A critical assessment by eminent legal and political science experts in the field, this book examines the two key factors which have deeply affected the position of national parliaments in European integration: the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty and the sovereign debt crisis in the Eurozone. Structured in three parts, the book will address the question, 'Do national parliaments exhibit resilience or resignation in these changed politico-legal and socio-economic circumstances in the EU?' Part I investigates the impact of the aforementioned factors against the theoretical concepts of constitutionalism and democratic legitimacy. Part II evaluates the changing nature of parliamentary functions, and Part III appraises the evolving relationships between national parliaments and national governments, national courts, and EU institutions, in addition to surveying the emerging patterns of interparliamentary cooperation. This interdisciplinary collection yields novel insights into how the deepening of the Economic and Monetary Union and the pursuance of new initiatives for parliamentary action impact the shape and nature of EU democracy.

This book assesses the many changes that have occurred within the European Parliament and in its external relations since the Lisbon treaty (2009) and the last European elections (2014). It is undoubtedly the institution that has evolved the most since the 1950s. Despite the many crises experienced by European integration in the last years, the Parliament is still undergoing important changes in its formal competences, its influence on policy-making, its relations with other EU institutions, its internal organisation and its internal political dynamics. Every contribution deals with the most recent aspects of these evolutions and addresses overlooked topics, providing an overview of the current state of play which challenges the mainstream intergovernmental approach of the EU. This project results from research conducted at the Department of European Political and Governance Studies of the College of Europe. Individual research of several policy analysts of the European Parliamentary Research Service (EPRS) have contributed to this endeavour.

The eurozone crisis challenges the scrutiny systems of national parliaments: many instruments tackling the crisis were established outside the EU legal framework; the crisis management has generally been dominated by European and national executives; and decisions were taken under enormous time pressure. Did national parliaments become involved in scrutiny of the crisis management, and if so, how? And to what extent are their crisis-related scrutiny activities different from those in other EU affairs? Based on a quantitative data set on formal parliamentary activities in 2010-12, this article shows that the crisis did play an important role with regard to plenary EU debates in many national parliaments. Beyond debates, however, scrutiny of the crisis management has surprisingly been 'business as usual' for most parliamentary chambers. This further cements the gap between formally strong and active and formally weak and inactive parliaments. This symposium item belongs to a section headed: SYMPOSIUM: CONVENTIONAL WISDOMS UNDER CHALLENGE - REVIEWING THE EU'S DEMOCRATIC DEFICIT IN TIMES OF CRISIS, which also includes Introduction: Rationale of the Symposium by Michael Blauberger, Sonja Puntscher Riekmann and Doris Wydra (DOI: ), Integration without Representation? The European Parliament and the Reform of Economic Governance in the EU by Berthold Rittberger (DOI: ), 'European Elections are Second-Order Elections': Is Received Wisdom Changing? by Richard Corbett (DOI: ), From 'Sleeping Giant' to Left-Right Politicization? National Party Competition on the EU and the Euro Crisis by Eric Miklin (DOI: ), No Demos? Identities and Public Spheres in the Euro Crisis by Thomas Risse (DOI: ), From Regulatory State to a Democratic Default by Giandomenico Majone (DOI: ).

As a result of the financial crisis, opposition parties have had to choose between the need to cooperate with the majority in order to contribute to necessary socio-economic changes, and the opportunity to stress their adversarial position vis-à-vis governments taking radical and unpopular measures. This book examines how opposition parties address this dilemma. It relies on a qualitative and quantitative analysis of the behaviour of the opposition parties in parliament, in light of the socio-economic issues that have arisen in recent years. It focuses in particular on the impact that the economic malaise has had on the government-opposition dynamics in the four southern European democracies most acutely hit by the crisis: Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain, as well as in the European Parliament. Each chapter utilizes a combination of empirical data analysis and qualitative process-tracking to understand the opposition parties’ complicated choice between supporting and dissenting. This book was originally published as a special issue of the Journal of Legislative Studies.

This book offers the first comprehensive political analysis of the Euro crisis that erupted in Greece in 2010 and subsequently threatened the very survival of the Euro area. It has left a profound mark on democratic politics all over Europe, changing public attitudes and voting preferences, institutional and societal norms, and deeply anchored political traditions. The contributors to this volume reveal the extent to which policymakers are torn between the pressures emanating from financial markets and the demands put forward by their own constituents; how they struggle to reconcile national preferences with wider European interests; and how a polarized and politicized Union seeks to maintain some degree of cohesion. The emerging picture is that of a European Union under serious stress, transformed by new governance structures and a shifting balance of power. In response, the authors evaluate the prospects of a more legitimate and democratic Europe. They provide a rich and pluralist set of new analyses and proposals, aimed at understanding and navigating the myriad tensions which surround the EU in the aftermath of the crisis. If the European project is to regain the trust of its citizens, such considerations must take a central place in public debate.

Seminar paper from the year 2015 in the subject Politics - Topic: European Union, grade: 1,3, University of Cologne (Institut für Politische Wissenschaft und Europäische Fragen), course: Advanced Seminar the political System of the EU: Parliamentary representation in the multi-level system of the EU, language: English, abstract: This paper focuses on the Spanish parliament (Cortes Generales, or just Cortes) and its role in the management of the Eurozone-crisis. Which measures does the Cortes Generales possess to scrutinize instruments of crisis management? Has it been actively using those to scrutinize European crisis management or has it been a mere rule taker? To answer these questions it is essential to look at the role of national parliaments in the EU system first. In a second step we want to have a closer look at the role of the parliament in the Spanish political system to better understand the then following part that is dealing with what scrutiny measures the Cortes possess and how actively it has been using them during the Eurozone-crisis. During the last decades, the process of European integration has fundamentally changed patterns of governance in Europe and led to the establishment of a new institutional framework on the continent. The ongoing transfer of competencies from the national to the supranational level has created a multi-level governance system in which new institutions emerged and already existing ones are looking for a new role in this very complex system. Since the national parliaments represent the will of the citizens, they play a crucial role in legitimating decision-making at the EU level and therefore are under pressure to find ways of influencing EU policy. This is especially crucial since national executives to an increasing degree exercise legislative competencies at the EU level (namely in the EU Council) and as a consequence increasingly restrict national parliaments in influencing policy-making at the EU level. The beginning of the European debt crisis in 2010 reinforced this tendency, since measures to counter the Eurozone-crisis, such as the establishment of the European Stability Mechanism (ESM), intergovernmental treaties outside the legal framework of the EU like the Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance in the Economic and Monetary Union (TSCG, also known as Fiscal Compact), and especially the European Semester strongly limit the national parliament’s key prerogative: budgetary authority. Since their legislative competencies have been limited, national parliaments have elaborated different mechanisms to scrutinize decision-making at the supranational level to ensure democratic legitimacy.

Parliaments in Crisis: Challenges and Innovations is the new Parliamentary Primer produced by the INTER PARES project, funded by the European Union and delivered by International IDEA. Written in the context of the coronavirus pandemic, the Primer looks at how democratic parliaments play a crucial role in making good decisions and protecting citizens’ rights during a crisis. The coronavirus pandemic has deeply impacted how we are governed. Democracies have had to adapt to operating under extreme time pressure, without losing the advantages of transparency, citizen voice, and effective policy feedback loops, that make democracy the most effective and just governance system. Parliaments are the core democratic institution representing citizens throughout the policy cycle; in creating legislative rules that govern society, in ensuring that government implements legislated programmes effectively and fairly, in voting the use of taxpayers’ resources to pay for government services, and in ensuring the diverse views of citizens are heard at every stage. During a crisis, parliaments must carry out the same functions, but more rapidly, and in often adverse circumstances. This Primer focuses on particularly two aspects of parliaments’ responses. First, it looks at how parliaments ensured that emergency measures considered the needs of all parts of the population, and also that any emergency government powers were both limited in time and scope, and subject to parliamentary oversight. Second, the Primer examines how parliaments implemented innovative solutions to enable virtual functioning. The Primer concludes by exploring how parliaments can play a key role in reviewing how effectively government responded to the crisis, identifying lessons to be implemented in improved crisis and disaster planning.