tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27932062.post3099450937231390956..comments2023-10-10T15:39:35.168+00:00Comments on Centre for European Reform: Can national parliaments make the EU more legitimate?Centre for European Reformhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06815454225955436329noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27932062.post-57957766242636989472013-07-16T06:41:29.536+00:002013-07-16T06:41:29.536+00:00One good model of how to involve national MPs in E...One good model of how to involve national MPs in European affairs would be one that has been successfully used for more than 60 years at the EU's less well-known older sister, the wider circle of nations (now 47) that is the Council of Europe.<br /><br />The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe was the main focus of the early builders of Europe for a few brief post-war years before some of its disenchanted luminaries peeled off to create the Coal and Steel Community, the EC and so on. It came up with - and still guides, to some extent, the development of - the European Convention on Human Rights.<br /><br />Churchill and the others who conceived the CoE understood that "tying in" parliamentarians was critical to the success of the whole enterprise. <br /><br />And today it is PACE which, despite its limited statutory powers, is generally regarded as "the driving force" of the Council of Europe, prodding the governments into action, and often taking the lead in new initiatives - such as opening its arms to Eastern Europe after 1989 for example (and now Arab Spring countries), or abolishing the death penalty.<br /><br />There are other democratic advantages. National obsessions have a natural outlet at European level, and the traffic can be two-way: MPs return to their home parliaments having "rubbed shoulders" and compared notes with their fellows in Strasbourg, who are often dealing with the same issues back home. The overall effect is to tilt perspectives away from troublesome national interest and towards deeper European values - just what the EU is after.<br /><br />There have been growing ties in recent years between the Council of Europe and its much more successful offshoot, the EU. But if the EU is seriously considering a parliamentary arm it might do well - as my father (a native of Aberdeen) used to say - to "tak pints" from its forerunner.<br />Angusnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27932062.post-78805478463221744062013-06-10T14:49:34.827+00:002013-06-10T14:49:34.827+00:00It really does say something about the state of th...It really does say something about the state of the European debate that the suggested solution to the current opaque proliferation of Euro- institutions is to create another one.Tony Brentonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27932062.post-37003875817309818612013-06-10T14:48:28.828+00:002013-06-10T14:48:28.828+00:00I don’t buy van Middelaar’s argument that Merkel a...I don’t buy van Middelaar’s argument that Merkel and co. become Senators of the Republic of Europe when they go to Brussels. I think this is a self-serving and wishful-thinking piece of Van Rompuyian propaganda. Having researched and written close reconstructions of the Eurocrisis summitry since late 2009, I think there is far more evidence that these were negotiations between hard-nosed national interests wrapped in the European flag. <br /><br />This affects the kind of education/socialisation that national MPs could realistically undergo if they played more of a role in Europe. The difference between, say, Merkel and her Bundestagfraktionen isn’t that she thinks more of the broader European interest, but that she thinks of a bigger set of domestic and foreign national interests; whereas sacrifices of the former for the latter can be harder for MPs to sell to their constituents, who are also socialised by German media to think mainly in terms of the price tag of bailouts. <br /><br />My sense is that national leaders were more likely to think and decide ‘as Europeans’ before the financial crisis – especially when the Kohl/Delors generation was in office – than in the era of Merkel and friends. The pressures of this crisis have sharpened the struggle for national interests – of obtaining exactly and only those European policies and institutions that suit individual creditor or debtor countries – that used to be softened by lofty historic ambitions of ‘building Europe’. It’s a change of personalities/generation as well as of circumstances. Call me cynical. <br /> <br />Poor old Schäuble sometimes gets into trouble because he’s a throwback to that earlier generation…he agrees to a ‘European’ deal because that’s where his heart lies, but then Merkel tells him he went too far and he has to go back to Brussels and do it again. It has happened at least twice, including over debt relief for Greece.<br /><br />Furthermore, different policies could improve the ‘output’ as you say, but the policies you rightly list are hard to imagine if power in the EU/Eurozone is dominated by a club of self-interested national governments. German national interests and political culture militate against banking union, fiscal stimulus or a broader mandate for the ECB. Southern Europe’s national political cultures and institutions make liberal economic reforms possible only at a snail’s pace – and under a level of duress that creates these very problems of legitimacy. Only federalism could break through this, but voters don’t support it: why reward EU institutions whose outputs have been so bad… <br />Marcus Walkernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27932062.post-50932534689284675432013-06-10T14:42:07.942+00:002013-06-10T14:42:07.942+00:00The EU Commission should be a technocratic/secreta...The EU Commission should be a technocratic/secretariat "back office" type institution to national governments and parliaments. It should not be initiating anything other than co-ordinating issues of mutual interest to the membership and helping to find the best solutions across that membership. Perhaps some extra powers for the Council of Ministers who should have their proposals accepted by parliaments/governments.<br /><br />It was created in the reverse order required to give it any democratic legitimacy. It should be subservient to the nations it serves. <br /><br />This construct would add time to getting matters through such revised EU machinery , but this would mean that it only dealt with what must be at the European level. Thus subsidiarity would be consistent with its brief and role.Ian Campbellnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27932062.post-29628823316122148832013-06-10T14:23:21.303+00:002013-06-10T14:23:21.303+00:00You ask, "Can national parliaments make the E...You ask, "Can national parliaments make the EU more legitimate"?<br /><br />It is far too late to even try to make any NATIONAL Parliament here in the United Kingdom of Great Bitain and Northern Ireland to make the EU more Legitimate.<br /><br />Right from the very beginning in 1972/3 here in the UK, lies HAD to be told to the people of this Country-by a Head of Government no less, before the only Referendum the people have had on "whether to remain in the then European Community", to get then to vote to remain in what they were told was a Common Market, in which "there would be no loss of essential Sovereignty".<br /><br />Legitimate=to make lawful? The EU could never be LAWFUL here in the UK because it was and is and always will be completely contrary to our very own long standing Common law Constitution.<br /><br />Had the people been told the truth from the very start, the people would never have agreed to remain in the then "Community".Anne Palmernoreply@blogger.com