Parliament plans radical reform to counter criticism

Date: 27/04/2000

By Rory Watson

SENIOR members of the European Parliament will meet next week to discuss radical changes in the way the institution operates.

The move follows mounting criticism of the assembly for focusing its efforts on exposing the European Commission's weaknesses while failing to do enough to put its own house in order. Parliamentarians now acknowledge that reform of the EU's only directly-elected body is vital as well if the assembly is to bolster its credibility in the eyes of a disillusioned public.

The reforms under consideration include measures to boost the role played by MEPs in deciding how the institution operates, changes to the way uncontroversial propo-sals for Union legislation are discussed, tighter procedures to ensure the legality of texts adopted by the Parliament and the reallocation of staff to ensure the best possible use of resources.

After initial soundings earlier this year, the process will be given a major push by Parliament President Nicole Fontaine at a meeting with the assembly's 14 vice-presidents next Tuesday (2 May). Although Secretary-General Julian Priestley has already introduced several changes, including measures to ensure greater staff mobility, the bureau will be asked to envisage far more fundamental reforms.

The challenge facing MEPs is to ensure that the Parliament's cumbersome internal procedures, which have evolved haphazardly from its days as a non-elected assembly, are overhauled to cope with the reinforced political and legislative clout it now enjoys.

One of the key aims of the proposed reforms is to reduce the role played by officials in the day-to-day running of the institution. 'We have inherited a very dirigiste type of system, based on the French model. We have to open it up and make members more responsible in future,' said one long-serving member. 'So many people say that Parliament would carry on whether members are here or not. That is the really terrifying thing.'

Supporters of change also want to see parliamentary business rationalised, members supplied with more human and material resources, the outsourcing of certain tasks considered and thought given to establishing a code of parliamentary behaviour.

They acknowledge that the proposed measures may only be introduced gradually, but insist improvements to legislative procedures are long overdue. 'We really must clean up the way we vote. It takes up far too much of the plenary's time. We could improve things by giving committees greater responsibility for sifting amendments so that we do not end up voting over 200 times on the one resolution as we did this month,' said one MEP.

Another idea on the table is to create a 'grand committee' to consider technical, non-controversial proposals for legislation. These would then be forwarded to plenary sessions for immediate adoption or rejection. This would give members more time at plenaries to debate higher-profile political issues.

Some MEPs have also suggested building 'constituency weeks' into the parliamentary calendar to allow members to spend more time on domestic political work.

With the increase in the Parliament's legislative activities, greater emphasis is also being placed on the need for strict quality control of the texts and amendments to proposed legislation adopted by the assembly to prevent subsequent legal challenges. Privately, some members fear the court case currently being fought against the EU's tobacco advertising ban might provoke similar challenges in other areas. 'We are in a situation unlike any other parliament. When they pass legislation it becomes law. But we have to comply with the treaties and so can fall down. We must be completely watertight,' said one moderniser.

Next week's meeting will also be asked to consider whether staff should be redeployed to achieve this, with more officials attached to MEPs instead of the central secretariat.

Senior members of the European Parliament are to meet to discuss radical changes in the way the institution operates. The move follows mounting criticism of the assembly for focusing its efforts on exposing the European Commission's weaknesses while failing to do enough to put its own house in order.. Parliamentarians now acknowledge that reform of the EU's only directly-elected body is vital as well if the assembly is to bolster its credibility in the eyes of a disillusioned public.