DOCSLIB.ORG

From the Chair Els 71 Percent

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
From the Chair Els 71 Percent Volume 20, No. 3 Summer 2007 ceptance rate for papers was 57 percent, and for pan- From the Chair els 71 percent. More panels gave the conference greater depth and Liesbet Hooghe breadth. I think it is fair to say that EUSA is the most diverse, multidisciplinary intellectual gathering on EU EUSA Conference: Can big be beautiful? studies. One can get an idea of this by looking at the diversity of panels at the conference across twelve IT IS AN HONOR TO SERVE as Chair of the European Union themes (these are from the list that EUSA uses to ask Studies Association for the next two years. I am very you to describe your intellectual interests when you sign much aware that my predecessor, John Keeler has up as member). strengthened the association over the past two years. EUSA Montreal – panel distribution by topic He steered EUSA through successful negotiations with Democracy 7 the University of Pittsburgh. Pittsburgh houses our ad- Economics, political economy 13 ministrative office, and co-pays the salary of EUSA’s Enlargement 11 executive director, Joe Figliulo. Europeanization 6 Joe’s multifaceted talents came into their own at External Relations 2 0 the Montreal conference which he organized with hu- mor, grace and promptness. EUSA is also grateful to Governance 15 Institutions 12 the European Commission, which provided financial Law, courts 3 support for the conference. Parties, interest groups, lobbying 7 Thanks also to the three members of the executive Public policy 13 committee whose terms have just ended: Sophie Theories of Integration 8 Meunier, Virginie Giraudon, and Grainne de Burca. Each Voting, public opinion 3 brought considerable wit and conviction to the excom. *two unclassified teaching panels Amy Verdun, Frank Schimmelfennig, and I are now joined by Neil Fligstein (vice-Chair), Erik Jones, Dan This was the first conference where we asked you Kelemen, and Craig Parsons. Craig has agreed to be- to submit your paper online. This will cost our associa- come editor of the EUSA Newsletter Forum Section from tion $2000 in lost paper room sales, but makes access this Winter issue onward. Amy Verdun takes over as to the conference open to (younger) scholars who could Secretary, and Frank Schimmelfennig as Treasurer. not come to the meeting. We are grateful to the Net- Andy Smith continues as the book reviews editor of the work of European Union Centers of Excellence (EUCE), EUSA Newsletter. based at the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill, I am writing this letter when the tenth conference in for financing, uploading and maintaining the website: http:/ Montreal—the first one outside the United States—is /www.unc.edu/euce. The papers will remain accessible still fresh in memory. I would like to draw some (per- there until six months before the next conference, at sonal) lessons as well as look ahead to our next con- which point they will be transferred to the web archive at ference in 2009. the University of Pittsburgh. At the beginning of July, there The Montreal conference was the largest ever. Six were 268 papers online. hundred fifty individuals attended 120 panels with 500 It is still possible to upload the paper you pre- papers. The conference was one third larger than Aus- sented if you have not done so already or send a tin in 2005. This was driven by a steep increase in ap- revised version. Please send it to plications: 400 paper proposals compared to 250, [email protected], and make sure to mention and 105 panel proposals compared to 55 for Austin— number and title of the panel. The program is acces- about a doubling. To meet this demand, the program sible on the EUCE website. committee guided by its chair, Wade Jacoby, increased In the remainder of this letter, I would like to initiate a the number of simultaneous panels from eight to ten, conversation on the shape of future conferences. and placed at least four papers in each panel. The ac- (continued on page 24) EUSA Review Summer 2007 1 EUSA Review EUSA Review Forum Fritz Scharpf: 2007 Award for Lifetime The EUSA Review (ISSN 1535-7031) [formerly the ECSA Contribution to the Field of EU Studies Review] is published four times yearly by the European Union Studies Association, a membership association and FROM HIS EARLY WORK through his most recent articles non-profit organization (founded in 1988 as the European (e.g., “The European Social Model: Coping with the Community Studies Association) devoted to the exchange Challenges of Diversity” (JCMS, 2002), Scharpf has of information and ideas on the European Union. We arguably done more than any other scholar of his welcome the submission of scholarly manuscripts. generation to illuminate the implications of European Subscription to the EUSA Review is a benefit of integration for both democracy and social welfare. Association membership. And given that he has produced one book and eleven articles since his “retirement” in 2003, scholars in Managing Editor our field can no doubt look forward to continued Joseph A. Figliulo groundbreaking work from Professor Scharpf. Be- Forum and Features Editor low we have reproduced the text of a lecture deliv- Amy Verdun (University of Victoria) ered at the EUSA Tenth Biennial International Con- Book Reviews Editor ference in Montreal, Canada (May 17-May 19, 2007). Andrew Smith (Sciences po Bordeaux ) Assistant Editor Irina Andriamanana Reflections on Multilevel Legitimacy 2007-2009 EUSA Executive Committee Fritz W. Scharpf Liesbet Hooghe, Chair (UNC Chapel Hill) Neil Fligstein, Vice-Chair THIS AWARD CAME as a totally unexpected surprise. But (University of California, Berkeley) since the news came a year and a half ago, I merci- Amy Verdun, Secretary (University of Victoria) fully had a bit of time to recover from the shock. I am Frank Schimmelfennig, Treasurer of course overawed by the honor of having been cho- (ETH-Zurich) sen, and I still have not been able to convince myself Erik Jones (Johns Hopkins University) that I deserve it. But then, I am also humble enough R. Daniel Kelemen (Rutgers University) to ask - who am I to say that this illustrious body has Craig Parsons (University of Oregon) chosen wrong? Alberta Sbragia (University of Pittsburgh) In any case, I am immensely grateful for the Ex Officio honor - and even more for its official designation. Getting a lifetime achievement award, whether justi- Immediate Past Chair (2005-2007) fied or not, conveys a clear message: It says, your John T.S. Keeler (University of Pittsburgh) work is over. Your achievements or failures have been European Union Studies Association ® recorded. You may now go playing - with your grand- 415 Bellefield Hall son, with your photography, or anything else. But as University of Pittsburgh far as serious scholarly work goes, you are done. As Pittsburgh, PA 15260 USA you may imagine, I find this message enormously Web www.eustudies.org ® liberating. And I try to guard as best as I can against E-mail [email protected] the temptation to continue in the old tracks - to do Telephone 412.648.7635 what I did before, just less and less, from one year to the next. Democracy and Multilevel Polities Nevertheless, there is also this nagging sense of some unfinished business, or the unrealistic hope that some issues with which I have struggled so long 2 Summer 2007 EUSA Review might still be clarified a bit more by some kind of “con- lack of a European “demos” or of a “thick” collective cluding remarks”. Among these is the relationship be- identity, the lack of a common political space, the lack tween democratic legitimacy and multilevel government. of a common language and of Europe-wide media of I have worked on both, off and on, ever since I started political communication, the lack of a political infrastruc- out as a political scientist in the late 1960s. But I never ture of Europe-wide political parties, the absence of did focus systematically on the relationship between Europe-wide political competition, the low political sa- the two. lience of elections to the European Parliament, the lim- In my work on multilevel policy making in German its of EP competencies, and hence the lack of parlia- federalism, that relationship played only a marginal role mentary or electoral accountability for European acts - and I think for good reasons. In Germany, parliamen- of government. In short, the European democratic defi- tary democracy is institutionalized at both levels, na- cit exists and it cannot be repaired in the foreseeable tional and regional. But German politics is so much fo- future. cused on the national arena that Länder elections (which In the affirmative mood, by contrast, we will empha- directly shape the party-political profile of the federal size features where the EU compares favorably to a second chamber) have mostly become “second order more realistic view of political structures and processes national elections” - with the consequence of increas- in real-existing member states (e.g., Majone 1998; ing the pressures of democratic accountability on the Moravcsik 2002). Institutional checks and balances at national government. Political scientists, it is true, tend the European level are more elaborate and provide more to worry about the lack of political transparency under protection against potential abuses of governing pow- conditions of the “joint-decision trap”, since the respon- ers than is true in most member states. Moreover, many sibility for national policy choices is shared among the of the governing functions of the EU belong to a cat- federal majority and Länder prime ministers. But since egory which, even in the most democratic member dissatisfied voters are not obliged to be fair when they states, is exempted from direct political accountability.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Is Europe Back on Track? Impetus from the German EU Presidency
    Is Europe back on track? Impetus from the German EU Presidency CEPS Working Document No. 273/July 2007 Sebastian Kurpas & Henning Riecke Abstract Rarely has an EU Presidency been met with such high expectations as Germany’s in the first half of 2007. With hindsight, it might be said that these expectations have largely been fulfilled. The agreement on a detailed mandate for the upcoming Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) under the Portuguese Presidency now offers a way forward for a Union that has been ‘in crisis’ since the French and Dutch no-votes. This report offers an overview of the German Presidency’s aims in the various policy areas and makes an assessment of the achievements of its six-month term. A summary of the content and structural background of German EU policy is given, explaining developments since unification, Germany’s motivations for European integration, public opinion on European integration and the stances taken by the key political players in Germany. Insight into the organisational structures of the Presidency appears in the annex. While acknowledging the difficulty of gauging the exact impact of the German presidency in relation to other factors, the report draws mostly positive conclusions on internal policies, where agreement on many concrete measures from the presidency’s work programme could be achieved, notably on the single market, justice and home affairs, climate protection and energy policy. With the ‘Berlin Declaration’ Germany achieved a show of unity for the future of the Union that was an auspicious start for the talks on treaty reform. While it is clear that the agreement reached was not only on Germany’s merit, the presidency played a prominent and constructive role throughout the negotiations.
    [Show full text]
  • 1. the Constitution for Europe and the Lisbon Treaty
    Bogdan Koszel Adam Mickiewicz University Poznań FRENCH-GERMAN COOPERATION IN THE EUROPEAN UNION IN 2007-20131 1. The Constitution for Europe and the Lisbon Treaty The Bundestag election campaign in the second half of 2005 overlapped with a serious crisis in the European Union that resulted from the failure to implement Germany’s coveted project of the Constitution for Europe. The Treaty, pushed by the SPD-Greens coalition government, and especially by Chancellor Gerhard Schröder and Foreign Affairs Minister Joschka Fischer, was signed on 29 October 2004 at the Roman Capitoline Hill and needed to be ratified by the European Parliament and parliaments of EU Member States. After its ratification by the German Bundestag and Bundesrat (12 and 27 May 2005), the finale of the referendum campaign in France was monitored by Germany with great concern as the number of opponents of the European constitution was on the rise in France. The pessimistic scenario came true, and on 29 May 2005 the French (54.87%) rejected the Constitutional Treaty which led to a political upheaval in the European Union. The explicit, though expected, French vote of no confidence for this project disappointed Brussels and puzzled Berlin. After the French referendum, the position of President Jacques Chirac notably weakened in French politics. His political instinct clearly failed him, as his decision on holding the referendum and the assumed victory of supporters of the European Constitution was intended to strengthen his position on the French political arena, which did not happen2. The direct consequence of the unsuccessful referendum was the dismissal of the government of Jean Pierre Raffarin and the appointment of the cabinet of Dominique de Villepin (31 May 2005).
    [Show full text]
  • New Council Secretary-General Takes Office
    COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION EN Brussels, 27 June 2011 11553/11 PRESSE 174 New Council Secretary-General takes office Uwe Corsepius took office on 26 June as Secretary-General of the Council of the European Union. Mr. Corsepius, aged 50, was European policy advisor to the German Chancellor from 2006 to February 2011 and since then has been economic and financial policy advisor to the Chancellor and G8 sherpa. He will take over from Pierre de Boissieu who has been Secretary-General since 1 December 2009 and was Deputy Secretary-General from October 1999 to 30 November 2009. The Council appointed Mr. Corsepius on 22 December 2009 for the period from 26 June 2011 to 30 June 2015 ( 17603/09 ). It took this decision in accordance with article 240(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU. Attached : CV of Uwe Corsepius P R E S S Rue de la Loi 175 B – 1048 BRUSSELS Tel.: +32 (0) 2 281 6319 Fax: +32 (0)2 281 8026 [email protected] http://www.consilium.europa.eu/Newsroom 11553/11 1 EN Background The Council of the European Union is assisted by a General Secretariat, under the responsibility of a Secretary-General appointed by the Council. The General Secretariat is engaged in organising, coordinating and ensuring the coherence of the Council's work. It assists the Presidency of the Council in seeking solutions. The General Secretariat of the Council, under the authority of its Secretary-General, also assists the European Council and its President. The Secretary-General of the Council attends the meetings of the European Council and takes all the measures necessary for the organisation of proceedings.
    [Show full text]
  • The Treaty of Lisbon
    Th e Treaty of Lisbon: A Second Look at the Institutional Innovations September 2010 Joint Study EUROPEAN POLICY CENTRE RAPPORTEURS: CEPS Piotr Maciej Kaczyński and Peadar ó Broin. EGMONT – THE ROYAL INSTITUTE FOR INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Franklin Dehousse, Philippe de Schoutheete, Tinne Heremans, Jacques Keller, Guy Milton (in association) and Nick Witney (in association). EUROPEAN POLICY CENTRE Janis Emmanouilidis, Antonio Missiroli, and Corina Stratulat. –––––––––– Articles in this publication represent the views of the authors and not necessarily those of the institutions to which they belong. All rights of copy, reproduction and translation in any form or by any means for all countries are strictly reserved to CEPS, Egmont and EPC. © Copyright 2010 Th e Treaty of Lisbon: A Second Look at the Institutional Innovations Joint CEPS, EGMONT and EPC Study September 2010 INTRODUCTION . 3 THE EUROPEAN COUNCIL . 5 THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT . 29 THE COMMISSION . 45 THE PRESIDENCY TRIANGLE . 63 DELEGATED AND IMPLEMENTING ACTS UNDER THE LISBON TREATY: WHAT FUTURE FOR COMITOLOGY? . 85 NATIONAL PARLIAMENTS & SUBSIDIARITY CHECK: A NEW ACTOR IN TOWN . 107 THE CITIZENS’ INITIATIVE: OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES . 121 EXTERNAL ACTION: A WORK IN PROGRESS . 139 DEFENCE: PERMANENT STRUCTURED COOPERATION . 163 SIMPLIFIED TREATY REVISION POSSIBILITIES WITHIN THE LISBON TREATY . 177 CONCLUSION . 187 LIST OF ANNEXES . 195 1 INTRODUCTION Th ree years ago, three Brussels based think tanks thought it useful to join eff orts in analysing potential implications of the Lisbon Treaty in the fi eld of institutions. At the time that Treaty had not been ratifi ed and the question of whether it would ever come into force was an open one.
    [Show full text]
  • RSCAS Policy Papers
    ROBERT SCHUMAN CENTRE FOR ADVANCED STUDIES RSCAS Policy Papers RSCAS PP 2010/04 ROBERT SCHUMAN CENTRE FOR ADVANCED STUDIES THE EU 'FOREIGN SERVICE': UNDER CONSTRUCTION Antonio Missiroli EUROPEAN UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE, FLORENCE ROBERT SCHUMAN CENTRE FOR ADVANCED STUDIES The EU 'Foreign Service': Under Construction ANTONIO MISSIROLI Policy Papers, RSCAS 2010/04 This text may be downloaded only for personal research purposes. Additional reproduction for other purposes, whether in hard copies or electronically, requires the consent of the author(s), editor(s). If cited or quoted, reference should be made to the full name of the author(s), editor(s), the title, the working paper, or other series, the year and the publisher. The author(s)/editor(s) should inform the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies at the EUI if the paper will be published elsewhere and also take responsibility for any consequential obligation(s). ISSN 1830-1541 © 2010 Antonio Missiroli Printed in Italy, December 2010 European University Institute Badia Fiesolana I – 50014 San Domenico di Fiesole (FI) Italy www.eui.eu/RSCAS/Publications/ www.eui.eu cadmus.eui.eu The Policy Paper Series The Policy Paper Series of the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies complements its Working Papers Series. This series aims to disseminate the views of a person or a group on a particular policy matter, specifically in the field of European integration. The European University Institute and the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies are not responsible for the proposals and opinions expressed by the author(s). The aim of the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies is to contribute to the public debate by offering views and opinions on matters of general interest.
    [Show full text]
  • SWP Research Paper 2008/RP 01, January 2008, 112 Pages
    SWP Research Paper Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik German Institute for International and Security Affairs Daniela Kietz and Volker Perthes (Eds.) The Potential of the Council Presidency An Analysis of Germany’s Chairmanship of the EU, 2007 RP 1 January 2008 Berlin All rights reserved. © Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik, 2008 SWP Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik German Institute for International and Security Affairs Ludwigkirchplatz 3−4 10719 Berlin Germany Phone +49 30 880 07-0 Fax +49 30 880 07-100 www.swp-berlin.org [email protected] ISSN 1863-1053 Translation by Marie McGinley, Alexandra Wagner, and Markus Wagner (English version of SWP-Studie 24/07) Table of Contents 5 Problems and Conclusions 56 Holding all the Cards. Strong German Impulses for Police Co-operation 7 The Presidency in the Council System: Daniela Kietz Functions, Scope for Manoeuvre and Room for Improvement 64 The Profile of the German Presidency in the ENP: Daniela Kietz Regulated Stimulation and Complex Bargaining Kai-Olaf Lang 19 The ‘Berlin Declaration’— Trial Run for Negotiations on the 71 Efficiency and Its Costs: Constitutional Treaty The “Strategy for a New Partnership” Daniela Schwarzer with Central Asia Andrea Schmitz 25 Pruning, Plundering and Reconstructing. Work on the Constitutional Treaty 76 The German EU-Presidency’s Russia Dossier: Andreas Maurer between Rational Interests and Neighbourhood Conflicts 32 Lisbon in Berlin and Brussels— Rainer Lindner the Lisbon Strategy under the German Presidency 82 The Council Presidency and the Middle East Peter Becker Peace Process: Limited Scope for Action, Primacy of Diplomacy 38 Between Transatlantic Integration and the Muriel Asseburg Doha Round: The German Presidency as Impulse-Giver and Impartial Broker in Trade 88 The Council Presidency and EU Relations with Policy Making Latin America: Competent Management, Little Stormy-Annika Mildner Lasting Impact Jörg Husar / Günther Maihold 44 Far-reaching Decisions in Favour of an Integrated Energy and Climate Policy 95 Scope and Limitations of the Council Presidency.
    [Show full text]
  • Leadership in Chaos: Angela Merkel and Eurocrisis"
    “LEADERSHIP IN CHAOS: ANGELA MERKEL AND EUROCRISIS" A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES OF MIDDLE EAST TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY BY ŞUAY NİLHAN AÇIKALIN IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE IN THE DEPARTMENT OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS MAY 2015 I hereby declare that all information in this document has been obtained and presented in accordance with academic rules and ethical conduct. I also declare that, as required by these rules and conduct, I have fully cited and referenced all material and results that are not original to this work. Name, Last name : Şuay Nilhan Açıkalın Signature : İİİ ABSTRACT LEADERSHIP in CHAOS: ANGELA MERKEL AND EUROCRISIS Açıkalın, Şuay Nilhan Msc., Department of International Relations Supervisor : Prof. Dr. Hüseyin Bağcı May 2015, 131 pages Leadership has been a questionable phenomenon for centuries. The Eurocrisis triggered debates over leadership within the European Union. This thesis analyzes the Federal Republic of Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel’s leadership profile during the Eurocrisis. Throughout this thesis, the Eurocrisis is discussed by use of chaos theory borrowed from physics and understood as a chaotic system. From this perspective, Chancellor Angela Merkel’s leadership profile is going to be analyzed within three time phases during the Eurocrisis period between 2009 and 2013 with four types of leadership. In terms of structure and theoretical perspective, this thesis makes a unique contribution to the prevailing literature. Keywords: Leadership, Chaos Theory,Chaotic Systems, European Union, Euro, Eurocrisis, Angela Merkel, Quiet Leadership, Transformational Leadership, Visionary Leadership, Quantum Leadership İV ÖZ KAOS ORTAMINDA LİDERLİK: ANGELA MERKEL VE EUROKRİZİ Açıkalın, Şuay Nilhan Uluslararası İlişkiler Bölümü Tez Yöneticisi : Prof.
    [Show full text]
  • Angela Merkel's Nightmare
    Angela Merkel’s Nightmare The markets test the German Chancellor’s approach of trial-and-error. Is there an end game in sight? s we go to press, German Chancellor Angela Merkel continues to display her characteristic political tech - nique, a mixture of trial-and-error with “unilateral instincts,” plus a hefty dose of nicht regieren, or non- Y LAUS NGELEN B K C. E governing. But sitting things out in a globalized world while managing the largest European economy in times of crisis can be damaging and very costly. This year, she faces seven state elections. There is a lawmaker revolt over pledges to defend the euro by providing more rescue Afinancing, especially among the ranks of her weakened coalition partner, the liberal Free Democratic Party. Making matters worse, the newest opinion polls show that more than four out of five Germans oppose increasing the bail-out fund for the euro. Add to that the jolt that Bundesbank head Axel Weber, the German frontrunner to head the European Central Bank, has withdrawn his candidacy by announcing that he would not serve a second term as Bundesbank president. Merkel has experienced a rapidly changing political environment since the eurozone crisis started early last year with the threatened default of Greece. She seems to realize that important segments of Germany’s elite and a large part of the general population no longer want to serve as Europe’s pay - THE MAGAZINE OF master without more say in what is done with their money. Ill-feeling is grow - INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC POLICY ing against an ever-more-encroaching bureaucracy in Brussels telling 888 16th Street, N.W.
    [Show full text]
  • Developing Diplomats 
    Developing Diplomats Comparing Form and Culture Across Diplomatic Services Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs The University of Texas at Austin Policy Research Project Report Number 194 Developing Diplomats: Comparing Form and Culture Across Diplomatic Services Project Directed by Robert Hutchings, Ph.D. Jeremi Suri, Ph.D. A report by the Policy Research Project on Reinventing Diplomacy May 2017 The LBJ School of Public Affairs publishes a wide range of public policy issue titles. ISBN: 978-0-89940-822-4 ©2017 by The University of Texas at Austin All rights reserved. No part of this publication or any corresponding electronic text and/or images may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Developing Diplomats Comparing Form and Culture Across Diplomatic Services Edited by: Dr. Robert Hutchings and Dr. Jeremi Suri Contributors: Team Brazil: Daniel Jimenez and Maria Pereyra-Vera Team China: Michael Deegan and Joel Keralis Team France: Bryce Block, Catherine Cousar, and Marne Sutten Team Germany: Bryce Block, Catherine Cousar, and Marne Sutten Team India: Joshua Orme and Leena Warsi Team Russia: Zachary Reeves and Jessica Terry Team Turkey: Evan Burt and Zuli Nigeeryasen Team U.K.: Adam Crawford and Annika Rettstadt Cover Design: William Williams 1 Acknowledgements Diplomatic services around the world face similar challenges: instilling in their ranks a global perspective and sensibility; managing the growing centralization of foreign policy making in the offices of presidents, prime ministers and chancellors; engaging a growing array of non-state actors with whom they must do business; and widening their scope of diplomatic activity to include commerce, climate change, terrorism, and cyber-security, among other issues.
    [Show full text]
  • Germany's Stance on the EU Treaty Reform in the Years 2005–2009
    Nr 12 ROCZNIK INTEGRACJI EUROPEJSKIEJ 2018 Janusz Józef Węc DOI : 10.14746/rie.2018.12.3 uniwersytet Jagielloński ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6331-4133 Germany’s Stance on the EU Treaty Reform in the Years 2005–2009 Introductory remarks The objective of this paper is to analyse the position of the German Government on Treaty reform of the union in 2005–2009. The first part of the article analyses Ger- many’s position on the constitutional crisis of the European Union. The second part describes the activities of the Federal Government during the German EU Presidency. The third part of the work reconstructs the German attitude to the 2007 Intergovern- mental conference and the content of the Treaty of Lisbon of 13 December 2007.1 1. Germany’s Run-Up to the Presidency of the European Union during the Constitutional Crisis The ratification of the constitutional Treaty encountered unexpected difficulties already in 2005, when it was rejected by referendum first inf rance (29 May), and then in the netherlands (1 June) by citizens of the said countries. The negative outcomes of the referenda in France and the Netherlands triggered a serious political crisis in the European Union called the constitutional crisis. In this situation, heads of state or government of the eu Member states adopted on 18 June 2005 in Brussels a decla- ration stating that the rejection of the Treaty by France and the Netherlands requires introduction of a “period of reflection.” The said period, which was to take one year, was intended to serve for launching in each Member state a broad debate on the Treaty ratification process with citizens, civil society, social partners, national parliaments and political parties (ec.
    [Show full text]
  • 021780/EU XXV. GP Eingelangt Am 14/04/14
    021780/EU XXV. GP Eingelangt am 14/04/14 COUNCIL OF Brussels, 11 April 2014 THE EUROPEAN UNION (OR. en) 6022/14 ADD 2 Interinstitutional File: 2014/0020 (COD) EF 39 ECOFIN 99 CODEC 285 COVER NOTE From: Secretary-General of the European Commission, signed by Mr Jordi AYET PUIGARNAU, Director date of receipt: 30 January 2014 To: Mr Uwe CORSEPIUS, Secretary-General of the Council of the European Union No. Cion doc.: SWD(2014) 30 final PART 2/3 Subject: COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT IMPACT ASSESSMENT ANNEXES 1 - 4 Accompanying the document Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on structural measures improving the resilience of EU Credit Institutions and the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on reporting and transparency of securities financing transactions Delegations will find attached document SWD(2014) 30 final PART 2/3. Encl.: SWD(2014) 30 final PART 2/3 6022/14 ADD 2 JLF/mf DGG 1B EN EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 29.1.2014 SWD(2014) 30 final PART 2/3 COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT IMPACT ASSESSMENT ANNEXES 1 - 4 Accompanying the document Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on structural measures improving the resilience of EU Credit Institutions and the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on reporting and transparency of securities financing transactions EN EN LIST OF ANNEXES ANNEX A1. Overview of structural reforms and reform proposals - PAGE 2 ANNEX A2. Summary of replies to the stakeholder consultation - PAGE 27 ANNEX A3.
    [Show full text]
  • Europe's Brexit Task Forces
    24th January 2017 BREXIT SNAPSHOT Europe’s Brexit task forces: the who’s who guide In this Brexit Snapshot, FTI Consulting examines the key players that will shape the positions of some of the most influential EU Member States. Often shunning the limelight, these individuals will play a crucial role in determining the approach that their leader takes in the final negotiations. While a broad range of ministries will engage in the process, in the end, it will come down to the 27 Presidents and Prime Ministers to agree any final Brexit deal. And as this snapshot shows, their advisers and offices will take a central role. For the moment, officials and politicians across the EU’s capitals will be carefully digesting Prime Minister Theresa May’s speech from last week While a broad range of (Tuesday 17 January), and considering the implications for the formal negotiations that begin when the UK fires the starting gun by invoking Article ministries will engage in 50 of the EU Treaty. the process, in the end, it will come down to the UNITED KINGDOM 27 Presidents and Prime The United Kingdom (UK) has set up its own Department for Exiting the EU Ministers to agree any (DExEU) to coordinate and lead the government’s Brexit preparations. Key final Brexit deal. And as officials include Oliver Robbins, recently appointed Permanent Secretary for this snapshot shows, their DExEU. He is responsible for supporting the department in its negotiations to leave the EU and establishing the future relationship between the UK advisers and offices will and EU, as well as responsibility for the wider European and Global Issues take a central role.
    [Show full text]