MEPs fight for rights over fast-track laws

By Anna McLauchlin

Date: 07/07/05

A row is brewing between the EU institutions over the European Parliament's lawmaking powers in the event that the Union's constitution does not come into force in 2007. Sources at the Commission say that officials are becoming increasingly worried and are trying to head off an institutional battle.

At this week's meeting between commissioners' heads of cabinet on Monday (4 July), Rolf Annerberg, the head of cabinet of Commission Vice-President Margot Wallstrsm, warned his colleagues to be vigilant over developments in their respective portfolios.

One official at the meeting said: "So far there is not a clear message from the Parliament, but the Commission realises that this could become a sensitive issue and it needs to reflect on it."

The tension arises over fast-track law-making for technically complex dossiers. Under the proposed constitution, MEPs would be given the right to call back any legislation passed under the 'comitology' procedure if they do not agree with it. Under comitology, the Commission and national governments decide on a framework law and expert committees later hammer out the details.

At present, MEPs only have the right to call back decisions under an informal 'gentlemen's agreement' with the Commission.

If the constitution is not ratified, MEPs fear that they will be left without the power to review important pieces of legislation.

The issue has already arisen in debate over a proposal on banking capital, known as the capital requirements directive (CRD). The rapporteur, German Christian Democrat Alexander Radwan, has threatened to abandon the comitology process in the CRD unless there is an inter-institutional agreement giving MEPs the right of call-back.

If he does so, it would mean that both national governments and MEPs would have to rubber-stamp any revision to the directive, which might take years.

"This is not my first choice," Radwan told European Voice, "but we have to strengthen the role of the Parliament."

The Council of Ministers' legal service is resisting MEPs' demands, on the grounds that any measures introduced for financial services might be generalised for the entire comitology process. Comitology can also cover measures relating to health and safety, agriculture and fisheries.

A 2002 proposal that would have provided a transitional procedure until the constitution came into effect has been bogged down in Council. Some observers believe that the Parliament is trying to bully the Council into reviving it.

A Commission official said: "We could look into specific cases and find solutions, but the Parliament is probably aiming for a re-launch of the comitology process."

British MEP Richard Corbett, the Socialists' co-ordinator on constitutional affairs, said that he would support a generalised approach and warned that individual measures could damage the Parliament's position.

"It's important that particular committees don't create a precedent by taking action in certain sectors," he said.

But the problem surrounding the CRD remains a priority. Internal Market Commissioner Charlie McCreevy admitted on 27 June that failure to reach an agreement with the Parliament over financial services policymaking - known as the Lamfalussy process - could lead to "serious difficulties". He said that he would start a dialogue with the other EU institutions to find "solutions that take into account the Parliament's legitimate requests".

The committee vote on the CRD is planned for 13 July and interested parties are already worried.

Tanguy van de Werve, head of financial markets and banking supervision for the European Banking Federation, said: "The banking industry does not want to fall victim to an inter-institutional fight on this issue."

Radwan's position has found support within his committee. "We need something more durable and I hope that there will be pressure from those involved in the CRD to give a legal basis on all issues," said Dutch Socialist Ieke Van den Burg.

UK Conservative John Purvis said: "There is a gentlemen's agreement and if the commissioners are gentlemen they will stick to it."

Article reports on the possibility of an inter-institutional dispute on the right for the European Parliament to call back legislation adopted under the comitology procedure. In this fast-track law-making procedure for technically complex dossiers the European Commission and national governments decide on a framework law and expert committees later work on the details . Under the proposed Constitutional Treaty for Europe, MEPs would be given the right to call back any legislation passed under the 'comitology' procedure if they do not agree with it.