Centre-left parties and the European Union: what next?

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Isabelle Hertner
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
European Integration ◽  
Direct Democracy ◽  
Power Dynamics ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
The European Union ◽  
External Constraint ◽  
Multi Level

This concluding chapter first summarises the key findings of this book. It states that European integration - as an external constraint - cannot be made solely responsible for the erosion of intra-party democracy. Rather, it argues that the three centre-left parties have (to varying degrees) missed the opportunity to adapt their organisations to this multi-level reality. Despite recent attempts by the leaderships of the three parties to empower the grassroots, for example through the use of referendums and policy consultations, deep and meaningful debates on the European Union remain rare. As a consequence, the broader party organisations lack EU-savvy and the means to scrutinise the leadership. The chapter then reflects on intra-party democracy, power dynamics and accountability inside the parties of the centre-left. It argues that assembly-based modes of decision-making are slower and more cumbersome, but more suitable than direct democracy, when it comes to EU matters. Last but not least, this chapter highlights the current challenges faced by the centre-left in Europe, such as the lack of a coherent EU narrative and the adoption of right-wing policies.

scholarly journals Euro-sceptical or Euro-phile? A critical analysis of the jurisprudence of the German Federal Constitutional Court on the process of European integration and decision-making

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Bernadette Sangmeister
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
European Integration ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
German Federal Constitutional Court ◽  
German Federal Constitutional

<p>On 14 January 2014, for the first time in its history, the German Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) decided to refer a decision to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). This referral, which concerned the issue of the legality of the European Central Bank’s bond-buying practices, must be seen as “historic” with regard to European integration and the relationship between European Union law and German constitutional law, forming part of important decisions of the FCC in this field since its first euro-critical judgment, Solange I, 40 years ago. Considering the high influence the German Federal Constitutional Court has had on the process of European integration, this paper aims at identifying and critiquing the lines of argumentation developed by the FCC in recent years in the field of European integration and decision-making before and after the Lisbon judgment in 2009, paying particular attention to the currently suspended OMT Decision proceedings in order to answer the question if a shift in the jurisprudence of the FCC from a euro-sceptical to a euro-phile approach has taken place.</p>

scholarly journals How Covid-19 impacted the European integration processes? The case of EU Cohesion Policy and budget

2021 ◽  
pp. 30-43
Author(s):  
Ida Musiałkowska ◽  
Piotr Idczak
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
European Integration ◽  
Valuable Insight ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Cohesion Policy ◽  
Member States ◽  
Future Evolution ◽  
Financial Framework ◽  
The Times

Purpose: The current pandemic crisis caused by Covid-19 significantly impacted the processes of European integration. The European Union decided to act within and beyond existing competences and instruments to support the efforts of its Member States, along with regional and local authorities, in the fight against Covid-19. Our study sheds light on the instruments and solutions proposed within the framework of the cohesion and budget policy to tackle the problems related to Covid-19 in Europe. The analysis focuses on two strands: 1) EU assistance offered through cohesion policy (CP) instruments toward above areas; 2) the future evolution of EU budget, and therefore integration shifts, provoked by the Covid-19 crisis. Design/methodology/approach: The study analyzes statistical data with regard to the use of instruments of the Cohesion Policy under the Covid-19 pandemic, but also the amendments introduced to legal acts and decision-making processes that refer to the multiannual financial framework (MFF) for 2021–2027. Findings: We notice a strong shift of priorities regarding environment transformation, digitalization, and health protection, reflected in the MFF. The coordinative role of European institutions and the redirection of different financial instruments to health care follows the neofunctionalist paradigm and represents a spillover effect resulting from integration. The crisis analyzed from the institutional perspective is seen as a chance to reform the decision-making process, while on the other hand, as a threat to the inclusive integration of all Member States. Originality and value: The paper is an original contribution on the overall use of both financial and legislative instruments in the times of unprecedented health and economic crisis caused by Covid-19 in the European Union. The text can be a valuable insight for both researchers and practitioners in the field of broadly understood European studies.

MULTI–LEVEL GOVERNANCE IN THE EUROPEAN UNION: FEATURES AND PERSPECTIVES

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (5) ◽  
pp. 196-218
Author(s):  
ALEXANDER I. CHERKASOV
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
National Level ◽  
Political Crisis ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Governance System ◽  
Territorial Organization ◽  
Multi Level ◽  
New Interpretation ◽  
Mutual Relations

The system of multi-level governance is being established in the countries — members of the European Union, within the framework of which there is considerable redistribution of authority between the main levels of power. These levels — supranational, national and subnational — are becoming increasingly interdependent, and there is the lack of unambiguous domination of a single particular level of power or an institute.The decision-making mechanism within the multi-level governance system is sufficiently fragmented. It is consensus — based and involves participation of not only formal state institutions but also of different non-governmental structures connected with the civil society. Finally, we have a new system of mutual relations between the state and the society with borders becoming more transparent.There are two major dimensions of the multi-level governance being described in the scientific literature — the "vertical", based on the interaction of three power levels mentioned above, and the "horizontal", involving the dynamic interaction of state and non-governmental structures, with the activities of the latter being often of a network origin. Mutual relations of the power levels in the European Union are complex and dialectical. The subnational level begins to play an increasingly important role, and this role is no longer necessarily mediated by governments of the corresponding countries, i.e. by the national level. Subnational authorities are active on the European arena through their representative offices and channels of communication available to them. Meanwhile many European states failed so far to create more or less strong regions able to perform significant powers and to serve as real limiters to the powers of their national governments.With consideration of asymmetry typical for the territorial organization of public power in the European Union and the growing economic and political crisis the perspectives of the multi-level governance seem to be rather vague. The ideologists of the corresponding concept managed only to give a new interpretation of the decision-making process in the European Union, but they failed to describe clearly enough the mechanisms of further development of the European integration.

scholarly journals The Committee of the Regions: A Springboard for the Citizens

2013 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 38-49
Author(s):  
Javier Mendoza Jiménez
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
European Integration ◽  
Qualitative Interviews ◽  
Current Situation ◽  
The Political ◽  
Democratic Deficit ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Committee Of The Regions ◽  
Different Levels

AbstractThis study focuses on the relation between the Committee of the Regions (CoR), an advisory institution of the European Union defined as the political assembly of holders of a regional or local electoral mandate serving the cause of European integration, and the democratic deficit, understood as the effective ways of citizens’ participation in the institutional decision making. The work hypothesis is that the CoR, in spite of being mostly unknown to citizens, could be an effective tool for tackling the democratic deficit. Through qualitative interviews and surveys at different levels, the article analyzes the current situation and the potential opportunities of the CoR in its relation with citizens.

scholarly journals A Presidência rotativa do Conselho e a governança multinível europeia: a peça-chave no processo de decisão intergovernamental

2020 ◽  
pp. 21-38
Author(s):  
José Magone ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
European Integration ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Integration Theory ◽  
Small States ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Council Of Ministers ◽  
Legislative Processes ◽  
Crucial Part

In the post-Lisbon constitutional architecture, the rotating presidency of the Council of Ministers of the European Union remains a vital part of intergovernmental decision-making. Its leadership activity is mainly behind closed doors to avoid the politicization of legislative processes. This study aims to contextualize the presidency as a crucial part of European integration due to its position between formal and informal processes. Informality gives the presidency time to create consensus and be flexible in its negotiation. Despite large countries’ attempts to reduce the importance of the rotating presidency, small states have resisted this temptation. In this contribution, the rotating presidency is seen from the point of view of European integration theory which is discussed in depth. Some notes follow on what can be expected in terms of the behaviour of the German and Portuguese presidencies in the new 2020-21 team presidency cycle.

The National Co-ordination of EU Policy: The Domestic Level. Edited by Hussein Kassim, B. Guy Peters, and Vincent Wright. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. 269p. $72.00.

2002 ◽  
Vol 96 (3) ◽  
pp. 691-692
Author(s):  
Maria Green Cowles
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
Member State ◽  
European Integration ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Top Down ◽  
Eu Policy ◽  
Oxford University ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Domestic Level

In recent years, scholars of the European Union (EU) have looked increasingly at the impact—administrative, institutional, legal, societal—of European integration on the member states. Some of this earlier literature on “Europeanization” viewed the Brussels–member state relationship in a rather static, one-way, top-down dimension. For this reason, the editors of The National Co-ordination of EU Policy take pains to eschew Europeanization as an organizing concept. But perhaps the editors doth protest too much. The National Co-ordination of EU Policy, in fact, fits nicely in the current literature on Europeanization, which views the Brussels–member state relationship in more dynamic terms. Indeed, the book provides a welcome and valuable addition by examining the domestic coordination processes through which “governments arrive at the position that they defend in EU decision making” (p. 235).

scholarly journals The (ambivalent) far-right populist stance on the European Union with the example of the Austrian party FPÖ

2021 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 113-124
Author(s):  
Albert Guziak
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Integration ◽  
Advanced Stage ◽  
Right Wing ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Far Right ◽  
Mutual Relation ◽  
Ernesto Laclau ◽  
Political Actions ◽  
The Eu

This article explores the attitude towards the European Union represented by right-wing populist parties by the example of the Austrian Freedom Party. Due to the advanced stage of the European integration and a multitude of its positive and negative repercussions, far-right populist parties adopted an antagonistic rhetoric aiming at discrediting and limiting the influence of the EU in a country, they represent. The FPÖ skillfully shapes a Euro-sceptic discourse in Austria, embracing a populist strategy of manipulation and hostility. The populist itself is, however, far from offering a clear political vision. Based on the reflections on populism by Ernesto Laclau, elaborating on the far-right populist strategies of a former FPÖ’s leader Jörg Haider and finally confronting the party discourse with real political actions, this article constitutes an attempt to show the complexity of a mutual relation between populism and the European Union.

A Demos for the European Union?

Politics ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 12-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mette Jolly
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
European Integration ◽  
Democratic Legitimacy ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Popular Support ◽  
Political Relationship ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
The Eu

The European Union's alleged shortage of democratic legitimacy is said to be caused partly by the polity's lack of a demos which makes it unsuitable for majoritarian decision-making. However, this problem is often overshadowed by – sometimes even confused with – the lack of public enthusiasm as regards European integration. But, although clearly related, these are not synonymous. The no-demos thesis focuses on the lack of a transnational political relationship between individuals and is related mainly to the legitimacy of the EU's decision-making processes, whereas the issue of popular support primarily relates to the legitimacy of European integration itself. In this article, I address the former by attempting to answer the following questions. Firstly, what do we mean when we say that the EU has no demos? Secondly, does the EU really need a demos, and if so, how can one be created?

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document