Reform Treaty - Institutional Changes, part 2 (National parliaments and participatory democracy)

Let's continue looking at the institutional changes set out in the Reform-Lisbon Treaty.

The biggest "winners" in the whole text are the parliaments of the member States. The new Treaty dramatically increases their involvement in the EU-institutional process. Regular readers will recall that the Commission has sought to involve national parliaments more by sending all proposals to them (see our post about that). Now, the new Treaty contains a new article on national parliaments that expressly sets out their rights and obligations in relation to the Union. The new provision deals with the information they receive, review of the subsidiarity principle, evaluation mechanisms in the area of freedom, security and justice, and revision of the Treaties.

The Protocol on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality is amended to allow closer scrutiny of subsidiarity by national parliaments. Under an early-warning system, any national parliament may, within eight weeks of being sent a legislative proposal, issue a reasoned opinion stating why it considers that the proposal does not comply with the principle of subsidiarity. National parliaments are allocated votes : Each national parliament has two votes, shared on the basis of the national system and if the system is a bicameral one, each chamber or house is given one vote. If the reasoned opinion represents at least one third of the votes allocated to national parliaments, the institution that made the proposal must review it and then decide whether to maintain, amend or withdraw it.

National parliaments have a special role to play in the legislative procedure too. If, during the course of the legislative procedure, the legislative proposal is challenged by a simple majority of the votes allocated to national parliaments and if the Commission decides to maintain its proposal regardless, a special procedure comes into play. The Commission will have to issue a reasoned opinion explaining how the principle of subsidiarity is being respected. The Commission's opinion is forwarded to the legislating institutions together with the reasoned opinions of the national parliaments. The legislating institutions may then decide (by 55% of the members of the Council or by a majority of the European Parliament) whether or not to continue with the legislative procedure.

The new Treaty also reinforces participatory democracy. It allows interested parties be consulted and that a dialogue be maintained with civil society and representative organisations. It requires that the work of the institutions be transparent and in particular that the activities of the Council and the European Parliament be public when they legislate.

The new Treaty incorporates the citizens' right of initiative: One million nationals from a significant number of member States may call on the Commission to present a legislative proposal in areas falling within the Union's field of competence. That's a left over from the 2004 Intergovernmental conference.

That's enough for now. The next installment will be on the Court of Justice and the other institutions.

Comments

[Phil Jones]

Once countries agree to give up a portion of their sovereign power, without veto, to an external entity with legal personality, there is no classification for the resulting structure other than a federal state. A federal state has a central government and it has provinces. The countries no longer are countries. Those that argue (only in the U.K. seemingly) that the Lisbon Treaty is not a federal constitution are trying to "suck and blow". There is nothing else it can be. Under the Lisbon Treaty, 14 of the new provinces other than the U.K. can dictate to people in the U.K. as to what is to happen in the U.K. in particular fields. That is the same situation as if the U.K. government gave it's right to make decisions on foreign affairs to the U.S., it's right to make decisions on taxation to Canada, it's right to make decisions on transport in the U.K. to Chile, etc. No difference. So please, can we have some straight-talking from those in the U.K. who rattle on about the Lisbon Treaty not being a federal constitution and not making the U.K., France, etc. into provinces. That is its effect.