ability to adapt to new challenges. Since treaty changes require unanimity, lengthy negotiations, and national ratifications, the EU often faces institutional rigidity when responding to crises or evolving global dynamics. Here’s what this means in practice: 1. Slow Response to Emerging Challenges Treaty reforms require years of negotiations, which makes the EU less agile in responding to urgent issues. Example: The Lisbon Treaty (2007) took over two years to ratify, delaying institutional reforms needed for more effective decision-making. Implication: The EU cannot quickly adapt to geopolitical shifts (e.g., security threats, migration crises, or energy policy changes). 2. Workarounds & Alternative Mechanisms Because formal treaty reform is difficult, the EU often relies on workarounds like: Passerelle clauses (shifting from unanimity to QMV without treaty change). Enhanced cooperation (allowing some member states to move forward without waiting for unanimous agreement). Intergovernmental agreements outside the EU framework (e.g., the European Stability Mechanism during the Euro crisis). Implication: Instead of fundamental institutional reform, the EU often uses pragmatic but legally complex solutions, which can create fragmentation. 3. Inability to Expand EU Competences Easily The Simplified Revision Procedure allows only internal adjustments—it cannot grant the EU new powers. Example: The EU lacks a fully integrated defense policy because treaty reform would require unanimity. Implication: The EU remains limited in policy areas like defense, taxation, and public health unless all 27 member states agree. 4. Risk of Institutional Gridlock If one or more countries oppose treaty changes, they can block reforms indefinitely. Example: The failed European Constitution (2005) was rejected by France and the Netherlands, forcing the EU to repackage reforms into the Lisbon Treaty. Implication: If a single member state disagrees with a necessary reform, the entire process stalls, leading to inefficiency and frustration. 5. Democratic Legitimacy vs. Political Constraints Treaty changes often require referenda in some countries, which can introduce populist resistance. 7 Example: Ireland rejected the Lisbon Treaty in 2008, forcing renegotiation before approval. Implication: Even when reforms are needed, public resistance can slow or block progress, making deep EU integration difficult. Conclusion: The EU Adapts, But Slowly Hard treaty reform means the EU struggles to evolve quickly in response to crises. Workarounds like passerelle clauses and enhanced cooperation help but create legal complexity. Future integration (e.g., deeper fiscal union, common defense) remains difficult due to unanimity requirements. Reform deadlocks create frustration among member states, raising the risk of political tensions. Are treaty reforms “easy” or “hard” to achieve? Treaty reforms in the EU are hard to achieve due to the complexity of the process, the requirement for unanimity, and the involvement of multiple political actors. The difficulty depends on the type of reform—major treaty changes (Ordinary Revision Procedure) are extremely hard, while minor adjustments (Simplified Revision Procedure, Passerelle Clauses) can be somewhat easier. Why Are Treaty Reforms Hard to Achieve? 1. Unanimity Requirement – One Veto Can Block Everything All 27 EU member states must agree to any treaty change. Even if a majority of countries support reform, a single country can veto the process. Example: The EU Constitution (2005) failed because France and the Netherlands rejected it in referenda. 2. Lengthy and Complex Process – Years of Negotiation Ordinary treaty reforms go through: Proposal stage (by governments, EP, or Commission). Review by the European Council (simple majority). Possible Convention (to draft changes). Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) (unanimous approval required). Ratification by all member states (can take years). Example: The Lisbon Treaty (2007) took over two years to ratify after Ireland initially rejected it. 3. National Ratification – Parliaments & Referenda Can Block It Each country must approve the treaty through national parliaments or referenda. Some countries (e.g., Ireland) require a referendum for major treaty changes. Example: Ireland’s first referendum on the Lisbon Treaty (2008) rejected the reform, delaying implementation. 4. Public and Political Resistance Treaty reforms are often politically sensitive, affecting national sovereignty and integration. 8 Euroskeptic movements in some countries oppose deeper integration. Example: The failure of the European Constitution (2005) was partly due to fears of losing national control. Are Some Treaty Reforms Easier? 1. Simplified Revision Procedure (Easier but Limited) Used for internal policy adjustments without expanding EU competences. Example: The European Stability Mechanism (2012) was created using this procedure without a full treaty revision. 2. Passerelle Clauses (Flexible but Veto-Prone) Allows shifts from unanimity to qualified majority voting (QMV) without a treaty change. Easier than full treaty reform, but national parliaments can veto the decision within 6 months. Example: The Lisbon Treaty introduced passerelle clauses but they remain rarely used due to political sensitivity. Final Verdict: Treaty Reforms Are Hard Factor Makes Reform Hard? Unanimity Requirement ✅ Yes, one country can block progress Lengthy Process ✅ Yes, negotiations can take years National Ratification ✅ Yes, referenda and parliaments can reject changes Political Sensitivity ✅ Yes, sovereignty concerns slow down reforms Alternatives (Simplified Procedures, ⚠ Easier, but still require unanimous Passerelle Clauses) approval Conclusion: Major treaty reforms are extremely difficult and require years of negotiation. Minor procedural changes are easier, but they still need political agreement. Workarounds (passerelle clauses, simplified procedures) exist, but they don’t allow deep structural reforms. 9 Section 3 – Enlargement and Neighbourhood Policy 1. Enlargement of the EU Definition & Purpose Enlargement is the process by which countries join the EU, subject to specific criteria, rules, and negotiations. It serves multiple purposes: o Expanding the EU’s political, economic, and security influence. o Encouraging democratic reforms in candidate countries. o Strengthening the single market and trade networks. o Promoting regional stability. Enlargement as a Policy & Bargaining Process Enlargement is not automatic—it involves: 1. Formal criteria (requirements countries must meet). 2. Negotiations (between the EU and the candidate country). 3. EU’s strategic interests (deciding when and how enlargement happens). Past Enlargements The EU has expanded multiple times: o 2004 ("Big Bang" enlargement) – 10 countries joined, mainly from Central & Eastern Europe. § Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Slovenia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Cyprus o 2007 – Bulgaria & Romania joined. o 2013 – Croatia joined. Current Candidate Countries: o Western Balkans: Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Serbia. o Eastern Europe: Moldova, Ukraine. o Turkey (candidate since 1999, but accession talks are stalled). 2. Legal Basis of Enlargement Treaty on European Union (TEU) – Article 49 A European country may apply for EU membership if it: o Respects the EU’s values (democracy, rule of law, human rights). o Meets economic and political criteria. The European Council must unanimously approve membership. 10 3. Copenhagen Criteria (1993) – Membership Conditions A candidate country must meet the following: 1. Political Criteria o Stable institutions guaranteeing democracy, rule of law, human rights. o Respect for & protection of minorities. 2. Economic Criteria o A functioning market economy. o The ability to cope with competition within the EU. 3. Legal & Institutional Criteria o Ability to adopt & implement EU laws (Acquis Communautaire). o Commitment to EU political, economic, and monetary goals. 4. EU’s Capacity to Integrate New Members (often called "Copenhagen Plus" for Western Balkans) o The EU must be able to absorb new members without harming its functioning. o Additional conditions may apply, such as good regional relations. E.g. For the Western Balkans, additional conditions include good regional relations (e.g., resolving disputes between Serbia and Kosovo or ensuring reconciliation in Bosnia and Herzegovina). 4. The Accession Process Stages of Accession 1. Application Submitted to the Council of the European Union (Country applies for EU membership). 2. Screening Process: o The European Commission evaluates the candidate’s readiness (based on the Copenhagen Criteria). o Opening benchmarks must be met before negotiations start. 3. Candidate Status Granted (EU assesses whether the country can proceed). 4. Negotiations on 35 Chapters of EU Law (Acquis Communautaire/ that which has been acquired by the Community. AKA entire body of EU laws, rights, and obligations). 5. Interim & Closing Benchmarks: o The candidate must complete key reforms before closing chapters. 6. Ratification by All EU Member States. 7. Full Membership Granted. Characteristics of Accession Negotiations 1. Unequal Bargaining Power: Candidates need EU membership more than the EU needs new members. 11 2. Variable Support Within the EU: a. Countries benefiting from EU subsidies may oppose enlargement due to budget concerns. b. Proponents of deep integration fear that adding more members could weaken EU decision-making. 3. Strategic Interests Matter: a. Established criteria and processes b. Equal treatment of candidates and (later) members c. EU interest in successful enlargement d. EU beneﬁts from credible and consistent demands i. The EU wants credible, consistent enlargement to maintain stability. e. Enlargement is shaped by political and economic calculations. 5. Transition Periods in Enlargement The EU often delays the full application of certain policies for new members. Why? o To ease economic & political shocks. o To create incentives for further reforms after accession. Examples of Transition Periods: 1. Free Movement of Workers o Older EU members restricted labor market access for Central and Eastern European workers after the 2004 enlargement. 2. Schengen Membership o Bulgaria & Romania have faced delays in joining the Schengen Zone (free movement area). 3. Euro Adoption o New members must meet economic criteria before joining the Eurozone. 6. The External Incentives Model (Schimmelfennig & Sedelmeier, 2020) This model explains how the EU influences candidate countries through conditionality (offering rewards in exchange for reforms). Key Factors of EU Influence: 1. Rewards – How attractive is EU membership or other benefits? 2. Determinacy – Are EU demands clear and specific? 3. Credibility – Will the EU follow through on promises? 12 4. Costs of Compliance – Are the changes politically, economically, or institutionally difficult for the candidate? Challenges to Enlargement Policy Credibility Issues: EU promises may not always be trusted (e.g., Turkey’s stalled accession). Integration Capacity Debate: Some member states argue that the EU cannot absorb more countries. High Costs for Candidates: Adapting to EU rules can be expensive and politically costly. 7. European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) ENP is not about enlargement but cooperation with EU neighbors. It applies to Eastern & Southern neighbors (e.g., Ukraine, Tunisia). Goals: o Economic integration. o Political cooperation. o Migration & security management. o Rule externalization (exporting EU rules). EU’s Offer to Neighbors: Access to EU markets. Regulatory alignment (some EU laws apply). Technical assistance & funding. Challenges of ENP Low political & economic rewards (no membership). Fragmentation (policies vary by country). Weak enforcement (little monitoring of reforms). Discussion Questions & Answers 1. Can the EU use enlargement to influence candidate countries? How? Yes. Through conditionality, the EU exerts influence by requiring reforms in exchange for membership. Example: Eastern European states adopted democratic & economic reforms to qualify for EU accession in 2004. 13 2. What are the biggest challenges to enlargement today? Credibility Issues: Uncertainty over whether the EU will follow through on promises. Internal EU Disagreements: Some member states fear new members could strain EU resources. Conflicts in Candidate Countries: Ukraine, Bosnia & Herzegovina, and Serbia face political instability. 3. Can the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) promote democracy? Partially. ENP encourages reforms but lacks strong enforcement. Example: Ukraine signed an Association Agreement with the EU in 2014, but democratic progress remains uneven. Final Summary Enlargement strengthens the EU but is a slow, political process. The External Incentives Model explains how the EU pressures candidates to reform. The European Neighbourhood Policy promotes cooperation but offers fewer incentives than full membership. 14 Section 4 - The European Council & The Council of the EU 1. The European Council (EuCo) Definition & Role The European Council consists of Heads of State or Government of EU member states. It does not legislate but provides high-level political guidance and strategic direction. Functions as the highest political authority in the EU, often referred to as "EU Summits". Key Responsibilities of the European Council 1. Sets Broad Political Priorities o Defines the overall strategy of the EU (e.g., economic growth, foreign policy, climate action). 2. Key Personnel Decisions o Nominates the European Commission President (who is then elected by the European Parliament). o Appoints other top EU officials (e.g., High Representative for Foreign Affairs). 3. Treaty Reforms & Crisis Management o Can convene an Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) to revise EU treaties. o Provides political guidance when there are legislative disagreements in the Council of the EU. 4. Handles High-Stakes Issues o Manages Brexit negotiations, migration crises, sanctions against Russia, etc. Leadership & Structure President of the European Council: o Elected for 2.5 years, renewable once. o Represents the EU externally (e.g., in foreign policy matters). o Current president (as of 2024): Charles Michel. 2. The Council of the European Union (Council of Ministers) Definition & Composition Represents national governments at the ministerial level. Divided into 10 different formations, each focusing on specific policy areas. o Examples: § ECOFIN – Economic & Financial Affairs (Finance Ministers). § Agriculture and Fisheries Council – Agriculture Ministers. 15 § Foreign Affairs Council – Chaired by the High Representative for Foreign Affairs. Key Responsibilities of the Council of the EU 1. Legislative Power (Co-Legislator with European Parliament) o Adopts EU laws and regulations (alongside the European Parliament). o Voting system: § Qualified Majority Voting (QMV): 55% of member states (at least 15 countries) representing 65% of the EU population. § Blocking Minority: 35% of the population + at least 4 governments. § Unanimity is required for sensitive matters (e.g., foreign policy, taxation). 2. Approves the EU Budget o Works with the European Parliament on financial planning & spending. 3. Certain Executive Functions o Manages external relations (e.g., trade agreements, sanctions). o Implements EU policies and decisions. Preparatory Bodies of the Council Coreper (Committee of Permanent Representatives): o Coreper II (senior ambassadors): Handles foreign affairs, general affairs, and budget issues. o Coreper I (deputy ambassadors): Handles economic, social, and regulatory matters. Working Parties: o Specialized groups prepare policy proposals before ministerial meetings. 3. The Rotating Presidency of the Council What Is It? The Council presidency rotates every six months among EU member states. Trio Presidency System: Three consecutive presidencies coordinate an 18-month agenda. Key Responsibilities of the Presidency 1. Chairs Meetings & Sets Agendas o The presidency controls legislative discussions, influencing which policies move forward. 2. Leads Legislative Negotiations o Facilitates discussions with the European Parliament and Commission. 3. Represents the Council Externally 16 o Represents the Council of the EU in international negotiations. Exceptions The High Representative for Foreign Affairs (not the rotating presidency) chairs Foreign Affairs Council meetings. Example of Presidency Planning Process 2-3 years before: Early preparations begin. 1-2 years before: Core planning phase. 6-12 months before: Finalizing policies and priorities. 4. Bargaining Power in the European Council & Council of the EU What Gives Governments Bargaining Power? 1. Institutional Power Resources o Council Presidency → Allows a country to set priorities. o Veto Power & Blocking Minority → Can prevent unwanted policies. 2. Structural Power Resources o Some countries have more influence based on economic/military power (e.g., Germany, France). 3. Negotiation Tactics o Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement (BATNA): If a country has good alternatives, it has stronger leverage. o Information Advantage: Some governments are better prepared for negotiations. 5. The Veto & The "No" Vote in the Council How Powerful Is the Veto? Veto power is available in areas requiring unanimity (e.g., foreign policy, taxation). However, it is rarely used because: o The EU favors consensus (opposition is usually only 1-2 member states). o The European Commission proposes laws that already have broad support. o The Presidency avoids votes that are likely to fail. Voting Patterns (2010-2019 Data) Only 2-3% of votes were "No" votes. Over 50% of votes in justice & home affairs were unanimous. 17 6. Select Bargaining Tactics in the EU 1) Issue-Linkage Combining multiple policy areas in negotiations to gain support. Example: Eastern European countries support migration policies in exchange for more EU subsidies. 2) Alternative & Exit Options Countries with strong outside options have more leverage. Example: The UK had more leverage in Brexit talks before triggering Article 50. 3) Exempting Opponents Giving opt-outs or special exemptions to hesitant countries. Example: Denmark opted out of the Eurozone. 4) Package Deals & Side-Payments Offering financial compensation or extra benefits to secure agreements. Example: The EU offered financial aid to Greece in exchange for economic reforms. Discussion Questions & Answers 1. Why does the European Council have so much power? It includes heads of state and government, making it the highest decision-making body. It sets the political direction of the EU and decides on high-stakes matters. 2. How does the Council of the EU differ from the European Council? Feature European Council (EuCo) Council of the EU Members Heads of State/Government National Ministers Main Role Sets broad EU priorities Passes laws with the EP Voting System Unanimity QMV & Unanimity Meets 4+ times a year Regular meetings in formations 3. Why is consensus the norm in the Council? Governments prefer not to be outvoted on sensitive issues. Social norms of "give-and-take" ensure governments compromise. 18 4. Why do some countries have more bargaining power in the EU? Economic power: Larger economies (Germany, France) have more influence. Institutional role: Holding the Council Presidency increases influence. Exit options: Countries with strong alternatives can negotiate better deals. Final Summary The European Council provides high-level strategic direction. The Council of the EU co-legislates with the European Parliament. Voting systems favor consensus, making vetoes rare. Bargaining power depends on institutional position, economic weight, and negotiation tactics. 19 Section 5 - The European Parliament & Decision-Making 1. The European Parliament (EP) – Overview Definition & Role The European Parliament (EP) is the legislative body of the EU. It has 705 Members of the European Parliament (MEPs), elected directly by EU citizens every 5 years. Primary locations: o Plenary Sessions → Strasbourg o Committee Work → Brussels o Administrative Secretariat → Luxembourg Main Functions of the EP 1. Legislative Function o Co-legislates with the Council of the EU under the Ordinary Legislative Procedure (OLP). o Can propose amendments but cannot introduce laws (only the European Commission has the right of initiative). 2. Budgetary Function o Approves the EU budget together with the Council of the EU. o Can reject the entire budget (happened in 1979 & 1984). 3. Oversight & Control o Holds hearings for the European Commission nominees and can dismiss the entire Commission through a motion of censure. o Investigates EU governance issues (e.g., corruption, mismanagement). 4. Electoral Role o Elects the President of the European Commission based on a proposal by the European Council. o Supervises EU elections & democratic accountability. 2. Composition & Representation MEPs & Seat Distribution Degressive Proportionality: Larger countries have more seats overall, but smaller countries have more seats per capita. Examples (based on 2018 data): o Germany: 96 seats (~1 MEP per 1.2 million people). o Czech Republic: 21 seats (~1 MEP per 2 million people). o Luxembourg: 6 seats (~1 MEP per 10 million people). 20 3. Political Groups in the EP What Are Political Groups? MEPs do not sit in national groups but instead join transnational political groups based on ideology. A political group must have at least 23 MEPs from 7 member states. Current Political Groups in the EP (as of 2024) Group Ideology Main Parties EPP (European People’s Party) Center-right, pro- CDU (Germany), Les Républicains EU (France) S&D (Socialists & Democrats) Center-left, pro- SPD (Germany), PSOE (Spain) EU Renew Europe (RE) Liberal, pro-EU La République En Marche! (France), FDP (Germany) Greens/EFA (Greens/European Green, Die Grünen (Germany), EELV Free Alliance) progressive (France) ECR (European Conservatives & Right-wing, PiS (Poland), Fratelli d'Italia (Italy) Reformists) Euroskeptic The Left (GUE/NGL) Socialist, far-left Die Linke (Germany), La France Insoumise Patriots for Europe Radical right Rassemblement National (France), Fidesz (Hungary) Europe of Sovereign Nations Far-right, Chega (Portugal), Freedom Party of (ESN) nationalist Austria Implications for Majority Formation Grand Coalitions (EPP + S&D): 324 votes (barely a majority). Centrist Coalition (EPP + S&D + Renew Europe): 401 votes (comfortable majority). Right-Wing Coalition (EPP + ECR + Patriots + ESN): 375 votes. Left-Wing Coalition (S&D + Greens + Left + Renew): 500 votes. Radical Right (Patriots + ESN): 187 votes (not enough to govern alone). Key Insight: Large coalitions are required to pass legislation, making the EPP pivotal. 4. The “Competing Principals” Problem (Hix, 2002) What Is It? MEPs face conflicting loyalties between: 1. Their European political group. 2. Their national party back home. 21 Conflicts are rare because: o National parties tend to join ideologically similar EU groups. However, when conflicts arise, MEPs must choose between national loyalty or European group loyalty. Which National Parties Face This Problem More? Parties from Euroskeptic countries (e.g., PiS in Poland, Fidesz in Hungary). Parties with internal divisions on EU policies (e.g., UK Conservatives before Brexit). How Do European & National Groups Enforce Discipline? European Political Groups: o Allocate committee positions. o Influence legislative agenda. National Parties: o Control re-election prospects. o Offer government roles back home. 5. Committees & Rapporteurs in the EP What Are EP Committees? MEPs do most legislative work in committees before voting in the plenary. 20+ standing committees, covering: o Foreign affairs, trade, environment, etc. Chaired by senior MEPs, with members assigned proportionally to party strength. Who Gets to Join What Committee? Motivated MEPs: o Policy experts. o Those representing national interests (e.g., agriculture for France). o Those seeking status/influence. Self-Selection Risks: o Committees may become biased toward special interests. o Example: The Fisheries Committee dominated by pro-fishing MEPs, resisting stronger environmental laws. 6. The Role of Rapporteurs & Shadow Rapporteurs What Do They Do? Rapporteur: 22 oWrites the draft report on legislation. oLeads inter-party negotiations. Shadow Rapporteurs (from other parties): o Review and suggest amendments. Selection Criteria for Rapporteurs 1. Party balance (to avoid domination by one group). 2. Expertise & experience (e.g., a climate policy expert for environmental laws). 3. Party loyalty (senior party members get key roles). Strategic Influence Some MEPs become go-to experts in niche areas. Example: A specific MEP might be known as "the carbon capture guy" (Häge & Ringe, 2019). Discussion Questions & Answers 1. Why does the European Parliament need political groups? Without transnational groups, the EP would be chaotic and fragmented. Political groups: o Organize voting blocs. o Help form stable coalitions to pass laws. 2. Why are large coalitions required in the EP? No single group has a majority. The EPP is often pivotal but needs partners to reach 353 votes (majority). 3. What are the biggest sources of division in the EP? Left vs. Right (economic policies, social rights). Pro-EU vs. Euroskeptics (federalism vs. national sovereignty). Climate activists vs. business interests (Green Deal). 4. How does committee selection affect legislative outcomes? If committees are dominated by special interests, their recommendations may be biased. Example: The Agriculture Committee is often pro-farming subsidies, making it harder to pass agricultural reforms. 23 Final Summary The EP is a powerful legislator, but coalition-building is necessary. Political groups structure decision-making. Committees & rapporteurs play key roles in shaping EU laws. MEPs face competing pressures from their European groups & national parties. Strategic positions in committees & rapporteurships increase influence. Section 6 - The European Parliament & Elections 1. European Parliament Elections – Overview Election Process Held every 5 years (since 1979). Last election: 23-26 May 2019. Next election: June 2024. Conducted simultaneously across all EU countries but with national variations. Electoral System Proportional Representation (PR) across all member states, but with variations: o Closed-list PR (e.g., Germany, Spain): Voters select a party, and the party assigns MEPs based on rank in the list. o Open-list PR (e.g., Sweden, Finland): Voters can express preference for specific candidates. o Single Transferable Vote (STV) (e.g., Ireland, Malta): Voters rank candidates, and votes are redistributed. o Different Constituency Structures: § Some countries (e.g., France) have one national constituency. § Others (e.g., Belgium) have regional constituencies. Key Limitations No EU-wide electoral system (each country sets its own rules within PR). No transnational lists (MEPs represent national parties, not EU-wide parties). Spitzenkandidaten process is informal (not legally binding). 2. Second-Order Elections Theory (Hix & Marsh, 2011) 24 What Are Second-Order Elections? Elections that do not determine the national government. Lower turnout, less media attention. Voters focus on national rather than EU issues. Voters use EP elections as a protest vote against ruling national parties. How Do They Differ From First-Order Elections? Feature First-Order Elections Second-Order Elections (EP) (National) Importance Decides government Less impact on executive power Turnout Higher Lower Campaign Focus National issues & policies Less focus, often about national politics Vote Choice Strategic voting More sincere voting & protest votes Success of Small Harder to gain votes More votes for opposition, fringe Parties parties Empirical Findings Lower turnout in EP elections compared to national elections. Small and protest parties perform better than in national elections. Government parties lose votes as citizens express dissatisfaction. Turnout Trends in EP Elections Turnout is historically lower than national elections. Variation by country: Higher in Belgium (compulsory voting), lower in Eastern Europe. Is it declining? Mixed evidence: o Turnout dropped in early 2000s but has stabilized. o 2019 EP elections had the highest turnout since 1994 (51%). 3. Voter Behavior & Factors Influencing Vote Choice (Hobolt & Wittrock, 2011) Key Research Question What variables predict voter choice in EP elections? Experimental Research Design Conducted in the UK (Oxford region). Voters were given different information treatments: 1. Left-Right ideological distance (national party position). 25 2. EU policy distance (candidate’s stance on EU integration). 3. Government performance (impact of ruling parties). Findings Left-Right ideology influences voting behavior. EU policy distance matters more when voters are informed. More awareness of EU issues = more votes for pro-EU candidates. Does This Support the Second-Order Model? Yes: If voters are uninformed, they vote based on national factors. No: If voters are well-informed, EU policy affects their choices. 4. The Spitzenkandidaten System What Is It? Introduced in 2014 as a quasi-presidential system for selecting the President of the European Commission. Each European political group nominates a lead candidate (Spitzenkandidat). The group that wins the most seats in the EP election gets the first chance to form a coalition to elect the Commission President. How It Works in Practice 1. Political groups select a candidate before elections (e.g., EPP nominated Ursula von der Leyen in 2019). 2. Voters indirectly influence Commission leadership by voting for a party. 3. European Council (heads of government) proposes a President. 4. The EP votes to confirm the President. Does It Work? Hopes vs. Reality Expectation Reality More personalized elections Voters often don't recognize Spitzenkandidaten Strengthens EU-wide democracy National parties still dominate campaigns Moves the EU toward a more federal EU leaders (European Council) resist automatic system selection Do Voters Know the Spitzenkandidaten? Most voters do NOT know them, except in their own country. EU-wide debates exist (e.g., Eurovision debate), but they have low visibility. 26 Main Issues & Criticisms No legal obligation to follow Spitzenkandidaten results. European Council can override EP preferences (as happened in 2019). Voters still focus on national rather than EU-wide candidates. 5. Should EP Elections Be Reformed? Possible Reforms 1. Introduce EU-Wide Transnational Lists o Instead of only voting for national parties, voters could also choose EU-wide lists. o Pros: Strengthens European political identity, reduces fragmentation. o Cons: National parties oppose it, hard to implement. 2. Strengthen the Spitzenkandidaten System o Make it legally binding for the European Council to follow EP election results. o Pros: Increases democratic legitimacy. o Cons: National governments would lose influence. 3. Increase Voter Engagement & Awareness o Improve EU-wide debates and media coverage. o Pros: More informed voting behavior. o Cons: Hard to change voter habits. 4. Harmonize Electoral Rules Across Member States o Standardize electoral systems (e.g., same PR model across the EU). o Pros: Makes elections fairer and more comparable. o Cons: Member states want control over their electoral laws. Discussion Questions & Answers 1. Why is turnout in EP elections lower than national elections? Second-order election effects: Citizens see EP elections as less important. Lower campaign visibility: National parties do not invest as much in EP elections. EU-wide issues are complex, making it harder to engage voters. 2. How do voters make choices in EP elections? If uninformed, they vote based on national party preference. If informed, they consider EU policies & ideology (Hobolt, 2011). 27 3. Is the Spitzenkandidaten process effective? Not fully: o Most voters do not know the candidates. o The European Council can ignore the results. o However, it has increased EU-wide political competition. 4. Should EP elections be reformed? Yes, to increase democratic legitimacy. Challenges: o National leaders resist EU-wide changes. o Public awareness of EU politics remains low. Final Summary EP elections are second-order elections, meaning turnout is lower and voters focus on national rather than EU issues. Electoral systems vary across member states, with different proportional representation methods. Spitzenkandidaten system was introduced to personalize elections, but it has not fully worked due to low visibility and lack of enforcement. Reforms are possible, but national governments resist changes that reduce their control over EU politics. 28 Section 7 - The European Commission 1. The European Commission – Overview Definition & Role The European Commission (EC) is the executive branch of the EU. It is responsible for proposing legislation, enforcing EU laws, managing policies, and representing the EU internationally. Composition: o 27 Commissioners (1 per member state). o Led by the President of the European Commission. o Commissioners serve a 5-year term. o Assisted by Directorates-General (DGs) and executive agencies. 2. Organisation & Key Actors The College of Commissioners President of the Commission: o Proposed by the European Council, elected by the European Parliament (EP). o Sets overall political direction of the Commission. o Can reshuffle Commissioners and assign portfolios. Commissioners: o Nominated by national governments but must be approved by the European Parliament. o Each Commissioner is responsible for a specific policy area (e.g., trade, climate action, economy). Cabinets & Chef de Cabinet: o Each Commissioner has a private office (cabinet) led by a Chief of Cabinet, who acts as an advisor and strategic planner. Directorates-General (DGs) & Executive Agencies DGs are equivalent to ministries in a national government. There are 32 DGs, each responsible for specific policy areas. Examples of DGs: o DG Climate Action (climate change policy). o DG Competition (anti-trust, mergers, state aid). o DG Trade (EU trade agreements, WTO negotiations). o DG Home Affairs (migration, security, borders). Executive Agencies: o Manage specific EU programs (e.g., the European Research Council for funding innovation). 29 3. Competences & Powers of the Commission 1) Legislative Power (Agenda-Setting Role) Exclusive right of legislative initiative: o Only the Commission can propose new EU laws. o Proposals are debated and voted on by the European Parliament & Council of the EU. Controls the legislative agenda by: o Including or excluding issues. o Prioritizing policy areas. o Bundling issues together into legislative packages. o Withdrawing proposals if political conditions are unfavorable. 2) Guardian of EU Law Monitors compliance with EU treaties & laws. Can initiate legal action against member states at the European Court of Justice (ECJ) if they fail to comply. 3) Executive & Administrative Functions Implements EU policies and manages funds: o EU Budget (~€170 billion annually). o Administers agriculture subsidies (CAP) and regional development funds. Manages EU external relations: o Leads trade negotiations (e.g., EU-Canada trade agreement). o Coordinates EU foreign aid & humanitarian assistance. 4) Competition Authority Regulates the single market: o Approves or blocks mergers & acquisitions. o Prevents anti-competitive behavior (e.g., Google fined for monopolistic practices). o Ensures fair competition across the EU. 4. How the Commission Uses Its Agenda-Setting Power Strategic Agenda-Setting Tactics (Source: Rauh, 2021; Hartlapp et al., 2013) 1. Excluding Issues from the Agenda: 30 o Avoids proposing laws that lack majority support. 2. Prioritizing Issues: o Focuses on high-profile issues (e.g., Green Deal, digital regulation). 3. Bundling & Synchronizing Issues: o Groups multiple policies into a package deal to increase support. 4. Waiting for a Favorable Political Climate: o Can delay proposals if political conditions are not ideal. o Example: Postponing environmental laws until after elections. 5. Threatening to Withdraw Legislation: o Uses the threat of withdrawal to pressure lawmakers to accept reforms. 5. Limits to the Commission’s Strategic Influence Challenges to Effective Agenda-Setting Internal Fragmentation: o The Commission consists of many DGs and Commissioners, making it difficult to coordinate. Long Legislative Process: o EU laws take 24+ months from proposal to adoption. Dependence on Other Institutions: o The Commission cannot pass laws alone—it needs the European Parliament and Council of the EU to approve legislation. Political Resistance from Member States: o National governments can block Commission proposals through the Council of the EU. Influence of the European Parliament: o The EP can amend Commission proposals or reject them outright. Example: The Green Deal & Climate Legislation The Commission proposed a strong climate package (Green Deal). Resistance from certain member states (Poland, Hungary) slowed down negotiations. The Commission had to compromise to ensure adoption. 6. Other EU Bodies and Their Relationship with the Commission Institution Relation with the Commission European Parliament (EP) Co-legislates with the Council, votes on Commission President, can dismiss the Commission. Council of the EU Must approve Commission proposals, can amend laws, represents national governments. European Council Proposes Commission President, sets broad priorities. 31 European Court of Justice Reviews Commission actions, enforces EU law. (ECJ) European External Action Works with the Commission on foreign policy but is a Service (EEAS) separate body. Discussion Questions & Answers 1. How does the exclusive right of legislative initiative empower the Commission? The Commission controls the legislative agenda by: o Deciding which issues to propose. o Prioritizing or delaying legislation. o Formulating proposals that maximize support. It acts as a policy entrepreneur but must balance political feasibility. 2. Can the Commission use its agenda-setting power strategically? Yes, but with constraints: o It can time proposals to align with political changes. o It can shape policy by controlling the scope of proposals. o However, fragmentation and resistance from other institutions limit its effectiveness. 3. What are the limits of the Commission’s influence? It relies on EP & Council approval to pass laws. Member states can push back (e.g., migration policy disagreements). Internal conflicts among Commissioners and DGs can slow down decision-making. 4. How does the Commission differ from a national government? Feature European Commission National Government Legislative Exclusive right to propose EU laws Usually shared with Parliament Initiative Executive Implements EU law, manages policy & Full control over domestic Authority funds policy Leadership President elected by EP, Commissioners Direct election or appointment Selection nominated by states by head of state Law-Making Needs approval from EP & Council Usually majority rule in Power Parliament 32 Final Summary The European Commission is the EU’s executive body, but it is not a government. It has strong agenda-setting powers, but its proposals must be approved by the European Parliament & Council. The Commission uses strategic tools (timing, bundling, prioritization) to push policies, but political resistance limits its success. The Commission also enforces EU laws, manages competition policy, and negotiates trade deals. Its internal structure (DGs, Commissioners, agencies) creates both expertise and bureaucracy, impacting efficiency. 33 Section 8 - Interest Groups & Lobbying in the EU 1. What Are Interest Groups? Definition Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that seek to influence public policy. They do not compete in elections (unlike political parties). Examples: o Business associations (e.g., European Round Table of Industrialists). o Trade unions (e.g., European Trade Union Confederation). o NGOs (e.g., Greenpeace, Amnesty International). o Professional groups (e.g., medical associations). Narrow vs. Broad Conceptions of Interest Groups Conception Definition Examples Narrow Only includes groups formed primarily to Business lobbyists, trade unions. influence government policy. Broad Includes actors interested in any public Consumer organizations, issue, even if not directly regulated by the professional groups, religious government. organizations. 2. Why Do Interest Groups Lobby? Core Motivations (Lowery, 2007) Organizational Survival: Interest groups need funding & visibility to stay relevant. Influence Policy: They try to shape regulations & laws that affect them. Mobilization & Recruitment: Attract members or supporters. Public Image: Gain media attention & legitimacy. Compete or Cooperate: Build alliances or outcompete rival interest groups. Discussion: Is Policy Influence the Main Goal? Some argue that survival & visibility are more important than actual policy influence. Others believe that influencing regulation & legislation is the core purpose of lobbying. Example: Environmental groups often lobby heavily for climate regulations but also fundraise & recruit members through public campaigns. 34 3. Interest Group Involvement in EU Consultations Key Study: Binderkrantz et al. (2011-2016 Analysis of 350 Proposals) Consultation Instruments 1. Open/Restricted Online Consultations: o Any stakeholder can submit input. o NGOs & citizens are more active here. 2. Stakeholder Conferences: o Gatherings where business, trade unions, & civil society present views. 3. Specialized Forums: o Expert groups & advisory committees directly consult with the EU Commission. o Businesses & trade unions dominate here. Findings 1. Business & public authorities are almost always consulted. 2. NGOs & citizens participate more in open consultations. 3. Trade unions & business groups dominate business regulation, while NGOs & citizens focus on broader policies (e.g., climate change, human rights). 4. Institutional matters attract the least public interest. 4. Strategies of Interest Groups A. Venue Shopping Policy is made in multiple arenas (EU level, national level, bureaucratic level, courts). Interest groups choose the most favorable level to lobby. Example: o If national governments oppose climate action, NGOs may lobby the EU Commission instead. o If the EU is too slow, groups might focus on member-state governments to push national implementation. B. Insider & Outsider Strategies Strategy Method Example Insider (Direct Direct lobbying of policymakers, Business groups meeting with Access) exchanging resources for influence DGs to shape economic policy. Outsider (Public Mobilizing public opinion, protests, NGOs running campaigns Pressure) media campaigns against deforestation in the EU. Constraints on Insider Strategies: o Lobbying regulations limit direct access. 35 o Political connections matter (big businesses have better access than small NGOs). Challenges for Outsider Strategies: o Public campaigns require money & media attention. o Success depends on whether the issue resonates with the public. 5. The “Resource Exchange” Perspective (Why Policymakers Listen to Interest Groups) What Do Policymakers Gain? Policymaker’s Need What Interest Groups Provide Example Public consultation boosts EU invites civil society groups to Legitimacy credibility. climate policy discussions. Expertise & Interest groups offer technical Pharma industry provides drug trial Information data & research. data for EU health regulations. Implementation Some policies require cooperation Farmers' unions consulted on CAP Support from affected industries. reform. Compliance Groups report non-compliance Tech firms reporting rivals for Monitoring (esp. competitors). antitrust violations. Examples of Interest Group Influence 1. EU Climate Law (Green Deal) o Business lobbyists tried to weaken carbon targets. o NGOs & scientists pushed for stricter rules. o Result: A compromise policy was adopted. 2. EU Digital Markets Act (DMA) o Big Tech firms lobbied against regulation. o Small businesses & consumer groups pushed for stronger antitrust rules. o Outcome: A new EU law to limit Big Tech monopolies. Discussion Questions & Answers 1. Why do businesses dominate lobbying in the EU? They have more resources (money, expertise, legal teams). The EU is highly technical, requiring specialized knowledge, which businesses provide. Business interests align with EU economic priorities (trade, digital markets). 2. When might NGOs have more influence than businesses? When an issue has high public awareness (e.g., climate change). 36 When policymakers need legitimacy & broad support (e.g., human rights policies). When there is public backlash against business lobbying (e.g., tobacco regulations). 3. Should the EU regulate lobbying more strictly? Pros: o More transparency & fairness. o Limits corporate overreach. Cons: o Reduces information flow to policymakers. o Could weaken public participation in policymaking. 4. Why do policymakers consult with interest groups? They need technical knowledge to design good policies. They build alliances to avoid opposition. They want to ensure implementation & compliance. Final Summary Interest groups are non-governmental actors that try to influence EU policymaking. Businesses dominate lobbying, but NGOs can be influential in high-profile issues. Interest groups use insider (direct access) & outsider (public pressure) strategies. The EU consults interest groups for legitimacy, expertise, and implementation help. Policy influence depends on resources, issue salience, and institutional access. 37 Section 9 - Inter-Institutional Relations in the EU 1. Key Examples of Inter-Institutional Relations A. Treaty Reforms Who is involved? o Commission & European Parliament (EP) can propose treaty changes. o The European Council (Heads of State/Government) has final approval. o National parliaments and sometimes referenda must ratify changes. Example: The Lisbon Treaty (2007) changed voting rules & introduced the permanent President of the European Council. B. EU Enlargement Commission: Conducts negotiations with candidate countries. European Parliament: Must approve accession before a new country joins. Council of the EU: Final decision requires unanimous approval. Example: Croatia joined the EU in 2013 after a lengthy negotiation process. C. High-Level Appointments European Commission President: o Proposed by the European Council. o Elected by the European Parliament. College of Commissioners: o Each member state nominates a Commissioner. o The European Parliament must approve the entire Commission. Example: Ursula von der Leyen became Commission President in 2019 after a controversial vote in Parliament. D. Legislative Process (Ordinary Legislative Procedure - OLP) Commission: Proposes legislation. EP & Council of the EU: Amend, approve, or reject laws. Special case: The budgetary process (requires additional negotiations). Example: The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) was passed under this process. 38 2. Bargaining Power Under the Ordinary Legislative Procedure (OLP) What Is the OLP? Previously called "Co-Decision", the Ordinary Legislative Procedure (OLP) is the main way EU laws are made. Steps in the OLP: 1. Commission proposes a law. 2. EP & Council debate & amend it. 3. They must agree on a final text. 4. If they disagree, the law enters conciliation (a joint committee to negotiate). Who Has More Power? Study by Costello & Thomson (1999-2009) analyzed 274 legislative issues. Findings: o The Commission has little power in final negotiations. o The Council has the most influence. o The European Parliament has some power, depending on the issue. Factors That Influence Bargaining Power Factor Impact on Power Proximity to the Status Quo If an institution prefers the existing rules, it has a stronger veto power. Divisions in EP Committees A divided Parliament weakens the EP’s negotiation position. Divergent Preferences in the If member states disagree, the Council struggles to act. Council Distance from the If the Council or EP supports the original Commission Commission’s Proposal proposal, they gain leverage. 3. The Practice of the Legislative Process (Novak et al., 1996-2019 study of EU lawmaking) Key Findings 1. Consensus is the norm in both the EP & Council. 2. Opposition in the Council is limited to a few governments (most prefer to avoid conflict). Why Is There Consensus? Anticipation Effect: The Commission only proposes laws with likely support. Presidency’s Role: The Council Presidency avoids controversial votes. Bargaining Tactics: Includes issue-linkage (trading policies) & side-payments. 39 Large Majorities Are Needed: Even when majority voting is allowed, member states prefer consensus. Avoiding Knock-on Effects: o A veto can delay implementation. o Public opposition might grow. Strategies Used by Key Actors Actor Strategy Governments in the Avoid appearing as losers, prefer compromise. Council MEPs in the EP Build cross-party alliances to show competence as rapporteurs. Council & EP Form pro-EU coalitions to exclude Euroskeptics. 4. The Budgetary Process How Does the EU Budget Work? The EU has two linked budgets: 1. Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF): Covers 7 years, sets spending ceilings. 2. Annual Budget: Covers 1 year, follows the MFF guidelines. MFF Procedure Commission proposes the MFF. Council must approve it unanimously. European Parliament must give consent. Example: The 2021-2027 MFF allocated €1.8 trillion, including the COVID-19 recovery fund. Annual Budget Procedure Commission proposes a budget. EP & Council amend the proposal within strict time limits. If they disagree, a Conciliation Committee negotiates. If no deal is reached, the budget process fails. Discussion Questions & Answers 1. Why does the Council have more bargaining power than the European Parliament? 40 It represents national governments, which hold ultimate sovereignty. Most EU laws require Council approval, even if Parliament disagrees. Unanimity is often required, allowing individual governments to block laws. 2. Why does the Commission have little power in final negotiations? The Commission proposes laws but does not vote on them. The Council & EP can amend or reject Commission proposals. Member states prefer intergovernmental control over policymaking. 3. Why do most laws pass by consensus in the Council? Avoids public opposition & delayed implementation. No government wants to appear weak. Issue-linkage & side-payments create incentives for agreement. 4. How does the budget process differ from regular legislation? The MFF requires unanimity, unlike most EU laws. The EP has more power in the annual budget (can reject the final deal). Member states negotiate harder, as the budget impacts national contributions. Final Summary Inter-institutional relations shape treaty reforms, enlargement, legislation, and budgets. The Ordinary Legislative Procedure favors the Council, with the EP playing a secondary role. Consensus is the norm, as governments avoid public conflicts. The budget process is complex, with the MFF requiring unanimity and the annual budget needing compromise. 41 Section 10 - Compliance with EU Law & The Court of Justice 1. Instruments of EU Law & Compliance Mechanisms Types of EU Legal Instruments Instrument Binding? Applicability Example Regulations ✅ Binding in Directly applicable in all GDPR (General Data full member states Protection Regulation) Directives ✅ Binding as Requires transposition EU Working Time to goals into national law Directive Decisions ✅ Binding in Applies only to the Antitrust rulings against full specific addressees companies Recommendations ❌ Non- Advisory Guidelines on AI binding governance Opinions ❌ Non- Advisory Opinion on fiscal policies binding Important Principles in EU Law Direct Effect: o EU law can be directly invoked by individuals in national courts. o Example: Van Gend en Loos case (1963) established direct effect for treaty provisions. Primacy of EU Law: o EU law overrides conflicting national laws. o Example: Costa v ENEL (1964) confirmed that national law cannot overrule EU law. 2. Types of Violations of EU Law Type of Violation Explanation Example Violation of Directly Failing to apply regulations, Failure to implement GDPR Effective Instruments decisions, treaty articles requirements Non-Notification of A member state fails to inform Delay in reporting a national Transposition the EU about transposing a law implementing the directive into national law Copyright Directive Non-Conformity of A directive is transposed National labor law not meeting Transposition incorrectly or partially minimum EU standards Bad Application of A law is transposed correctly but Environmental law exists but Directives not enforced properly factories continue polluting 42 National Legislation A new national law conflicts with Poland’s judiciary reforms Violates EU Law EU rules contradicting EU rule of law principles 3. The Infringement Procedure: Steps & Mechanisms What is the Infringement Procedure? A legal mechanism under Article 258 TFEU that allows the European Commission to act against member states violating EU law. Steps in the Infringement Process 1. Initial Concern o The Commission identifies a potential violation through: § Own investigations. § Complaints from individuals, businesses, NGOs, or other states. 2. Letter of Formal Notice o The Commission sends a warning letter explaining the concern. o The member state has 2 months to respond. o The process is confidential. 3. Reasoned Opinion o A formal request to correct the violation. o The state must comply within 2 months or face legal action. 4. Referral to the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) o If non-compliance continues, the case is brought to court. o The CJEU adjudicates and issues a ruling. 5. New Referral & Fines (If Non-Compliance Persists) o Under Article 260 TFEU, the Commission can return to the Court to request: § Lump sum fines (one-time penalty). § Daily penalties (continuous fines until compliance is achieved). o Example: Italy fined for failing to treat wastewater under an EU environmental directive. 4. Strategic Enforcement by the Commission Why Doesn’t the Commission Pursue Every Violation? Limited Resources: o The EU has 27 member states, thousands of laws, and sub-state actors. o Monitoring all violations is impossible. Public Complaints Help Identify Cases: o Many cases are initiated via citizen, NGO, or industry complaints. o But this process is selective—not all violations get attention. 43 Strategic Considerations in Enforcement Factor Impact on Enforcement Legal Strength of the Case The Commission prefers clear-cut violations with high chance of winning. Severity & Systemic Impact Major economic or rule-of-law breaches get priority. Political Sensitivity The Commission avoids direct confrontation with powerful governments. Support from Other Governments Enforcement is stronger if multiple countries or & Stakeholders industries support the case. Example of Political Caution: The Commission delayed action against Germany for failing to implement whistleblower protections, likely due to Germany's influence within the EU. 5. Why Do Member States Violate EU Law? A. Rejection of EU Goals & Means Governments may disagree with EU rules and choose to delay or resist. Examples: o Hungary & Poland resisting rule-of-law principles. o France delaying implementation of competition rules affecting national industries. B. Domestic Opposition & Political Constraints Compliance often involves multiple government actors: o Different ministries, agencies, and local governments. o Conflicts between national & regional governments. o Public opposition can slow transposition (e.g., farmers protesting environmental rules). Example: Italy failed to enforce EU wastewater regulations due to regional non-compliance. C. Administrative & Capacity Deficits Some states lack the resources or expertise to implement EU law effectively. Example: Newer member states (Romania, Bulgaria) struggle with complex financial regulations. 44 D. Poor Monitoring & Weak Sanctions If the Commission is unlikely to enforce, some states may ignore obligations. Example: Some governments delay transposing minor directives, expecting low enforcement risk. 6. The Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) Structure Court Composition Role Court of Justice 27 Judges, 11 Advocates- Reviews infringement cases, interprets EU (ECJ) General law General Court 2x27 Judges Handles cases brought by individuals, companies, member states Judges are appointed for 6-year terms (1 per country). The Advocates-General provide opinions before the court issues judgments. Key Competences 1. Annulment of EU Acts: o The court can strike down EU laws that violate treaties. 2. Member State Compliance: o Handles infringement cases. 3. Preliminary Rulings (Article 267 TFEU): o National courts ask for interpretations of EU law. o Can lead to conflict if national courts reject EU primacy (e.g., Polish Constitutional Tribunal case). Example: The court ruled in Costa v ENEL (1964) that EU law has primacy over national law. Discussion Questions & Answers 1. Why is the infringement procedure a multi-stage process? Pros: o Encourages negotiation & voluntary compliance. o Reduces the burden on the court. Cons: o Slow & resource-intensive. o Allows governments to delay enforcement. 45 2. What limits the Commission’s enforcement power? Political considerations (large states are harder to challenge). Limited monitoring resources. Risk of backlash (governments might retaliate in other policy areas). 3. What role do national courts play in enforcing EU law? They apply EU law directly. They refer cases to the CJEU for preliminary rulings. Conflicts arise when national courts reject EU primacy. Final Summary The Commission enforces EU law but faces political & resource constraints. Member states violate EU law due to political, administrative, and economic reasons. The Court of Justice ensures compliance, but national resistance remains an issue. 46 Section 11- Euroscepticism in the EU 1. What Is Euroscepticism? Definition & Dimensions Euroscepticism is criticism or opposition to the European Union (EU), which can take different forms: 1. General rejection of EU membership (e.g., advocating for leaving the EU, like Brexit). 2. Opposition to specific EU institutions, rules, or policies (e.g., Schengen, Eurozone, migration). 3. Criticism of the EU’s democratic legitimacy (e.g., "Brussels is too bureaucratic"). 4. Opposition based on ideology: o Left-wing critique: The EU is too neoliberal, pro-market, and undemocratic. o Right-wing critique: The EU threatens national sovereignty, culture, and identity. Types of Euroscepticism (Taggart & Szczerbiak, 2013) Type Definition Example Hard Total opposition to EU membership or Brexit campaign (UK), Le Euroscepticism deep integration Pen (France) Soft Acceptance of EU membership but Poland & Hungary’s Euroscepticism opposition to specific policies or opposition to EU migration institutions policy Polity-Based Criticism of the EU’s institutional Concerns over EU Criticism structure and governance democratic legitimacy Policy-Based Opposition to specific EU policies Austerity measures in Greece Criticism 2. Has Euroscepticism Increased Over Time? Measuring Euroscepticism: The Eurobarometer Annual EU-wide survey measuring public attitudes towards the EU. Key question: "Do you think your country's membership in the EU is a good thing?" Data since 1974 shows variations rather than a clear increase. Trends in Euroscepticism Pre-1990s: Pro-EU sentiment grew, as countries sought EU economic and political stability. 1990s-2000s: o Mixed trends—post-Cold War optimism met resistance to EU expansion & deepening integration. 47 o Rise of the Euro (1999) and Eastern Enlargement (2004, 2007) created tensions. Post-2008 Financial & Eurozone Crisis: o Southern Europe (Greece, Italy, Spain) saw anger over austerity. o Northern Europe (Germany, Netherlands) resisted bailouts. Post-2015 Migration Crisis: o Eastern & Southern European countries became more critical of EU migration policies. Brexit (2016-2020): o The first country to leave the EU → Inspired far-right and nationalist parties elsewhere. Key Takeaways No uniform increase in Euroscepticism. Crises (e.g., financial, migration) temporarily increase Euroscepticism. Regional variation: Some countries (e.g., France, Italy) have seen increasing opposition, while others (e.g., Portugal) remain pro-EU. 3. The Salience of EU Issues Over Time Why Have EU Issues Become More Important? New Competences: The EU now has powers over the Euro, migration, foreign policy, environment. Repeated Treaty Reforms: Maastricht, Lisbon, etc., led to deeper integration. Crisis-Driven Attention: Financial, migration, and security crises forced EU issues into national debates. Salience Theory (Kriesi, 2016) EU issues are not always debated—salience is event-driven. The public pays attention to the EU only during major crises (e.g., Brexit, Greece bailout). 4. Individual-Level Explanations for Euroscepticism A. Utilitarian Perspective (Economic Self-Interest) Winners of EU integration → More pro-EU: o Mobile, educated individuals benefit from the EU’s single market. o Exporters, EU-funded groups, and skilled workers support integration. Losers of EU integration → More Eurosceptic: o Low-skilled workers & rural populations fear job competition & outsourcing. 48 o Small farmers & industries dependent on national subsidies worry about EU budget cuts. Example: Workers in deindustrialized regions (e.g., Northern England) supported Brexit due to economic fears. B. Identity Perspective (Cultural & National Identity) Pro-EU Citizens: o Have cosmopolitan identities. o Support European identity over nationalism. o Have positive views of immigration. Eurosceptic Citizens: o Have strong national identities. o Feel threatened by cultural & political integration. o Oppose open borders & migration policies. Example: Marine Le Pen (France) frames EU opposition as a fight for national identity. C. Elite Perspective & Cue-Taking The public often takes cues from elites (politicians, media). Parties & media shape perceptions of the EU, making Euroscepticism stronger when elites frame the EU negatively. Example: Nigel Farage & UKIP shaped Brexit discourse by linking the EU to uncontrolled migration. 5. Party Positions on the EU The 2-Dimensional Party System (Kriesi et al., 2006) Economic Dimension (Interventionist vs. Market-Oriented). Cultural Dimension (Progressive vs. Conservative). Euroscepticism often aligns with the cultural dimension—parties that emphasize nationalism and sovereignty are more Eurosceptic. 49 The Inverted-U Model (Hooghe et al., 2002) Euroscepticism is highest at the political extremes: o Radical left → Opposes EU neoliberalism & austerity. o Radical right → Opposes migration & political integration. o Centrists (center-left & center-right) tend to support the EU. Party Ideology Position on EU Example Far-Left Opposes EU economic policies France Insoumise (Mélenchon) Center-Left Pro-EU, but with reforms SPD (Germany) Center-Right Generally pro-EU CDU (Germany) Far-Right Strongly anti-EU AfD (Germany), National Rally (France) Recent Trends: Is the U Disappearing? Radical Left: Some parties are softening their opposition to the EU. Radical Right: Focus has shifted from economic concerns to migration & sovereignty. Example: Italy’s Brothers of Italy (Giorgia Meloni) moved from hard Euroscepticism to reforming the EU from within. 6. Discussion Questions & Answers 1. Why are some countries more Eurosceptic than others? Economic factors: Southern Europe (Greece, Italy) faced economic crises that weakened trust in the EU. Cultural identity: Eastern Europe (Poland, Hungary) opposes EU migration & social policies. Party influence: Countries with strong nationalist parties tend to be more Eurosceptic. 2. What role do elites play in shaping Euroscepticism? Parties & media frame EU issues in ways that influence public opinion. Example: Brexit was partly driven by elite narratives about sovereignty & migration. 3. Has Euroscepticism permanently increased? Not necessarily—it rises during crises but can decline when stability returns. 50 Final Summary Euroscepticism is diverse—it ranges from full opposition to reformist critique. Economic, identity, and elite factors explain individual Euroscepticism. Euroscepticism is most common on the far-left & far-right. Crisis events increase salience, but support for the EU remains strong in many countries. 51 Section 12- Democratic Backsliding in the EU 1. What is Democratic Backsliding? Definition & Key Characteristics Democratic backsliding refers to the gradual weakening of democratic institutions and norms, often led by elected governments rather than through outright coups. Key features include: o Erosion of judicial independence o Restrictions on media freedom o Weakening of civil society o Politicization of public administration o Manipulation of electoral rules Examples of Democratic Backsliding in the EU Hungary (Fidesz, Viktor Orbán): o Judicial reforms limiting independence. o Media control and suppression of opposition voices. o Restrictions on NGOs and academic institutions (e.g., forcing CEU to leave Hungary). o Redistricting & changes to electoral rules favoring the ruling party. Poland (Law and Justice Party - PiS): o Judicial purges (forced early retirement of judges). o Increased control over state-owned media. o Anti-LGBTQ+ policies restricting civil liberties. o Legal conflicts with the EU over rule of law violations. 2. The Relationship Between EU Membership & Backsliding Democracy as a Precondition for EU Membership The Copenhagen Criteria (1993) require EU candidates to uphold: o Stable democratic institutions. o Rule of law. o Respect for human rights. Problem: Once a country joins the EU, there are fewer mechanisms to prevent backsliding. How EU Accession Can Contribute to Backsliding Focus on Strengthening the Executive 52 o The accession process encourages strong executive authority to implement EU laws. o This can reduce checks & balances, making it easier for leaders to erode democracy after accession. Reduced Political Competition o Countries must align with EU rules before accession, which can limit political opposition. Illiberalism & Populist Discourse o Populist leaders use EU rules as a scapegoat for national problems. o Example: Orbán claims the EU is "interfering with Hungary's sovereignty". Advantages of EU Membership for Backsliding Governments (Kelemen 2020) Advantage Explanation Example Alliances in EU Right-wing governments can align with Fidesz & EPP (until 2021) Institutions like-minded parties in EP & Council Financial Access to EU cohesion & recovery Hungary & Poland receive Benefits funds billions from the EU budget Market Free trade & investment flows continue Hungary remains attractive Protection despite backsliding for investors Migration Safety Citizens can leave if they oppose Poles & Hungarians Valve government policies, reducing domestic emigrating to Western opposition Europe Veto Power in Backsliding states can block EU-wide Hungary blocking Ukraine the Council decisions to extract concessions aid Challenges for the EU in Addressing Backsliding Unanimity in the European Council makes action against backsliding states difficult. The European Commission fears escalation—too much pressure could push states further towards authoritarianism. Political trade-offs: Some member states prioritize stability over democracy enforcement. 3. The EU’s Tools to Combat Democratic Backsliding 1) Dialogue, Monitoring, & Recommendations The EU regularly monitors rule of law violations. Reports & warnings are issued, but they are not legally binding. Problem: These methods rely on moral pressure and are easily ignored. 2) Infringement Proceedings (Article 258 TFEU) Commission initiates legal action against a member state. Case is judged by the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU). 53 Advantages: o No voting required → The Commission can act alone. o Legal enforcement → Rulings must be followed. Disadvantages: o Slow process. o Only applies to specific EU law violations, not general democratic backsliding. 3) Article 7 TEU ("Nuclear Option") The strongest EU tool against backsliding. Step 1: EU warns the country (simple majority in the Council). Step 2: EU suspends voting rights (requires unanimity). Cases: o Poland (2017-2024) → Rule of law procedure ongoing. o Hungary (2018-present) → No serious consequences due to vetoes. Problem: Unanimity in Step 2 is impossible since backsliding states protect each other (Hungary & Poland blocked each other’s sanctions). 4) Rule

Policymaking in the EU PDF

Document Details

Tags

Related

Summary

Full Transcript