Planning for Climate and the Environment: the EU Green Deal

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 267-306 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ludwig Krämer
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
European Commission ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
Environmental Context ◽  
Member States ◽  
To Come ◽  
Climate Neutrality ◽  
The Eu

The green deal, a strategy programme by the European Commission, intends to “green” the EU activities and re-orient policies and laws for the years to come, in areas such as climate and energy, agriculture and fisheries, products and services, and trade and foreign policy, the most important announcement being the adoption of an EU climate law which will ensure EU climate neutrality by 2050. This contribution tries to place the different elements of the green deal strategy into their environmental context and also to assess the probability that the proposed measures will be agreed by the European Parliament and by the Council (the Member States’ governments).

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 Die „Methode Barnier“ – Lehren aus der Verhandlungsführung der EU beim Brexit

IG ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 85-100
Author(s):  
Nicolai von Ondarza
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Commission ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
European Council ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Institutional Approach ◽  
Five Elements ◽  
High Degree ◽  
The Eu

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.

EU comitology reform could politicise regulation

2017 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Interest Group ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
Member States ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Eu Regulation ◽  
Regulatory Decisions ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Final Reform

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.

scholarly journals The unknown agents of European cooperation, and their future

ERA Forum ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex Brenninkmeijer
Keyword(s):  
European Commission ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
Maastricht Treaty ◽  
Pivotal Role ◽  
National Interests ◽  
Member States ◽  
Daily Lives ◽  
European Cooperation ◽  
Performance Audit ◽  
The Eu

AbstractSince the Maastricht Treaty, the EU has created 37 agencies and bodies covering nearly every aspect of our daily lives. However, agencies have always played a supporting role, serving national interests as well as those of Brussels, and their pivotal role in bringing those interests together is often overlooked. As agencies have increasingly been used as a solution for addressing the challenges facing Europe, their relationship with the European Commission, the Member States and EU citizens also needs to evolve as a model for European cooperation. A few guiding principles are relevant for this purpose, and have already been set out in a performance audit entitled “Future of EU agencies – Potential for more flexibility and cooperation” for which I had the pleasure to serve as the reporting Member to the European Parliament.

scholarly journals The Conclusions of the ‘Dialogue on the future of Europe: How to build a more effective and genuinely strong Union?’ Conference Organised by the Ferenc Mádl Institute of Comparative Law and the Ministry of Justice

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 211-223
Author(s):  
Julianna Sára Traser ◽  
Márta Benyusz
Keyword(s):  
Civil Society ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Comparative Law ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
National Parliaments ◽  
Member States ◽  
International Conference ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Eu

This article concludes the presentations made at and the main lessons drawn from the international conference held on 21 September 2020, within the framework of the pan-European dialogue on the future of Europe, co-organised by the Ferenc Mádl Institute and the Ministry of Justice. It also presents the EU context and background of the debate, the role of the EU institutions, and the evolution of their position. The event was attended by representatives of the EU, Hungarian politicians, and representatives from academia and civil society. With this event, Hungary officially launched a series of conferences on the future of Europe. The presentations in these conferences reflected the crises facing the Union, including the institutional challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, and the effectiveness of the EU and its Member States' responses to them. The speakers considered the involvement of and consultation with citizens important to the process. In the context of disputes over competences between the EU and the Member States, some speakers drew attention to the spillover effect, and others called for the strengthening of the supervisory role of constitutional courts and the need for more effective involvement of national parliaments in subsidiarity control, with regard to the sovereignty of the Member States and the primacy of EU law. Critical remarks were made on the limited nature of civil society representation at the EU level. The article reflects on the main events on thinking about the future of Europe over the last four years, including the main initiatives and positions expressed by the European Commission, the European Parliament, the Heads of State and Government, citizens' consultations, and institutional competition in relation to the thematic and organisational issues of the EU-level conference. Whereas the European Commission and European Parliament, which has an ambitious position and has already proposed concrete solutions to organisational and governance issues, were the first to formulate their vision, the position of the Council, representing the Member States, will not be established until June 2020. Thus, no joint declaration on part of the institutions has been adopted thus far and no conference has been hosted, either. In view of all this, the organisation of the international conference by the Ferenc Mádl Institute of Comparative Law and the Ministry of Justice can be considered timely and proactive.

EU's ‘tech sovereignty’ goal reflects new realities

2019 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supply Chain ◽  
European Commission ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
Supply Chain Disruption ◽  
Member States ◽  
Content Type ◽  
President Elect ◽  
Major Consideration ◽  
The Eu

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.

scholarly journals Budget of the EU and Common Agricultural Policy for 2014-2020 in the light of the polish interests

Management ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 473-487
Author(s):  
Andrzej Czyżewski ◽  
Sebastian Stępień
Keyword(s):  
European Commission ◽  
Agricultural Policy ◽  
Common Agricultural Policy ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
European Council ◽  
The Political ◽  
The Common ◽  
Polish Economy ◽  
The Eu

Summary The objective of the paper is to present the results of negotiations on the EU budget for 2014-2020, with particular emphasis on the Common Agricultural Policy. Authors indicate the steps for establishing the budget, from the proposal of the European Commission presented in 2011, ending with the draft of UE budget agreed at the meeting of the European Council on February 2013 and the meeting of the AGRIFISH on March 2013 and then approved by the political agreement of the European Commission, European Parliament and European Council on June 2013. In this context, there will be an assessment of the new budget from the point of view of Polish economy and agriculture.

scholarly journals Member States’ social security agreements with India

2018 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 173-187
Author(s):  
Pauline Melin
Keyword(s):  
Social Security ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Current Approach ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Bilateral Agreements ◽  
Country Case Study ◽  
The Eu

In a 2012 Communication, the European Commission described the current approach to social security coordination with third countries as ‘patchy’. The European Commission proposed to address that patchiness by developing a common EU approach to social security coordination with third countries whereby the Member States would cooperate more with each other when concluding bilateral agreements with third countries. This article aims to explore the policy agenda of the European Commission in that field by conducting a comparative legal analysis of the Member States’ bilateral agreements with India. The idea behind the comparative legal analysis is to determine whether (1) there are common grounds between the Member States’ approaches, and (2) based on these common grounds, it is possible to suggest a common EU approach. India is taken as a third-country case study due to its labour migration and investment potential for the European Union. In addition, there are currently 12 Member State bilateral agreements with India and no instrument at the EU level on social security coordination with India. Therefore, there is a potential need for a common EU approach to social security coordination with India. Based on the comparative legal analysis of the Member States’ bilateral agreements with India, this article ends by outlining the content of a potential future common EU approach.

scholarly journals Insights from the Slovak Hybrid Mail Services Case. Case Comment to the Judgement of the General Court of 25 March 2015 and Order of Court of Justice of the EU of 30 June 2016 Slovenská pošta v Commission (Cases T-556/08, C-293/15P)

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (16) ◽  
pp. 191-203
Author(s):  
Karolis Kačerauskas
Keyword(s):  
European Commission ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Strange Situation ◽  
Member States ◽  
Commission Decision ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Article 102 Tfeu ◽  
The Eu

The Slovak hybrid mail services case (or Slovenska posta case) is truly unique in EU jurisprudence. Within the last decade, the European Commission rarely applied Article 106(1) in conjunction with Article 102 TFEU to challenge competition distortions in individual cases. Thus Slovenska posta constitutes one of the rare examples of such enforcement. Slovenska posta also constitutes a very rare example of a judicial review of Commission decisions based on Article 106(1) and 102 TFEU. Slovenska posta is only the second case when European courts were called upon to review the application of Article 106(1) and 102 TFEU by the Commission and the first when the judicial review was conducted over a Commission decision regarding “failure to meet the demand”. Indeed, since 1989–1990 (when the Commission commenced to apply Article 106(1) and 102 TFEU to challenge competition distortions introduced by the Member States) and until 2014, when the Court of Justice adopted its decision in Greek lignite (DEI) case, none of the Commission decisions was reviewed by EU courts. Such lack of appeals resulted in a rather strange situation under which the Commission and CJEU developed their own jurisprudence on the application of Article 106(1) and 102 TFEU and occasionally interpreted the same legal criteria differently. In this regard, a court review in Slovenska posta was eagerly awaited in the hope it would reconcile these diverging positions and provide more clarity on the application of Article 106(1) and 102 TFEU.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document