Download This PDF File
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Politics and Governance Open Access Journal | ISSN: 2183-2463 Volume 7, Issue 3 (2019) OutOut ofof thethe Shadows,Shadows, IntoInto thethe Limelight:Limelight: ParliamentsParliaments andand PoliticisationPoliticisation Editors Christine Neuhold and Guri Rosén Politics and Governance, 2019, Volume 7, Issue 3 Out of the Shadows, Into the Limelight: Parliaments and Politicisation Published by Cogitatio Press Rua Fialho de Almeida 14, 2º Esq., 1070-129 Lisbon Portugal Academic Editors Christine Neuhold (Maastricht University, The Netherlands) Guri Rosén (University of Oslo, Norway) Available online at: www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance This issue is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY). Articles may be reproduced provided that credit is given to the original andPolitics and Governance is acknowledged as the original venue of publication. Table of Contents Introduction to “Out of the Shadows, Into the Limelight: Parliaments and Politicisation” Christine Neuhold and Guri Rosén 220–226 Conceptualizing the Parliamentarization and Politicization of European Policies Niels Gheyle 227–236 The European Parliament and the Layered Politicization of the External Dimension of the Common Fisheries Policy Hubert Zimmermann 237–247 Eurosceptics into the Limelight? Eurosceptic Parliamentary Actors and Media Bias in EU Affairs Katrin Auel 248–265 Proving Their Worth? The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership and the Members of the European Parliament Guri Rosén 266–278 Brexit under Scrutiny in EU Member States: What Role for National Parliaments in Austria and Germany? Katharina Luise Meissner 279–290 The Politicisation of the European Central Bank and the Bundestag Anna-Lena Högenauer 291–302 Preparatory Bodies as Mediators of Political Conflict in Trilogues: The European Parliament’s Shadows Meetings Ariadna Ripoll Servent and Lara Panning 303–315 In the Shadow of Public Opinion: The European Parliament, Civil Society Organizations, and the Politicization of Trilogues Justin Greenwood and Christilla Roederer-Rynning 316–326 The European Parliament as an Arena and Agent in the Politics of Climate Change: Comparing the External and Internal Dimension Frank Wendler 327–338 Parliamentarizing a Politicized Policy: Understanding the Involvement of the European Parliament in UN Climate Negotiations Tom Delreux and Charlotte Burns 339–349 Politics and Governance (ISSN: 2183–2463) 2019, Volume 7, Issue 3, Pages 220–226 DOI: 10.17645/pag.v7i3.2443 Editorial Introduction to “Out of the Shadows, Into the Limelight: Parliaments and Politicisation” Christine Neuhold 1 and Guri Rosén 2,* 1 Department of Political Science, University of Maastricht, 6200 Maastricht, The Netherlands; E-Mail: c.neuhold@maastrichtuniversity.nl 2 ARENA Centre for European Studies, University of Oslo, 0318 Oslo, Norway; E-Mail: guri.rosen@arena.uio.no * Corresponding author Submitted: 4 September 2019 | Published: 27 September 2019 Abstract The Lisbon Treaty gave the European Parliament extensive new powers and its consent is now required for the vast majority of EU international agreements. At the same time, national parliaments—and even regional ones—are increasingly assert- ing their powers over areas of European governance that were traditionally dominated by the executive. Exerting influence and conducting oversight is time-consuming, however. Particularly at the EU-level parliaments cannot influence or scruti- nise every policy dossier with equal rigour. A key factor directing parliamentary attention seems to be the ‘politicisation’ of an issue. In other words, the amount of contestation and attention given to a particular issue seems to affect parliamentary activity. This thematic issue seeks to assess how politicisation affects the role parliaments play within the system of EU gov- ernance. In particular, the contributions aim to answer the over-arching question of whether politicisation has an impact on how parliaments seek to influence policy-making and hold the EU executives to account. Furthermore, we raise the question of whether and how politicisation affects the role of parliaments as arenas for contestation and communication of different political interests. Jointly, the findings provide the empirical foundations for a more comprehensive debate regarding the democratic implications of politicisation. Politicisation puts pressure on parliaments to act, but parliamen- tarians themselves may also find it in their interest to instigate contestation. This thematic issue addresses these questions by shedding light on both the European Parliament and national parliaments and examines different policy-fields reaching from climate change and trade, to financial affairs and the Common Fisheries Policy. Keywords democracy; European Central Bank; European Parliament; national parliaments; politicisation; Common Fisheries Policy Issue This article is part of the issue “Out of the Shadows, Into the Limelight: Parliaments and Politicisation”, edited by Christine Neuhold (Maastricht University, The Netherlands) and Guri Rosén (University of Oslo, Norway). © 2019 by the authors; licensee Cogitatio (Lisbon, Portugal). This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribu- tion 4.0 International License (CC BY). 1. Introduction consent is now required for the vast majority of EU international agreements. At the same time, national In October 2016, the small region of Wallonia in Southern parliaments—and even regional ones—are increasingly Belgium made world headlines when it interrupted asserting their powers over areas of European gover- the ratification of the Comprehensive Economic Trade nance traditionally dominated by executive actors. Trade Agreement in the Council. This incident is emblematic of is one example, but we also find similar tendencies in the two key developments which set the scene for this the- realm of finance and security. matic issue. Second, considering that exerting influence and con- First, through the Lisbon Treaty, we have seen the ducting oversight is time-consuming—particularly at the empowerment of the European Parliament (EP), whose EU-level—parliaments cannot influence or scrutinise ev- Politics and Governance, 2019, Volume 7, Issue 3, Pages 220–226 220 ery policy initiative with equal intensity. A key factor di- ical insights but also contribute to the conceptual debate recting parliamentary attention seems to be the ‘politici- on politicisation. All contributions to this thematic issue sation’ of an issue. In other words, the amount of contes- engage with the concept of politicisation. Politicisation is tation and attention given to a particular issue seems to seen as an essentially discursive phenomenon that builds affect parliamentary activity. on political communication (Gheyle, 2019). Although au- This issue seeks to assess how politicisation affects thors might disagree on the causes and consequences the role parliaments play within the system of EU gov- of politicisation, there is broad agreement that politici- ernance. In particular, the contributions aim to answer sation of issues include at least three dimensions: First, the over-arching question of whether politicisation has policies must be salient. Following Hutter and Grande an impact on how they seek to influence policy-making (2014, p. 1004): “Only topics that are frequently raised and hold the EU executives to account. Furthermore, by political actors in public debates can be considered we raise the question of whether and how politicisa- politicized.” Among the empirical examples investigated tion affects the role of parliaments as arenas for con- in this thematic issue are European Central Bank (ECB) is- testation and communication of different political inter- sues for the German Bundestag (Högenauer, 2019), the ests. Jointly, the findings of this thematic issue provide Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP; the empirical foundations for a more comprehensive Rosén, 2019), and the Brexit negotiations (see Meissner, debate regarding the democratic implications of politi- 2019). Secondly, politicisation entails the polarisation of cisation. Politicisation puts pressure on parliaments to opinion. This can be in parliament, or in public opinion, act, but parliamentarians themselves may also find it in but the main point is that without an increasing contes- their interest to instigate contestation. The subsequent tation between diverging opinions, it is difficult to speak question is under which conditions such contestation of the “expansion of the scope of conflict” (Hutter & takes place. Grande, 2014, p. 1003). The same is the case for the This thematic issue contributes to two canons of lit- range of actors involved in debates (de Wilde et al., 2016). erature that have for the most part remained rather dis- If a debate takes place solely among elites, no matter tinct (see, however, Bellamy & Kröger, 2016, for a special how heated, it does not signify politicisation. focus on national parliaments and the impact of politici- In his article on the external dimension of the sation of EU integration as such): Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), Zimmermann (2019), shows how it is characterized by an uneven distribution • The academic debate of the politicisation of EU of politicisation. He suggests the concept “layered politi- policies and the (differentiated) impact on EU cisation” to explain the resulting pattern. Two decisive policy-making processes (e.g., de Wilde, Leupold, elements are seen to shape this