Subsidiarity as a Subject of Battle in European Union Politics

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kees van Kersbergen ◽  
Bertjan Verbeek
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Power Relations ◽  
Political Process ◽  
Maastricht Treaty ◽  
Lisbon Treaty ◽  
The Political ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Over Time ◽  
The Eu

Since the Maastricht Treaty (1993), subsidiarity has guided the political process surrounding the distribution of competences between administrative layers in the European Union (EU). The EU’s subsidiarity regime affects the politics and governance of the EU, because the notion of subsidiarity allows for continuous negotiation over its practical use. The constant battle over subsidiarity implies that the notion changes its meaning over time and alters the power relations between different actors within the EU. Since the Lisbon Treaty (2009), subsidiarity has mainly strengthened the position of member states at the expense of the Commission.

scholarly journals The EU after Brexit: Key Geopolitical and Geo-Economic Challenges

2020 ◽  
pp. 30-44 ◽  
Author(s):  
Petr YAKOVLEV
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Commission ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
European Council ◽  
The Political ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Union History ◽  
The Eu

The decision on Britain’s secession from the European Union, taken by the British Parliament and agreed by London and Brussels, divided the Union history into “before” and “after”. Not only will the remaining member states have to “digest” the political, commercial, economic and mental consequences of parting with one of the largest partners. They will also have to create a substantially new algorithm for the functioning of United Europe. On this path, the EU is confronted with many geopolitical and geo-economic challenges, which should be answered by the new leaders of the European Commission, European Council, and European Parliament.

scholarly journals Crisis?: What (Type) of Crisis? The overlapping problems of the European Union

2014 ◽  
Vol 22 (50) ◽  
pp. 33-48 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kai Lehmann
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Economic Crisis ◽  
Future Development ◽  
Political Process ◽  
European Population ◽  
The Political ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Current Crisis ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Eu

It is common today, even in the European media, to treat the current crisis of the European Union almost exclusively as an economic crisis. The present article pretends to show that such a focus is not only wrong but is indeed dangerous for the future development of the European Union as a whole. The article will argue that the present economic crisis simply aggravated – and a lot – a crisis of legitimacy through which the European Union has been passing for some time. Showing that the anti-European tendencies which are spreading throughout the countries of the continent threaten the very future of the European project, the article will make suggestion on reforms for the future development of the EU, alerting to the necessity to finally elaborate once again a coherent argument for the continuation of the European integration process which puts the European population at the heart of the political process instead of just austerity.

scholarly journals The Limits of Agencification in the European Union

2014 ◽  
Vol 15 (7) ◽  
pp. 1223-1255 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miroslava Scholten ◽  
Marloes van Rijsbergen
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Lisbon Treaty ◽  
Democratic Legitimacy ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Road ◽  
European Court ◽  
On The Road ◽  
The Eu

Although not explicitly regulated by the EU treaties, EU agencies not only exist but also have increased in number and power. In addition, while EU agencies may exercise very similar functions to those of the Commission, Articles 290 and 291 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) do not list agencies among the possible authors of non-legislative acts. The existing situation raises the questions of the extent to which the ongoing agencification in the EU is legitimate and what its limits are. This article addresses these questions in the light of the old and new Treaties and case law, including the just releasedESMA-shortsellingcase. It shows that while the Lisbon Treaty made a few steps forward on the road of legitimizing EU agencies and delegating important powers to them, the scope of powers that EU agencies can have remains unclear. In this respect, the European Court of Justice's lenient approach in theESMA-shortsellingcase is unfortunate because it neither clarifies the issue nor pushes the Union Legislator and the Member States to address it. Consequently, in the absence of clear limits, further agencification is likely to persist at the risk of increasing the democratic legitimacy deficit and remaining accountability gaps.

scholarly journals The Lisbon Treaty and the Accession of Turkey to the European Union

2017 ◽  
pp. 7
Author(s):  
Luísa Verdelho Alves
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Adverse Outcome ◽  
Lisbon Treaty ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Integration ◽  
Current Member ◽  
Treaty Reform ◽  
Eu Treaty Reform ◽  
The Eu

On December 13, 2007, the Member States of the European Union (EU) signed in Lisbon a treaty amending the founding Treaties of the EU. After a troubled ratification process, due to the adverse outcome of a national referendum in Ireland, the Lisbon Treaty finally entered into force on December 1, 2009, defining a new trajectory for the EU integration process. The present article addresses the possible implications of the recent EU treaty reform to the accession of Turkey to the EU. To that end, I propose an analysis of the modifications introduced in the institutional framework of the Union and I inquire whether the legal change at this level is capable of influencing the attitude of the current Member States concerning the accession of Turkey to the EU.

scholarly journals Enhanced Cooperation, EMU Reforms and Their Implications for Differentiation in the European Union

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 84-106
Author(s):  
Tomasz Kubin
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Maastricht Treaty ◽  
Theoretical Framework ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Future ◽  
Differentiated Integration ◽  
Treaty Of Amsterdam ◽  
The Eu

Abstract Initially, before the entry into force of the Maastricht Treaty, differences in integration between members of the European Communities (EC; later the European Union) were relatively few and usually temporary in nature. The Schengen Agreement, the Maastricht Treaty and the Treaty of Amsterdam, and the possibility of establishing enhanced cooperation meant that the problem was becoming more and more important in the functioning of the EU—both in theory and in practice. The objective of the paper is to show that for several years, along with the stagnation in the deepening of integration between all the EU Member States, differentiation of integration in the EU is progressing very rapidly. The progressing differentiation in the EU is a consequence of mainly two processes: the development of enhanced cooperation and reforms in the eurozone, which are strengthened by the widening of the EU. The article covers the issue of the categorization of differentiation of European Union integration, which constitutes the theoretical framework for further considerations. Specified processes which contribute to increasing the differentiation of the EU are discussed, showing the development of enhanced cooperation in the EU and presenting the reforms of the eurozone. The article concludes with the identification and the consequences of differentiated integration, both those that have already occurred and those that may occur in the future.

scholarly journals The political system of European Union after European Parliament Election of 2019

2019 ◽  
pp. 15-30
Author(s):  
Andrii Martynov
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Integration ◽  
Political System ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
The Political ◽  
The European Union ◽  
National Parliaments ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Eu

The politics of the European Union are different from other organizations and states due to the unique nature of the EU. The common institutions mix the intergovernmental and supranational aspects of the EU. The EU treaties declare the EU to be based on representative democracy and direct elections take place to the European Parliament. The Parliament, together with the European Council, works for the legislative arm of the EU. The Council is composed of national governments thus representing the intergovernmental nature of the European Union. The central theme of this research is the influence of the European Union Political system the Results of May 2019 European Parliament Election. The EU supranational legislature plays an important role as a producer of legal norms in the process of European integration and parliamentary scrutiny of the activities of the EU executive. The European Parliament, as a representative institution of the European Union, helps to overcome the stereotypical notions of a “Brussels bureaucracy” that limits the sovereignty of EU member states. The European Parliament is a political field of interaction between European optimists and European skeptics. The new composition of the European Parliament presents political forces focused on a different vision of the strategy and tactics of the European integration process. European federalists in the “European People’s Party” and “European Socialists and Democrats” consider the strategic prospect of creating a confederate “United States of Europe”. The Brexit withdrawal from the EU could help the federalists win over European skeptics. Critics of the supranational project of European integration do not have a majority in the new composition of the European Parliament. But they are widely represented in many national parliaments of EU Member States. The conflicting interaction between European liberals and far-right populists is the political backdrop for much debate in the European Parliament. The result of this process is the medium term development vector of the European Union.

scholarly journals Media support and its influence on the results of the referendum in Britain’s exit from the EU

2020 ◽  
pp. 102-114
Author(s):  
Yana Kybich
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Driving Forces ◽  
Political Process ◽  
British Society ◽  
The Political ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Binary Oppositions ◽  
The Media ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

June 2016 was marked by a landmark event - the so-called Brexit (literally from Britain’s exit ) – a referendum in which 52% of the population voted for the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union and only 48% - against. The significant changes that took place in the UK in the summer of 2016, finally split British society into those who are for and against leaving the European Union. The British media acted as a platform for political debates and discussions on the key issue of Britain’s stay in the EU. The most powerful media conglomerate, of course, had a decisive influence on the mood of those who voted, intensifying social polarization, which was reflected in the results of the fateful referendum. Elements of the British media played a key role in the debate over the referendum on the country’s membership in the European Union. The exit vote was influenced by a long campaign against the EU and against migration from EU countries. Throughout the campaign, virtually all media are in flagrant violation of journalistic standards of objectivity, fairness, and accuracy, becoming essentially propaganda bodies. The relevance of the study is due to the fundamental changes in British society related to the Brexit process, as well as the importance for politicians and the public of understanding public opinion and the media about Brexit. In addition, it is important to see how the view of Brexit has changed. It is necessary to find out the benefits, priorities and understanding of different scenarios, the driving forces behind these attitudes, and whether they change in response to statements and remarks by politicians and public figures. Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union is important for the whole world, as it affects the changing geopolitics of the whole of Europe. This topic is important for understanding the study of the political preferences of British society and the British media during the Brexit process. It can be stated unequivocally that both Brexit and the subsequent US election campaign in 2016 showed another example of skillful speculation in facts and figures, the successful creation and dissemination of unverified “viral information” through the media, which in the era of telecommunications has become a particularly effective tool for manipulation of public sentiment. The example of Brexit has demonstrated how to take the success of such campaigns to a new level, using all types of media (from traditional to electronic, including social networks), through which you can introduce into society binary oppositions that divide it, to introduce into the information space certain political figures, to popularize the necessary moods and slogans, to simplify the political process to the level of a show.

Social Policy and European Union Politics

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Daly
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Social Policy ◽  
Trade Unions ◽  
The Political ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Policy Model ◽  
The Social ◽  
Democratic Parties ◽  
The Eu

Social policy has a particular character and set of associated politics in the European Union (EU) context. There is a double contestation involved: the extent of the EU’s agency in the field and the type of social policy model pursued. The former is contested because social policy is typically and traditionally a matter of national competence and the latter because the social policy model is crucial to economic and market development. Hence, social policy has both functional and political significance, and EU engagement risks member states’ capacity to control the social fate of their citizens and the associated resources, authority, and power that come with this capacity. The political contestations are at their core territorially and/or social class based; the former crystalizes how wide and extensive the EU authority should be in social policy and the latter a left/right continuum in regard to how redistributive and socially interventionist EU social policy should be. Both are the subject of a complicated politics at EU level. First, there is a diverse set of agents involved, not just member states and the “political” EU institutions (Parliament and Council) but the Commission is also an important “interested” actor. This renders institutional politics and jockeying for power typical features of social policymaking in the EU. Second, one has to break down the monolith of the EU institutions and recognize that within and among them are actors or units that favor a more left or right position on social policy. Third, actors’ positions do not necessarily align on the two types of contestation (apart perhaps from the social nongovernmental organizations and to a lesser extent employers and business interests). Some actors who favor an extensive role for social policy in general are skeptical about the role of the EU in this regard (e.g., trade unions, some social democratic parties) while others (some sectors of the Commission) wish for a more expansive EU remit in social policy but also support a version of social policy pinned tightly to market and economic functions. In this kind of context, the strongest and most consistent political thrust is toward a type of EU social policy that is most clearly oriented to enabling the Union’s economic and market-related objectives. Given this and the institutional set-up, the default position in EU social policy is for a market-making social policy orientation on the one hand and a circumscribed role for the EU in social policy on the other.

Regionalist Parties and the European Union

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emanuele Massetti ◽  
Arjan H. Schakel
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Integration ◽  
Political System ◽  
Maastricht Treaty ◽  
Multilevel Governance ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Political Actors ◽  
The Eu

Regionalist parties are political actors that emphasize distinct ethno-territorial identities and interests vis-à-vis those of the entire state, advocating some forms of territorially based self-government in a view to protect, give voice to, and enhance those identities and interests. The tense relationships that these political actors often have with the central institutions leads them, in the European Union (EU) context, to identify the EU as a potential ally in their struggle against the state. Indeed, the EU system of multilevel governance, in which regional governments have obtained a considerable role, is also the result of a combined effect of regionalist parties’ pressure on member states from below and the process of European integration creating a favorable political framework from above. This putative alliance was celebrated, during the 1980s and 1990s, with the Maastricht Treaty representing a pivotal moment for the launch of the vision of a “Europe of the Regions.” However, the EU constitutional reforms of the 2000s (from the Treaty of Nice to the Treaty of Lisbon) fell rather short vis-à-vis regionalist claims, revealing the “illusionary character” of the “Europe of the Regions” idea. Since then, attempts to achieve “Independence in Europe” (through “internal enlargement”) have intensified in regions governed by strong and radical regionalist parties, such as in Catalonia and Scotland. These secessionist attempts have added further strain to an already under-stress EU political system. Indeed, far from acting as an ally of regionalist forces, the EU appears to have straddled between the role of a neutral observer and a supporter of member states’ territorial integrity.

Sovereignty in Europe

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dieter Grimm
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Integration ◽  
Lisbon Treaty ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Jürgen Habermas ◽  
Member States ◽  
Jurgen Habermas ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
The Eu

This chapter examines the question of who is sovereign in the relationship between the European Union and its Member States. It first considers the relevance of the debate over sovereignty in the EU and the development of the concept of sovereignty, paying attention to public powers form the substance of sovereignty, Jürgen Habermas’ theory of dual sovereignty, and the relevant provisions of the Lisbon Treaty. It then explores the problem of whether one should maintain the concept of sovereignty or recognize that the era of post-sovereignty has begun. It argues that it makes sense to address the question of who is sovereign in the EU, suggesting that the answer will determine the future course of European integration. It also analyses which concept of sovereignty is best suited to understand and explain the EU.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document