Paris rebuffed over national parliaments’ role in Union

Date: 08/05/1997

By Rory Watson

FRANCE is failing in its bid to use the negotiations on treaty reform to ensure national parliaments are given an official input into European Union business.

“There is no support for giving national parliaments any formal standing in EU decision-making. There is a strong feeling that if they had such a status it could complicate and delay the legislative process. EU and national procedures should remain separate,” said one official.

The lack of progress is a clear rebuff to France, which had initially floated the idea of creating a second European Parliament chamber in which national assemblies would be represented and which would scrutinise draft Union legislation.

Paris' view that the treaty should formally allow national parliaments to express a collective view on various EU issues is rejected by other member states, which argue that it is up to parliaments themselves to devise ways of exercising closer democratic control over their own governments on Union issues.

Even within France, there are suggestions that the idea of formal links with the Union is losing ground and is viewed more favourably by the country's senate than by its national assembly.

Despite the lack of enthusiasm for France's initiative, the Intergovernmental Conference talks have revealed a general recognition that national parliaments should be kept better informed about Union initiatives.

A protocol likely to be attached to the revised treaty is expected to set out that as a general rule, except in matters of special urgency, a minimum of four weeks should elapse between supplying national parliaments with copies of

EU consultation documents and legislative papers and any discussion of their contents in the Council of Ministers.

“National parliaments want to be informed as early as possible, especially on draft legislation, and it is important they have access not only to the original proposals, but also that they are able to follow the subsequent negotiations,” explained Belgian Liberal MEP Annemie Neyts-Uyttebroeck, who is examining ways of improving contacts between the European and national parliaments.

The revised treaty may also give a wider consultative role to the existing forum which brings together various national and Euro MPs and labours under the unwieldy title of the Conference of European Affairs Committees of national parliaments and the European Parliament (COSAC).

This could include the possibility of COSAC carrying out a six-monthly or annual review of the extent to which EU institutions have respected the twin principles of subsidiarity and transparency, which would then be submitted to Union governments.

“It would be a watching brief and involve reviewing items after the event. There would be no question of a formal involvement in EU decision-making,” predicted one diplomat.

Although the status of individual parliaments is unlikely to change as a result of the IGC, a notable evolution in understanding is taking place between national and Euro MPs.

Until recently, mutual suspicion was the overriding characteristic of the relationship. Now it is marked by greater cooperation as both try to ensure more effective democratic control over EU decisions.

“There is no doubt that the atmosphere has changed. There is a general recognition now that the European Parliament wants a real partnership with national deputies and wants to avoid rivalry,” said Neyts-Uyttebroeck.

Confirmation of that emerging partnership could be seen at a recent round table in Brussels involving MEPs and national deputies.

Both sides voiced concern that democratic control could be undermined by the growth in grey areas of intergovernmental EU activities such as justice and home affairs cooperation.

According to the Belgian MEP, the democratic deficit is further compounded by the technical nature of the issues,

the over-complex structure of Union institutions and the geographical spread of EU agencies.

Ideas being floated to tackle this include the electronic transmission of EU documents, allowing national MPs to debate the Union's annual legislative programme and giving national parliaments the right to take cases to the European Court of Justice on ultra vires or other grounds.