2 2 WORKING PAPER February 2013 Foundation Francisco Manuel dos Santos Charter of Principles Fundação Francisco Manuel dos Santos herein proposes to think about, to study and to con- tribute to a better knowledge of the Portuguese reality. Its aim is to cooperate in the effort of solution of the problems of the society, to the benefit of all Portuguese people and of the generations to come. In order to reach this aim, Fundação Francisco Manuel dos Santos shall promote the realization of studies, investigation works and other initiatives which, obeying to the highest standards of rigor and quality, allow a better understanding of the reality, submit real solutions and recommendations to those who have to decide, deepen the debate around the great national problems and contribute to the justice, to the development and to the reinforcement of social cohesion. The activity of Fundação Francisco Manuel dos Santos shall be guided by the principles of dignity of the human being and of social solidarity and by the values of democracy, of freedom, of equally of opportunities, of the merit and of pluralism. Fundação Francisco Manuel dos Santos shall act in absolute independence in relation to all public and private powers, ideologies, opinion trends, philosophic trends, religious beliefs or confessions. Its corporate bodies are the guarantors of the fulfillment of the statutory norms, notably of its inde- pendence. Fundação Francisco Manuel dos Santos considers as essential to promote a more active involve- ment of the civil society in the reflexion and solution of national problems and, for such reason, it shall endeavor its best efforts to give to citizens the widest knowledge of its initiatives and projects. In such sense, Fundação Francisco Manuel dos Santos shall seek to provide the Portuguese society with clear, objective and accurate information on the results of its activities, further guaranteeing the maximum transparency in regards to its organization, its purposes its sources of financing and its activities. Fundação Francisco Manuel dos Santos is of the opinion that the realization of enlarged and plural public debates around its recommendations is a purpose as important as the realization of research studies and works. In the pursuit of its activities, Fundação Francisco Manuel dos Santos seeks to be faithful to the commitment of social responsibility that constitutes its mission, such as defined by its founders. Rua Tierno Galvan, Torre 3, 9ºJ 1070-274 Lisboa Portugal www.ffms.pt [email protected] Phone number: + 351 21 381 84 47 Impressão: Guide Artes Gráficas, Lda. The views and opinions expressed in this text are the sole responsibility of its authors and do not bind the Foundation Francisco Manuel dos Santos (FFMS). Total or partial reproduction of the text should be requested from the authors or the FFMS. nd 2PORTUGAL REPORT to the IN FundaçãoTHE EUROPEAN Francisco ManuelPARLIAMENT dos Santos Professor Alexander H. Trechsel & Professor Richard Rose In collaboration with: Dr. Daniela Corona Dr. Filipa Raimundo Dr. José Santana-Pereira European Union DemocracyJorge Fernandes Observatory (EUDO) Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies European University Institute Final Draft January 23, 2013 1 3 Table of contents: 1. Introduction 2. The EP across time: a steady growth of power 3. Power within the EP 4. Portugal within the EP 4.1 Electing Portuguese representatives: the EP elections 4.2 The Portuguese MEPs’ background 4.3 The Portuguese MEPs in the EP structures 4.4 What do Portuguese MEPs do in the plenary? 4.5 How do Portuguese MEPs perceive their work in the EP? 5. Conclusions 3 5 Executive summary This report addresses a central pillar of the EU’s institutional architecture in which Portugal can play an important role and foster its national priorities: the European Parliament (EP). As stressed in the first report, in order to achieve their goals in the European setting, small and medium states must rely on smart power. The EP, in that respect, has gained over time a pivotal role in the European legislative endeavors in that it co-decides with the Council in (almost) all areas of EU competence. The report starts off by summarizing the major developments of the EU architecture for what regards the enhancement of the EP’s role. It then analyzes the composition and the main features of the Portuguese representation in the current Parliament: the national political parties Portuguese MEPs belong to, their political preferences, their placement in the European political landscape, and their performance in the EP’s legislative activity. The interviews of current and former Portuguese MEPs offer an important added value and an innovative angle to the analysis of the role played by this country in the European arena. Within the institutional architecture of the European Union, the power of the European Parliament strongly evolved over the various rounds of Treaty changes. Born as a merely advisory body, with no real powers in European legislative activity, the EP has been able to take advantage of its powers in the budgetary sphere during the 1970s so as to become nowadays an almost perfect co-legislator, standing on an equal footing with the Council of Ministers. In 1979, the first direct election of the EP gave momentum to this process by granting the institution and its members a democratic “imprimatur”. Since then, the EP grew also in size. This evolution has rendered the EP one of the largest and most powerful parliaments in the world. To make use of its (prima facie limited) power Portugal needs to (a) be present in the strategic channels within the EP and (b) make sure its political personnel, both MEPs and staff, are of the highest quality. This is an absolutely necessary condition to extract benefits from Portuguese presence in the EP. In this• report,number Portuguese of Portuguese personnel MEPs in the diminished EP is characterized over the years as follows: The along with the increasing number of EU Member States: having started off with 24 MEPs in 1986, the Portuguese representation is now composed by 22. However, the more significant drop in numerical powers of the Portuguese delegation to the EP becomes visible when we look at the joint effect of increased numbers of MEPs and the lower absolute number of EP seats held by Portuguese representatives. Indeed, between 1986 and today, the proportion of Portuguese MEPs dropped by over one third, from 4.6% to 2.9%. The same happened to similar-sized countries, such as Belgium and Greece. It is worth noting, however, that EU enlargement rounds had 5 7 deeper downsizing effects on the representation of larger Member States, • such as Germany. Portugal has one of the highest turnover rates in the EP, with 68% new MEPs, compared to the EU 27 average of 50%. Some of the big countries have significantly lower turnover rates, for example the UK (28%) or Germany (41%). Consequently, Portugal loses a considerable amount of experience and cumulated knowledge following each European election, with significant consequences for the country’s capacity to exert power in the EP. A low systematic turnover is a condition pointed out as necessary by most observers before any parliamentarian is ready to take full advantage of the institutional opportunities opened in the structure • under which she operates. The most frequent professional background of Portuguese MEPs is that of law, and full time politicians tend to be overreprepro-elitesented in biased the EP compared to the situation at the national level. Moreover, in occupational • terms, the Portuguese political class seems to be rather . PERMREP, the institutional structure that links Portuguese MEPs with their national government, offers mixed results. This report shows evidence that to a large extent Portugal still lacks a coherent and integrated national strategy, supported by a professional and sophisticated staff that delivers that strategy to MEPs in Brussels. However, PERMREP’s efficiency is said to be increasing over the past few years, particularly after the Portuguese presidency, during which • Portugal had to articulate a European policy. The articulation between MEPs, political parties, and national parliament is still insufficient. There is a general perception that the European Affairs Committee, in the AR [Portuguese national legislature], is the only body incorporating a ‘European level of governance’. Hence, this report makes clear that instead of using a policy-driven approach, requesting MEPs’ presence in sectorial committees, the Portuguese parliament still channels all the input from the European level (particularly MEPs insights) through the European affairs committee. About the Portuguese presence in strategic internal bodies of the EP this report concludes• that: The committees where Portugal has been more strongly represented throughout the years of Portuguese membership are Agriculture and Fisheries (AGRI/PECH), but also Employment (EMPL), Budget (BUDG), • Economy and Monetary issues (ECON) and Regionalleadership Development structures (REGI). Portuguese MEPs are not strongly present in the of the EP: there is just one EP committee chaired by a Portuguese and two committees with Portuguese vice-chairs. However, in the current legislature, around one third of Portuguese MEPs have been chosen to act 8 6 committee coordinators as , mainly as a result of the fact that they are at allocationtheir second of legislativemandate. reportsThe role of committee coordinator is one of the most desired in the EP.