4 2012 Annual Report from the Commission
on relations between the European Commission and National Parliaments
| (35241)
12989/13
COM(13) 565
| 2012 Annual Report on relations between the European Commission and national parliaments
|
| Legal base | —
|
| Document originated
| 30 July 2013 |
| Deposited in Parliament
| 5 August 2013 |
| Department | Foreign and Commonwealth Office
|
| Basis of consideration
| EM of 28 August 2013 |
| Previous Committee Report
| None; but see HC 86-xii (2012-13) chapter 13 (12 September 2012)
|
| Discussion in Council
| Not applicable |
| Committee's assessment
| Politically and legally important
|
| Committee's decision
| For debate on the floor of the House together with the 2012 Annual Report on subsidiarity and proportionality
|
Background
4.1 The Barroso initiative, launched in 2006, encouraged
national parliaments to enter into dialogue with the Commission
by commenting on individual initiatives as well as the Commission's
Work Programme. The annual report outlines the extent to which
national parliaments have engaged with the Commission under that
initiative and new arrangements for strengthening the role of
national parliaments under the Treaty of Lisbon, as set out in
Article 12 TEU and Protocol 2 to the EU Treaties.
4.2 There is more limited comment on specific aspects
of the subsidiarity control mechanism, such as the effect of the
first "yellow card" issued on the Monti II proposal.
This is instead addressed in greater detail in the 2012 Annual
Report on Subsidiarity and Proportionality which was published
at the same time as the current document and also addressed in
this Report at chapter xx.
4.3 Last year the Committee concluded that:
· it was looking forward
to the Commission's response to the yellow card raised by national
parliaments in relation to the draft Regulation on the exercise
of the right to take collective action within the context of the
freedom of the establishment and the freedom to provide services
(Monti II) as this would give a better indication of the extent
to which dialogue with national parliaments is progressing;
· there was too great
a time lag between submission of a Reasoned Opinion and a response
from the Commission, which was not conducive to effective dialogue;
and
· there were opportunities
for Departmental Select Committees to use the Commission Work
Programme to examine European Commission proposals and the publication
of reports by them could open up a means of engaging in political
dialogue with the Commission and that we would take that forward
as part of our ongoing scrutiny inquiry.
The document
4.4 This is the eighth annual report from the Commission
providing an overview of the level, nature, means and subject
matter of communication between the Commission and national parliaments
during 2012.
4.5 As in 2011, the Commission notes that much of
this political dialogue, enabling national parliaments to "actively
participate in policy shaping at EU-level," took place within
the context of the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) for 2014-20
and the EU response to the economic and financial crisis, including
the deepening of Economic and Monetary Union (EMU). It therefore
also includes the Commission's views on democratic legitimacy
and how this can be increased.
4.6 The Commission says that political dialogue took
many forms in 2012 including:
· general bilateral
and multilateral debates and discussions, often held in the context
of inter-parliamentary meetings;
· exchanges of national
parliaments' written opinions and Commission replies; and
· other meetings and
contacts in the course of the year.
FISCAL CONSOLIDATION AND DEMOCRATIC LEGITIMACY
4.7 In 2012, the Commission says that the dialogue
on the 2011 legislative measures to address the economic and financial
crisis and the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) for 2014-20
has increased in focus, through a variety of channels and contexts,
including:
· engagement with the
Commission through COSAC;
· enhanced political
dialogue between the Commission and national parliaments during
the European Semester following the publication of the Annual
Growth Survey, and the endorsement of country-specific recommendations
by the European Council; and
· through the debate
prompted by the Commission's Blueprint for a deep and genuine
EMU — Launching a European Debate[7]
4.8 In particular, the Commission said in the Blueprint
that further EMU integration was needed to observe democratic
accountability, both at the level at which the executive decision
is taken and at the level of its impact. This would require greater
involvement of both national parliaments and the European Parliament,
strengthening of scrutiny at both national and European Parliamentary
levels and greater inter-parliamentary cooperation between them.
4.9 As regards the democratic legitimacy of the European
Semester process, the Commission says that key features of political
dialogue were the use of informal and formal initiatives to strengthen
scrutiny by national parliaments in the context of economic governance.
In particular, through inter-parliamentary cooperation envisaged
by Article 9 of Protocol 1 to the Treaties and Article 13 of the
Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance, as agreed at
the European Council meeting in March 2012.
WRITTEN OPINIONS
4.10 The Commission notes that overall the number
of written opinions received from national Parliaments had increased
in 2012 (to 663, an increase of 7%) but that this was a much smaller
increase than in previous years (55% in 2010 and 60% in 2011).
It also reports in relation to these opinions that:
· 70 were Reasoned Opinions
submitted as part of the subsidiarity Protocol procedure;
· the most active parliamentary
chambers were Portugal, Italy and Germany;
· ten parliamentary
chambers accounted for more than 10% of the total received;
· the UK Parliament
issued a total of 22 opinions in 2012, of which 16 were issued
by the House of Lords and six by the House of Commons;
· the opinions related
to no fewer than 354 Commission documents and although 23 proposals
accounted for 25% of opinions received, the vast majority of Commission
proposals received one to three opinions (reflecting a wide range
of topics of interest to national parliaments);
· proposals attracting
the most opinions were the Monti II Regulation (17 opinions),
the Data Protection Directive (13), the Data Protection Regulation
(12), the Concession Awards Directive (11), the Copyright and
Licensing Directive (10), the Roadworthiness Regulation (6), the
Trans-European Transport Network Guidelines (9), the Fund for
European Aid to the Most Deprived (8), the Directive on Recovery
and Resolution of Credit Institutions (8), the Regulation on Supervision
of Credit Institutions (8), the Electronic Identification and
Trust Services Regulation (7), the Roadworthiness Directive (6),
the Transparency Directives (6), the Directive on Medicinal Products
subject to Medical Prescription (6), the Regulation on Medicinal
Products subject to Medical Prescription (6) and the cohesion
policy legislative package 2014-20 (5);
· six policy areas accounted
for more than half of opinions received: internal market and services,
justice, home affairs, mobility and transport, employment and
health; and
· legislative, as opposed
to non-legislative, documents attracted the most attention.
MEETINGS AND CONTACTS
4.11 The report emphasises the value of political
dialogue through frequent meetings between the Commission and
national parliaments in Brussels and in Member State capitals.
It mentions in particular the participation of President Barroso
at the Copenhagen COSAC in April 2012 and the attendance of the
High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Baroness
Ashton, at the newly established Inter-parliamentary Conference
for CFSP and CSDP. The main discussion points at those meetings
were specific legislative proposals, the EU response to the economic
crisis and the democratic legitimacy of the EU.
OUTLOOK
4.12 The Commission notes that the debate on stronger
democratic legitimacy and accountability, especially in the context
of the European Semester and deepening EMU, will stay high on
the political dialogue agenda for inter-institutional dialogue
during 2013 and intensify as the year progresses. This has already
been evidenced by, amongst other events, the COSAC Chairpersons'
meeting of 27-28 January in Dublin and the first European Parliamentary
Week on the European Semester Policy Coordination which took place
between 28-30 January.
4.13 The Commission says that it will therefore focus
on effective implementation of the strengthened political dialogue
it has offered national parliaments at the two crucial points
of the European Semester, on the priorities identified by the
Annual Growth Survey and on policy concerning the implementation
of country-specific recommendations. It also mentions the initiative
of a "Europe Day" to be organised by national parliaments
to raise awareness of European affairs.
The Government's view
4.14 In the Explanatory Memorandum dated 28 August
the Minister for Europe (David Lidington) says the Government:
· welcomes continuing
dialogue between national parliaments and the Commission to increase
the democratic accountability of the EU and to recognise the importance
of scrutiny of its proposals by national parliaments;
· wants national parliaments
to be given a much more significant role in the EU's functioning;
· maintains its view
of the role of national parliaments as "the true source of
real democratic legitimacy and accountability in the EU"
as expressed by the Prime Minister in his January 2013 Bloomberg
speech on Europe and as meriting the ability to block legislation
that need not be agreed at the European level (the proposed "red
card" system);
· welcomes our current
inquiry into the European Scrutiny system in the House of Commons
and the House of Lords European Union Committee's inquiry into
the role of national parliaments in the European Union;
· is considering how
best to support parliaments' efforts to improve their coordination,
including how to identify Commission proposals which raise subsidiarity
concerns and in turn make more effective use of the 'yellow card'
mechanism;
· thinks it is for national
parliaments to determine the mechanisms for cooperation with the
European Parliament;
· recognises the important
work that the UK Parliament representatives do through their office
in Brussels, and their contribution to increased coordination
between national parliaments;
· believes that the
Commission should provide a more detailed assessment of the effectiveness
of this dialogue with national parliaments on individual proposals
in future annual reports;
· is encouraged by the
increased number of opinions in total, including Reasoned Opinions,
submitted by national parliaments in 2012 compared to 2011 as
it highlights that national parliaments are continuing to scrutinise
Commission proposals closely, and are raising concerns through
the Reasoned Opinions process, as part of a much broader range
of activity by national parliaments in scrutinising Commission
proposals and holding the EU to account;
· believes that the
Commission should consider whether current arrangements give national
parliaments adequate time to scrutinise those Commission proposals
which particularly impact on the national interests of Member
States; and
· is encouraged by the
important role COSAC plays in engaging with the Commission but
believes more could be done to further strengthen COSAC.
4.15 Finally, the Minister comments on the Commission's
plans for further engagement with national parliaments in 2013
within this report, including the suggestion that national parliaments
should organise a regular 'Europe Day'. He says:
"the Government believes
that it is vital that the Commission should base any further engagement
on the most complex and contentious forthcoming Commission proposals,
ahead of time, rather than holding a 'Europe Day'. This will support
better EU law-making in the long term, and greater coordination
between national and EU-level institutions — to encourage
greater engagement from all parliamentary chambers across the
EU, something the UK would support."
Conclusion
4.16 We agree with the Minister's response to
this annual report, in particular his emphasis on the need for
robust democratic accountability and legitimacy at national parliamentary
level. We agree that the Commission's apparent focus on this issue
is trivialised by its championing of the proposed "Europe
Day" in the report's concluding paragraph.
4.17 We draw the House's attention to the ongoing
scrutiny inquiry as the role of national parliaments, including
issues such as the early engagement of Departmental Select Committees
and the proposed "red card" (which the Minister refers
to) falls within its scope.
4.18 As in previous years, we will send this chapter
of our Report to the Commission, together with the chapter on
the Commission's 2012 Annual Report on subsidiarity and proportionality
(chapter 5) for their information.
4.19 Given the political significance of the need
for national parliaments to be given an increased role in the
EU's functioning and so provide the EU with greater democratic
legitimacy, we recommend this document for debate on the floor
of the House, together with the 2012 Annual Report on subsidiarity
and proportionality.
7 COM(2012) 777 final/2. Back
| 
