The Role of Regional Parliaments in the Process of Subsidiarity Analysis Within the Early Warning System of the Lisbon Treaty
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Role of Regional Parliaments in the Process of Subsidiarity Analysis within the Early Warning System of the Lisbon Treaty The study was written by European Institute of Public Administration (EIPA) and European Center for the Regions (ECR) (authors: Gracia Vara Arribas and Delphine Bourdin) It does not represent the official views of the Committee of the Regions. More information on the European Union and the Committee of the Regions is available online at http://www.europa.eu and http://www.cor.europa.eu respectively. Catalogue number : QG-30-11-060-EN-C ISBN : 978-92-895-0541-3 DOI : 10.2863/35536 © European Union Partial reproduction is allowed, provided that the source is explicitly mentioned. Table of contents 1. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1. AIM OF THE STUDY ...................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2. METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................................................... 4 2. ANALYSIS OF PROCEDURES ESTABLISHED IN MEMBER STATES WITH REGIONAL PARLIAMENTS REGARDING SUBSIDIARITY SCRUTINY WITHIN THE EARLY WARNING SYSTEM ................................................................................................................................................................ 7 2. 1. FEDERAL STATES ........................................................................................................................................ 7 2.1.1. Austria................................................................................................................................................ 7 2.1.2. Belgium ............................................................................................................................................ 23 2.1.3. Germany........................................................................................................................................... 43 2.2. REGIONALISED STATES ............................................................................................................................. 62 2.2.1. Italy.................................................................................................................................................. 62 2.2.2. Spain ................................................................................................................................................ 75 2.3. ASYMMETRICAL REGIONALISED STATES ................................................................................................... 92 2.3.1. Finland............................................................................................................................................. 92 2.3.2. Portugal ......................................................................................................................................... 104 2.3.3. The United Kingdom...................................................................................................................... 115 3. WITH THE EWS, A NEW ROLE FOR NATIONAL PARLIAMENTS OF THE EUROPEAN UNION AND REGIONAL PARLIAMENTS WITH LEGISLATIVE POWERS? .................................................. 141 3.1. PERCEPTION OF THE EWS AT THE NATIONAL AND REGIONAL LEVELS ..................................................... 142 3.2. THE EWS: A CONTROVERSIAL NOVELTY OF THE LISBON TREATY ........................................................... 145 3.3. CHALLENGES TO BE FACED BY THE REGIONAL PARLIAMENTS WITH LEGISLATIVE POWERS ..................... 147 3.4. BEST PRACTICES ...................................................................................................................................... 150 4. OPTIMISATION OF THE COR SUBSIDIARITY MONITORING NETWORK ................................ 155 4.1. THE SUBSIDIARITY MONITORING NETWORK (SMN)............................................................................... 155 4.2. NATIONAL AND REGIONAL PARLIAMENTS ' PERCEPTION OF THE SMN ..................................................... 166 4.3. NEEDS AND EXPECTATIONS OF REGIONAL PARLIAMENTS WITH LEGISLATIVE POWERS CONCERNING THE SMN .............................................................................................................................................................. 171 4.4. PROMOTING THE SMN AS AN EFFECTIVE TOOL FOR REGIONAL PARLIAMENTS WITH LEGISLATIVE POWERS CONCERNING THE EWS.................................................................................................................................. 173 5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................................................... 179 BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................................................. 185 ANNEXES ......................................................................................................................................................... 189 List of abbreviations General CALRE : Conference of the European Regional Legislative Assemblies CJEU : Court of Justice of the European Union COSAC : Conference of Community and European Affairs Committees of Parliaments of the European Union CoR : Committee of the Regions EC : European Commission EP : European Parliament EU : European Union EWS : Early Warning System IPEX : Inter-parliamentary EU Information Exchange MEPs : Members of the European Parliament MPs : Members of Parliament NGOs: Non-governmental organisations REGLEG : Conference of European regions with legislative power SMN : Subsidiarity Monitoring Network Austria NR : Nationalrat – federal chamber of national parliament BR : Bundesrat – regional chamber of national parliament BVG : Bundesverfassungsgesetz – federal constitution L-BN : Lissabon Begleitnovelle – Lisbon amendment to the BVG Belgium BP : Brussels Regional Parliament COCOF: Commission communautaire française (French Community Commission) COCOM: Commission communautaire commune (Common Community Commission) COCON: Commission communautaire flamande (Flemish Community Commission) (in French) FCP : French-speaking Community Parliament FP : Flemish Parliament GCP : Parliament of the German-speaking Community in Belgium VGC: Vlaamse Gemeenschapscommissie (Flemish Community Commission) (in Dutch) WP : Walloon Parliament Germany BT : Bundestag (Federal Parliament) BR : Bundesrat (Regional Assembly with legislative competences at federal level) GG : Grundgesetz (Basic Law, i.e. German federal constitution) IntVG : Integrationsverantwortungsgesetz (Act on Assuming Responsibility for EU Integration) EUZBBG : Gesetz über die Zusammenarbeit von Bundesregierung und Deutschem Bundestag in Angelegenheiten der Europäischen Union, EU- Zusammenarbeitsgesetz (Act on Cooperation between the Federal Government and the BT in Matters concerning the EU) EUZBLG :Gesetz über die Zusammenarbeit von Bund und Ländern in Angelegenheiten der Europäischen Union: (Act laying down terms of interinstitutional cooperation in EU matters between the Federal Government and the regions) Italy CIACE : Comitato interministeriale per gli Affari Comunitari Europei (Interministerial Committee for EU Affairs) Portugal EAC : European Affairs Committee COFACC: Conference of Foreign Affairs Committee Chairs JPM: Joint Parliamentary Meeting JCM: Joint Committee Meetings Spain COPREPA : Conferencia de Presidentes de Parlamentos autonómicos españoles (Conference of Presidents of the regional parliaments) United Kingdom HoC : House of Commons HoL : House of Lords 1. Introduction 1.1. Aim of the study In 2006, the Barroso Commission announced that it would, even without Treaty obligations, transmit all new EU proposals and consultation papers directly to the national parliaments inviting them to react so as to improve policy formulation. 1 This practice is now formalised in the Lisbon Treaty, in force since 1 December 2009, as far as the subsidiarity principle is concerned. Indeed, the Lisbon Treaty formally introduced the Early Warning System (EWS) which gives the right to all national parliaments to get involved in the EU legislative process, by allowing them to object to a Commission legislative proposal within an eight-week period if they consider it infringes the subsidiarity principle. The Treaty specifies in its Protocol No 2 on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality (hereinafter referred to as "Protocol No 2"): “Any national parliament or any chamber of a national parliament may, within eight weeks from the date of transmission of a draft legislative act, in the official languages of the Union, send to the Presidents of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission a reasoned opinion stating why it considers that the draft in question does not comply with the principle of subsidiarity. It will be for each national parliament or each chamber of a national parliament to consult, where appropriate, regional parliaments with legislative powers”. The following two procedures can result from the EWS: "Yellow card" : If one third (one quarter in the area of freedom, security and justice) of the national parliaments oppose its subsidiarity arguments, the Commission, a group of Member States or another legislative initiator, may decide to maintain, amend or withdraw the draft. Reasons