January to March: Vaccinating Europe

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-54
Author(s):  
Peter Ludlow

The three European Council meetings which are discussed in these Notes covered a wide range of subjects and included sessions with the new US president and NATO's secretary general. They were nevertheless dominated by the pandemic and more particularly by the efforts of the EU and its member states to vaccinate their citizens as rapidly as possible. It was not an easy task and the EU rollout during the first three months of 2021 was significantly slower than that of either the UK or the US. There were many explanations, including the European Commission's failure to invest enough money early enough, inefficiencies at member state level and the production difficulties of the manufacturers in general and of AstraZeneca in particular. As the months have passed, many if not most of these difficulties seem, however, to be less consequential than they did at the time. The Commission and most of the member states learned from and made good their early failures and, AstraZeneca apart, BioNTech and the other manufacturers succeeded in delivering even more vaccines than they had promised to do. These improvements were already beginning to make themselves felt before the end of the first quarter. They were not widely acknowledged however, either inside or outside the political class. Partly because good news is always slow to drive out bad news, but still more because the debate about the vaccination rollout was driven by forces which were only loosely connected with the pandemic, including in particular the German-German debate in an election year, the British government's need to find and proclaim a post-Brexit success and the blunders of the European Commission's president. The politics of the rollout are indeed as interesting as, if not more interesting than the objective challenges which policymakers grappled with. Above all because the process highlighted once again the significance of the European Council. Despite strong countervailing pressures in the media, which continued to propagate the story of 'Europe's failure' and widespread dislike of von der Leyen's management style, the European Council maintained its commitment to an EU-wide rollout strategy and endorsed a string of initiatives, including an EU certificate, which aimed to defend the Union against the corrosive effects of the pandemic. The non-Covid business which the European Council addressed between January and March may have been overshadowed by the pandemic but it was far from unimportant, and the debates which it provoked anticipated both the concerns and the language of European Council discussions later in the year about the EU's role in a rapidly changing world order. The sessions with Jens Stoltenberg and Joe Biden in February and March respectively were reassuring rather than dramatic, but it was already apparent, particularly in the debate before and during the February meeting, that the lines between 'Atlanticists' and 'Europeans' have shifted significantly and that the buzz words of the emerging EU consensus – 'resilience', 'the reduction of dependencies' and 'a European capacity for autonomous action' – were well on the way to becoming common currency.

2013 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 331-353 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mónica García Quesada

AbstractFailures of compliance with European Union (EU) directives have revealed the EU as a political system capable of enacting laws in a wide range of different policy areas, but facing difficulties to ensure their actual implementation. Although the EU relies on national enforcement agencies to ensure compliance with the EU legislation, there is scarce analysis of the differential deterrent effect of national enforcement in EU law compliance. This article examines the enforcement of an EU water directive, the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive, in Spain and the UK. It focuses on the existing national sanctions for disciplining actors in charge of complying with EU requirements, and on the actual use of punitive sanctions. The analysis shows that a more comprehensive and active disciplinary regime at the national level contributes to explain a higher degree of compliance with EU law. The article calls for a detailed examination of the national administrative and criminal sanction system for a more comprehensive understanding of the incentives and disincentives to comply with EU law at the national state level.


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. 312-355
Author(s):  
Elspeth Berry ◽  
Matthew J. Homewood ◽  
Barbara Bogusz

Titles in the Complete series combine extracts from a wide range of primary materials with clear explanatory text to provide readers with a complete introductory resource. This chapter discusses the role of the Court of Justice in ensuring that the rule of law in the EU is observed both by Member States and EU Institutions. The chapter examines infringement actions under Article 258 TFEU, and financial penalties for Member States under Article 260 TFEU. The discussion of judicial review considers acts that may be challenged; who can bring an action under Article 263 TFEU; permissible applicants under Article 263 TFEU; non-privileged applicants; reforming the criteria for locus standi for non-privileged applicants. The chapter also explains the grounds for annulment; the effect of annulment; the plea of illegality; failure to act; and the relationship between Article 263 TFEU and Article 265 TFEU.


Author(s):  
R. Daniel Kelemen

Theories of federalism can provide a set of assumptions, concepts, and arguments that shed light on many aspects of European integration. Applying the federalism perspective opens up EU scholars to a range of relevant comparative cases that provide analytic leverage and insight on the EU. This perspective also enables EU scholars to draw on and contribute to a well-established literature in comparative politics, thus connecting their findings about the EU to broader academic debates. EU scholars have applied theories of federalism to help explain a wide range of questions about European integration, from general questions about why and how the EU came together as a political system to narrow questions about very specific policy areas, to the causes and consequences of the EU’s recent crises. This chapter discusses the main assumptions, concepts, and methodologies in federalism theories of the EU, and explores how this perspective can shed light on the eurozone crisis and the crisis of democratic backsliding among EU member states.


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.


2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (02) ◽  
pp. 189-218
Author(s):  
Eleonora Milazzo

The concept of solidarity has been receiving growing attention from scholars in a wide range of disciplines. While this trend coincides with widespread unsuccessful attempts to achieve solidarity in the real world, the failure of solidarity as such remains a relatively unexplored topic. In the case of the so-called European Union (EU) refugee crisis, the fact that EU member states failed to fulfil their commitment to solidarity is now regarded as established wisdom. But as we try to come to terms with failing solidarity in the EU we are faced with a number of important questions: are all instances of failing solidarity equally morally reprehensible? Are some motivations for resorting to unsolidaristic measures more valid than others? What claims have an effective countervailing force against the commitment to act in solidarity?


Author(s):  
Marta Ostrowska

AbstractIDD directive constitutes a piece of EU primary legislation and therefore it is obliged to respect the legal principles ruling the way in which EU acts towards the Member States, among which proportionality principle is of special importance. A legal act complies with the principle of proportionality if the measures adopted by the EU do not exceed the limits of what is appropriate and necessary to attain the objectives legitimately pursued by the legislation in question. According to IDD’s recitals, the measures adopted therein are proportional to the aim pursued by the IDD, i.e. customer protection. However, a live discussion boosted over the focal point of the IDD, i.e. a wide range of information duties, may lead to different conclusions and thereby put proportionality of the IDD in doubts. To verify this thesis, the author attempts to carry out the ‘proportionality test’ of the discussed information duties.


Author(s):  
Elspeth Berry ◽  
Matthew J. Homewood ◽  
Barbara Bogusz

Titles in the Complete series combine extracts from a wide range of primary materials with clear explanatory text to provide readers with a complete introductory resource. Complete EU Law combines extracts from leading cases and articles to take a fresh and modern look at the constitutional and substantive law of the EU. It starts by looking at the origins of EU integration and more recent developments such as the implications of the UK ‘Brexit’ vote. It then examines the role of EU institutions within the legislative process, and the sources of EU law. Next, it explores the relationship between the EU and the Member States; the supremacy of EU law and its impact upon the principle of UK parliamentary sovereignty; the direct and indirect effect of EU law in the national courts; and the ability of those national courts to request preliminary rulings from the Court of Justice. The book also examines the obligations that EU law imposes on Member States, including the operation of infringement actions and Member State liability in damages for breaches of EU law, and the obligations that it imposes on both the EU institutions and the Member States to protect human rights in the EU. It then discusses economic integration within the internal market and how EU law regulates the rights of individuals and businesses under the ‘four freedoms’, focusing on the free movement of persons and goods. Finally, the book considers competition law and its enforcement within Member States.


Author(s):  
Elspeth Berry ◽  
Matthew J. Homewood ◽  
Barbara Bogusz

Titles in the Complete series combine extracts from a wide range of primary materials with clear explanatory text to provide readers with a complete introductory resource. Complete EU Law combines extracts from leading cases and articles to take a fresh and modern look at the constitutional and substantive law of the EU. It starts by looking at the origins of EU integration and more recent developments such as the implications of the UK ‘Brexit’ vote. It then examines the role of EU institutions within the legislative process, and the sources of EU law. Next, it explores the relationship between the EU and the Member States; the supremacy of EU law and its impact upon the principle of UK parliamentary sovereignty; the direct and indirect effect of EU law in the national courts; and the ability of those national courts to request preliminary rulings from the Court of Justice. The book also examines the obligations that EU law imposes on Member States, including the operation of infringement actions and Member State liability in damages for breaches of EU law, and the obligations that it imposes on both the EU institutions and the Member States to protect human rights in the EU. It then discusses economic integration within the internal market and how EU law regulates the rights of individuals and businesses under the ‘four freedoms’, focusing on the free movement of persons and goods. Finally, the book considers competition law and its enforcement within Member States.


Author(s):  
Marlene Wind

Doomsdays preachers suggested that Brexit and Trump would mean the end of the liberal world order as we know it and thus the end of the EU. The research presented here suggests the opposite. Not only have Europeans turned their back to populism by voting yes to reforms and pro-EU-parties and governments in different member states over the past months, but Brexit and Trump also seems to have given a complete new momentum to the European project. This chapter demonstrates why Brexit cannot be generalized to the rest of the continent but is the result of a complicated and special British conception of what it means to be a sovereign state in the twenty-first century. Moreover, and paradoxically, surveys show that the greatest fear among Europeans today is not more European integration but right wing populism and European disunion.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document