EU comitology reform could politicise regulation

Subject Proposed reform of the EU comitology procedure. Significance The little-known ‘comitology’ procedure plays a key role in EU regulation. In recent years, this process has been breaking down as member-state expert representatives in comitology committees often abstain from voting, forcing the European Commission to take controversial decisions on its own (and accept any blame for them). In response, the Commission has proposed reforms that would pressure member states to take a position on (and hence political ownership of) controversial regulatory decisions. Impacts Government representatives, interest-group representatives and corporate lobbyists will be most affected by comitology reform. Despite adding transparency and avoiding blame-shifting to Brussels, the reforms would probably not help the EU’s image with citizens. The European Parliament might demand -- as part of any final reform package -- an increase in its involvement in the comitology process.

Subject The new European Commission's goal of achieving 'technological sovereignty'. Significance The incoming European Commission, which takes office in November, will next week appear for hearings before the European Parliament. President-elect Ursula von der Leyen’s priorities for the next five years, notably on recovering Europe’s 'technological sovereignty', will be closely scrutinised. Impacts Some of the Commission's proposals on digital tech will be diluted by member states averse to transferring more funds to the EU. Member states will prioritise their national digital strategies, even though this weakens the Commission’s envisaged collective approach. The risk of technological supply chain disruption is now a major consideration for all major economies, including the EU.


Author(s):  
Petr YAKOVLEV

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.


2019 ◽  
pp. 208-248
Author(s):  
Nigel Foster

This chapter considers the actions commenced before the Court of Justice. These include actions by the European Commission and other member states against a member state (Articles 258–60 TFEU); judicial review of acts of the institutions (Article 263 TFEU); the action against the institutions for a failure to act (Article 265 TFEU); actions for damages (Articles 268 and 340 TFEU); and the right to plead the illegality of an EU regulation (Article 277 TFEU). The chapter also considers interim measures under Articles 278 and 279 TFEU and enforcement actions arising from the Commission enforcement of EU competition law against individuals.


IG ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 85-100
Author(s):  
Nicolai von Ondarza

The Brexit negotiations constituted unchartered political and institutional territory for the European Union (EU). This analysis shows how a new institutional approach enabled the EU-27 to present an unusually united front. The “Barnier method” is characterised by five elements: a strong political mandate from the European Council, a single EU negotiator based in the European Commission in the person of Michel Barnier, very close coordination with the Member States and the European Parliament, and a high degree of transparency. Lessons can also be drawn from this for the next phase of the Brexit negotiations and the EU’s relations with other third countries.


Significance The celebration came just days before the United Kingdom is set to begin the withdrawal process. Precisely what path the EU will take over the next decade remains uncertain and the European Commission has kicked off a process of dialogue on various scenarios for its future. Impacts Debates about the future of the EU will occur simultaneously with Brexit negotiations and be coloured by them. EU leaders will be keen to continue to demonstrate their commitment to press forward with European integration despite Brexit. Brexit will not lead to an unravelling of the EU and thus far has served to enhance support for the Union in other member states. Yet Brexit will not lead to any sudden deepening of integration.


Subject Polish/EU frictions. Significance The European Commission has taken the unprecedented step of warning of a "clear risk" of a serious breach of the rule of law in Poland. Many in Brussels and Poland hoped that the appointment of a young prime minister and a major cabinet reshuffle signalled a rapprochement. On early evidence, at least, they may be sorely disappointed. Impacts Poland’s position in the EU will become more constrained as the rule-of-law conflict is exploited in negotiations on unrelated issues. In openly censuring Poland, the EU sees an opportunity to prove its credentials as a bulwark against populism and extremism. If Poland is pushed too far, the EU’s actions may undesirably strengthen anti-EU sentiments in one of its largest member states.


Subject Prospects for the EU to end-2019. Significance Centrists will still be the dominant force in the European Parliament (EP), accounting for around 70% of its members (MEPs). Nevertheless, the fragmentation of the centre coupled with the rise of Green and Eurosceptic parties will limit the scope for consensus-based politics, potentially reducing the EP’s influence with the European Commission and Council.


Author(s):  
Dimitry Kochenov

On a reasoned proposal by one third of the Member States, by the European Parliament or by the European Commission, the Council, acting by a majority of four fifths of its members after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament, may determine that there is a clear risk of a serious breach by a Member State of the values referred to in Article 2. Before making such a determination, the Council shall hear the Member State in question and may address recommendations to it, acting in accordance with the same procedure.


2020 ◽  
pp. 65-89
Author(s):  
Matthew J. Homewood

This chapter discusses articles in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) that provide for actions that are brought directly before the Court. Under Articles 258 and 259 TFEU (ex Articles 226 and 227 EC), respectively, the European Commission and Member States may bring enforcement proceedings against a Member State in breach of Treaty obligations. Article 260 TFEU (ex Article 228 EC) requires compliance with the Court’s judgment. Article 263 TFEU (ex Article 230 EC) concerns judicial review of EU acts. The outcome of a successful action is annulment. Article 265 TFEU (ex Article 232 EC) provides for actions against the EU institutions for failure to act.


Significance Taipei has seized the opportunity, increasing its lobbying of both EU institutions and member states. China has threatened that those supporting closer ties with Taiwan will "pay a heavy price”. Impacts The Czech Republic’s new government will promote ties with Taiwan as during its presidency of the EU Council in the second half of 2022. No member state or EU institution is ready to abandon the 'One China' policy, but they will find ways to increase interaction with Taipei. There will be further rhetorical skirmishes and credible Chinese threats of sanctions on European individuals promoting ties with Taiwan.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document