EU

• Institutions: The EU offers a stable set of institutions for collective decision-making

• Desires: citizens realize their expectations through the politicak system (mostly indirectly through parties)

• Impact: EU decisions impact allocation of economic ressources

• Feedback: interaction between in- and output

• These are rule systems that produce and implement authoritative and collectively binding decisions (Göhler)

• They are the center of a political institution and regulate: Power relations, distribution of collective ressources, emtry of participants…

• european comission: executive —> directives in legislative process

• european parliament: legislative 1 —> consent to EU legislation, required on the majority

• council of the EU: legislative 2 —> executive ministers of the MS

• european court of justice: judical —> composed of different courts

• european council: agenda setting —> heads of MS + comission president

• european central bank

• Effects of war

• Cold War

• Economic context: USA promote recovery and development in the EU (marshall plan)

• founding fathers: Robert Schumann (frensh foreign minister) and jean monnet (frensh statesman, draftet plan)

• vision of european integration; promote sectoral integration at the beginning: pool coal and steel resources + stable franco-german alliance

• founded by treaty of paris in 1951 —> belgium, france, west germany, italy, luxembourg and netherlands

• institutional blueprint: high authority, council of ministers, common assembly, court of justice

Context: korea war, algerian war, suez crisis, invasion of hungary by soviets

EEC

• founded by treaty of rome (1957)

• Goal: create common market in 15 years

De Gaulle (65-66) reject a proposal and boycott the council of ministers —> exposed limits of EU intergration

luxembourg compromise (1966) + de gaulles retirement in 1969

• Most important trearty: created the EU

• Created pillar structure

• Established an european citizenship

• expanded scope of integration

• more power for the EP (introduced in the Single European Act 1986)

Goal: prepare EU for decision making with enlarged membership

key features

• revised pillar structure

• increased social policy competencies

• established mechanism for closer cooperation and flexible integration (Schengen)

institutional reforms

• capped EP at 700

• more competenscies for EP

• Greater democracy: Increased role of EP, Council (President) and ECJ (reform)

• introduction of citizen initiatives

• priciples of EU policy making: proportionality and subsidiaritry; acts of the union are now called laws

A federation is a “system of govt in wich significant govt powers are divided and shared between the central govt and small subnantional units”

Central govt usually controlls foreign and security policy, currency and the army

David Mitrany

How to achieve world peace?

By taking functional tasks out of the hands of national govts and giving those to international agencies

-Ernst B. Haas

-Explanation of integration and a critique of realism

-Integration as a process that would undermine the sovereignty of states beyond their govt expectations (Spillover effect)

-Example: Cooperation in one policy area (e.g. single market) necessitates pressures to cooperate in other policy areas such as labour relations an standard setting

-Important role of elites: development of supranational loyalties

1. Empirical critique: fails to predict integration crisis (empty chair crisis) and misunderstands the relevance of national interests in the integration process

2. Theoretical: Critics denied the existance of elite socialization also downplays the role of national leaders

3. Normative: No role for european citizens (inappropriate for the EU in 21 century

Based on realist assumptions

Core assumption: states as the primary actors in integration process and national diverity

Combines elements of realism and liberalism

“European integration can best be explained as a series of rational choices made by national leaders”

Core Assumption: Cooperation based on self interests not idealism

1. economic interests

2. asymmetrical interdependence and relative bargaining power (e.g. importance of france and germany)

3. inter-state commitments through the development of supranational institutions

• Key International Relations theories of European integration

• Both families of theories have fallen in and out of favour.

• Intergovernmentalism formed a response to neo-functionalism based on empirical

  observations.

• New variants draw on contemporary social science theory (actor cantered, micro-

  foundation) and on elements of original theory (Supranational Institutionalism and Liberal

  intergovernmentalism).

• Set to remain valuable in the future:

• E.g. accounts of the Eurocrisis draw on both New Intergovernmentalism and New Supranationalism

1. Rational choice institionalism; methodological individualism, rationality (preference orders), logic of consequences —> Institutions have an impact but not as important (“thin” institutions)

2. Sociologiacal institutionalism; behaviour of political actors is shaped by informal norms and values—> Institutions have profound effecs on the preferences (“thick” institutions)

3. Historical institutionalism; decions are shaped by pre-existing relationships (“thick” instituions)

Treaty on EU, Article 2: The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities.

Since lisbon treaty (2007)

The principal actors are the European Council, the Council of Ministers and the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.

The Commission, the EP and the ECJ limited powers.

The European Council sets the EU’s broad policy agenda and the general direction of integration.

The Commission has the sole right to initiate legislation, although in practice this power has been undermined

The Council of Ministers, acting increasingly by qualified majority voting (QMV) has to agree to proposals for them to become law.

In most policy areas, the European Parliament (EP) is a co-legislator

The Council of Ministers and EP are co-equal decision makers in relation to the annual budget.

Institutions which are consulted during the legislative process include the European

Economic and Social Committee (EESC) and the Committee of the Regions and Local Authorities (CoR).

The European Central Bank is in charge of monetary and interest rate policy in the Eurozone.

Ordinary legislative procedure (OLP) since Maastricht 1993, Article 294 TFEU

The OLP denotes the use of Qualified Majority Voting in the Council combined with co-decision between the Council and EP

Main legislative instruments: directives, regulations, decisions

The European Council sets a multi-annual budgetary envelope which frames annual budget negotiations

The Commission draws up a Preliminary Annual Budget Draft which is considered by the Council of Ministers and then sent to the EP.

The Council of Ministers and the EP must jointly agree on the terms of the budget before it is approved.

• Increasing relevance of institutionalist approaches to study the EU as just one variety of comparative politics approaches

• The treaty framework constitutes the basic institutional architecture of the EU and has been amended over timeàex. Non-compliance sanctions

• While the main actors remain the same their balance of influence has changed —> council/Ep/ Commission, EP more powerful

• OLP is now crucial to EU legislation.

Principals delegate tasks to agents. Agents are accountable to principals. Principals can sanction agents.

Rational choice: Principals delegate tasks to realize their preferences

Why delegation? Capacity, competence, collective choice, credible commitment

• unclear preferences of the principal

• agents self interest

• information asymmetry

• institutional slippage

• shirking (opportunistic bahaviour)

Solution:

Ex ante —> Contacts/Institutional design, screening mechanisms

Ex post —> Monitoring, institutional checks

• 5 year term

• Independent

• promote general interest of the EU

• ensure application of the treaties

• coordinating, executive and management functions

1. Commission submits proposal to council

2. council seeks opinion of EP

3. council makes finals decision (by unaminity)

Also:

• The EP and council can request the comission to initiate policy

• Area of freedom, security and justice —> 1/4 of the MS may also propose initiatives

• EP and council can amend proposals

• College of commissioners (political leadership)

  • Each commissioner is in charge of a portfolio (sectoral/ functional)

  • decision making by simple majority

  • presidentalization (power to reject proposals of MS + power to re-allocate portfolios/ right to reshuffle)

• Services (administration)

1. Council proposes candidate (by taking into account the elections of the EP)

2. EP elects the President by a majority of the MS

   
   

Controversy: EP wishes to nominate a Spitzenkandidat but its not part of the treatys

Ex ante selection of the Members of the Commission:

“The members of the Commission shall be chosen on the ground of their general competence and European commitment from persons whose independence is beyond doubt.” (Art. 17 (3) TEU)

EP scrutinize the nomination process

• Commission responsible to the EP. EP may vote on a motion of censure (Misstrauensvotum) of the commission (Absolute majority of all members)

• Reporting and monitoring

  • Information duties (Annual reports, auditions)

  • EP has rights to interrogate

  • Check legality and correctnesss of acts

Two Modes as an implememnter:

• direct policy implementation powers (very small number of policy areas)

• apex of a multi-level system of implementation

Commission can adopt a delegated act on the basis of delegation rights granted by EU law, so legislative act, but subject to strict limits —> Complement existing legislation and fill in gaps

Commission plays important role in EU politics:

• Debate over control of the Commission remains central to explanations about the nature and pace of European integrationàdebate about the nature of the EU itself

• Commission as merely an agent of the MS. They argue that it is convenient for MS to delegate some control over the EU’s detailed agenda and the implementation of its legal acts to the Commission.

• Commission achieve a degree of autonomy from MS to pursue its own agenda.

• Formed in 1970s

• Motor of history making moments in the EU

• Lisbon treaty redefines membership:

  • Heads of MS

  • Preseident of the european council + president of the commission

  • High representive of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy

  • Heads of the govts and president of commission need an assistent (minister/commissioner)

    
    

• Agenda setting institution: policy making only in foreign affairs

• Institutional design: treaty revision/enlargement

  • by simple majority: introducing a conference on poposals to amend the treaties (ordinary revision procedure)

  • by unanimity: agree on less significant changes (simplified revision procedure)

  • Definition of the eligibility criteria for new MS

    
    

• Selection of agents

  • Nominates the commission president and appoints the Commission after EP consent

  • Appoints high representive of the union

  • decides number of members of the EP

• Right to monitoring other institutions, amendment and veto rights in decision making

  • Must approve all legislative proposals

  • non-legislative decisions (e.g. foreign security)

• 10 council formations for different policy areas

  • Most senior: GAC (General affairs), FAC (FOreign Affairs), ECOFIN (economic and financial), AGFISh (agriculture and fishery)

• COREPER (Commitee of permanent representives) preparing Ministers councils

1. European Council presidency (two and a half year appointment

2. High representive of the Union for foreign affairs and security policy is the chair of the FAC (five year term)

3. The Euro Group elects its own president (two and a half year term

4. Trio presedency of the MS is responsible for other sectorial councils (18 months)

• Lisbon treaty —> double majority: 55% of the MS with at least 15 MS must agree on a decision and 65% of the EU population must be covered

• Blocking minority must include at least 4 MS

• Luxembourg compromise (1966): Unanimity rather than QMV —> Consensus orientation

• Council developed a routine to handle of conflicts

  • New information, learning process

  • Distributive norms

  • Several hierachy levels

• mediators: commission and council presidency

• The council as a forum for bargaining (communicative rationality as important as instrumental rationality for supranationalists with a construktivist theoretical position)

European Council as the EU’s main agenda setter

• EU Council as main decision-making body

• Councils are the principal institutions to promote national interests

• Debates

  • MS as principals of the Commission?

  • Institutional rules vs. consensual voting

  • Bargaining vs. Arguing

  • Supranational vs. national identities

• Founded in the rome treaties (1958) direct elections since 1979

• 750 MEPs and the president (elected every two-and-ahalf years)

• Meets once a month in Strasbourg —> plenary sessions take place on the basis of earlier commitee reports

• president presides over plenary debates and represents the EU externally

1. Democratic representation

2. Territorial representation

3. Party representation

4. Decision making efficiency

• Articulation/Aggregation of public interests

• election function

• legislative powers

• budgetary powers

• political control and consultation

• Election of the Commission president

• Organized in transnational party groups (European People's Party and Socialists & Democrats)

• Since 2007: 20 Members from at least 6 MS could form a party

  —> The ideological oragnization is more important than national part units and groups

1. organizational self-interest and institutional context

   • European Parliamentary Assembly (EPA) was not directly elected and had limited powers -> designed to monitor behaviour of other institutions, give advice

   • direct elections in 1979

2. extension and usage of budgetary powers

   • In 1970: the EP was given the rights to amend and modificate the budget

   • In 1975: the EP was given the power to reject the budget as a whole

   • The Lisbon Treaty makes the EP and the Council co-equal budget authorities (on the annual EU budget)

3. the EP as a legislator

   • The EP must be consulted

   • Subsequent treaty reforms (Amsterdam, Nice, Lisbon) have revised and increased the use of the co-decision procedure, turning it into the OLP (OLP) and making the EP a co-equal legislator to the Council

   • The EP has veto right on important decisions

• Amsterdam treaty, proposals were discussed with entirely cycle (all 4 readings)

• EU institutions seek to agree early on proposals and to find policies solutions early in the legislative process (mostly at 1st reading)

  —> To be able to agree early they have complemented the OLP by an informal procedure, informal negotiations in the Trialog, in which all 3 legislative institutions (council, EP and commission) are involved and try to negotiate possible solutions.

• Duration of OLP shortened over time.

• EPP (EVP), SPE (SPD), ALDE (Liberal)

  —> They voted jointly almost 80% of the legislative proposals

• less common that left or greens win a vote in EP

  
  

• Institutional choices can reduce the transaction costs associated with decision-making: efficiency

• political actors attempt to create rules from which they expect the generation of ‘policy streams’ which maximize their policy preferences under given constraints

• Principals may delegate four function powers to their agents: monitoring the compliance with agreements among principals; filling in ‘incomplete contracts’; providing expert information; agenda-setting to avoid endless ‘cycling’ of proposals

BUT: social influence in form of community eviroment has also an impact and obliges the EP to take the that into account when shaping the EU

• EP‘s organization = working parliament (committees most of the work)

• High discipline of EU party groups

• No opposition party

• Trend Increase the EP’s influence in EU politics

• EP now co-equal legislator on most EU policy proposals (trilog)

• Explanation of EU evolution emphasize

  • MEPs self-interests (increase their competencies and powers)

  • increasing powers of the EU and need for greater democratic legitimacy

  • rhetorical entrapment of the MSàwant more representative democracy

    (Maastricht), cannot opt out of strengthening EP

1. The Court of Justice (ECJ)

   • Makes binding decisions on disputes over Treaty provisions or secondary legislation

   •  Hears the most important cases, including those of political significance

   • Due to overload, the Court of First Instance was founded in 1989 (Nice: became

     independent)

2. The General Court

   • Central administrative court of the EU

3. The specialized courts, notably the EU Civil Service Court

   • Specialized court which hears disputes between employees of the EU institutions and the institutions themselves

• Main functions:

  • Dispute resolution (institutions-MS)

  • Clarify and complete treaty provisions (theory of political delegation)

  • Uniform interpretation and application of EU law in MS

• Debate:

  • Is the Court an agent of the MS?àOr judgment beyond what MS delegate to ECJ?

  • Does the EU proceed based on legal integration?àECJ contributed in significant

    ways to move EU competencies forward

  • Does the Court tend to overstep its boundaries?

• Consists 28 judges

• Judges are appointed by common accord of MSa —> staggered terms, 6 years, renewable, no retirement age

• Judges are chosen from persons whose independence is beyond doubt, who meet the requirements for appointment to the highest judicial offices in their respective countries or who are of recognized competence

• Courts work is conducted in chambers of three or five judges, each chamber has a president

• In the early days democatic representation was not a priority —> Monnet method: focusses on output legitimacy in form of innovation

1. Increase in parliamentary representation

   • direct elections (1979)

   • Co-decision procedure (Maastricht 1991)

   • OLP procedure; EP has to content (Lisbon)

2. Limit transfer of powers to EU

   • Principal of subisdiarity (Maastricht)

   • individual rights and EU citizenship

   • strenghtening of representative and participatory democrazy

1. founded on representative democracy

2. Citizens directly representated in the EP. MS in the EU Council and the Council.

3. Every citizen have the right to participate. Open decisions.

4. political parties expressing the will of citizens in the EU

Democracy —> “set of procedural rules arriving at collective decision in a way which accommodates and facilitates the fullest possible participation of interested parties”

Legitimacy —> degree of trust towards political system

• Input legitimacy: democratic process, political participation, democratic procedure and transparency, accountability of rulers

• Output legitimacy: performance and efficiency

• Democratic the wrong term; Better description is polyarchy (rule of the many)

• Two Dimensions

  • Contestation (freier Wettbewerb): captures the extent to wich citizens are free to organize themselves

  • Inclusion (Partizipation): Who gets to participate in the democratic process

• The unelected character of the Commissio

• The alleged weakness of the EP

• The withdrawal of powers from national parliaments

• The lack of a European ‘demos’

• The absence of strong European political parties

• The obscurity of the EU’s decision-making procedures

Moravscik:

• concerns over the EU’s democratic deficit are misplaced

• EU has limited competencies

• Control through pronounced set of checks and balances in the EU political system: political delegation by the MS who act as principalsàMS still principals of EU institutions