Chapter 1 – Introduction
Most legislation is now made using the ordinary legislative procedure (OLP). This
procedure used to be called ‘co-decision. In broad terms it means that the EU Council,
comprising national ministers or their representatives, and the European Parliament, made
up of elected representatives, together ‘co-decide’ EU laws. Together, then, they make up
the EU’s legislature. The Commission, by contrast, is often labelled the EU’s executive
body. The Commission is not a government as such but has some government-type
functions in that it proposes new laws.
Chapter 2 – The European Union: Establishment and Development
2.2 – Integration and cooperation in Europe: ambitions, tensions, and divisions
Initial steps in promoting economic integration had been taken in April 1948 with the
establishment of the Organisation for European Economic Cooperation (OEEC). Created
at the insistence of the US government to administer US financial assistance from the
Marshall Plan, the OEEC was also committed to promoting trade liberalisation. For
integrationists, the OEEC, like the Council of Europe, lacked ambition. Incorporating as
many states as possible promoted inclusivity, but it tended to mean that the goals to be
achieved were limited to the pragmatically possible. The European Coal and Steel
Community (ECSC) was established in 1952 along with the creation of Europe’s first
supranational institutions. The Treaty of Paris encouraged ideas of pursuing sectoral
integration in other areas. In 1956 the European Economic Community (EEC) was
established, it would also involve the free movement of workers and capital, certain social
policy activities and an investment bank. With the establishment by Austria, Denmark,
Norway, Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom of the looser,
intergovernmental European Free Trade Association (EFTA) in 1960, an ‘outer seven’ was
created and the division of Western Europe into two trade blocs was formalised.
2.3 The Communities and a Europe of ‘the Six’
The 1970s was a challenging decade for the Communities and for integration. International
currency instability, the 1973 oil crises, and inflation brought an end to the sustained
economic growth of the post-war period. Governments in Europe generally reacted to the
economic crisis by pursuing national as opposed to coordinated European Responses. A
boost of sorts came with the regularisation of meetings of heads of state and government as
the ‘European Council’ from 1975 onwards and so the beginnings of greater
institutionalised intergovernmentalism.
2.4 Establishing the European Union
The Single Market project, conceived in 1984–85, was a major stage in the process of
European integration. It not only provided the Communities with a new sense of purpose, it
would also ultimately act as a significant catalyst for integration in other areas. The agreed
Single European Act (SEA) introduced a range of new competences (environment,
research and development, and economic and social cohesion); established in 1992.
Agreement was reached on launching a new IGC in 1991. Before long a second IGC—on
political union—was being proposed. The motivation was less the spillover from the renewed
internal dynamism of the Communities, but more the momentous geopolitical changes that
were taking place in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE). Communist regimes had been
,collapsing since 1989, the Cold War had ended, and there was now the prospect of German
unification. Out of these emerged the Treaty on European Union (TEU).
Agreed by the member states at Maastricht in 1991, the TEU— often referred to as the
‘Maastricht Treaty’—was designed to expand the scope of European integration, to reform
the EC’s institutions and decision-making procedures, and to bring about EMU. The principle
of subsidiarity was introduced. Moreover, the TEU saw the establishment of new institutions
and bodies, including the European Central Bank, the Committee of the Regions and the
Ombudsman.
2.5 Reviewing the Union: the 1996 Intergovernmental Conference and the Treaty of
Amsterdam
2.6 Preparing for enlargement and the twenty-first century: the 2000
Intergovernmental Conference, the Treaty of Nice and the ‘Future of Europe’ debate
Opening up the possibility of large-scale enlargement made the need to address the
Amsterdam leftovers more urgent. Hence an IGC was called. What the member states
agreed at Nice attracted much criticism. Although it was rightly heralded as paving the way
for enlargement, for many it produced suboptimal solutions to the institutional challenges
increased membership raised. The Treaty of Nice also made closer cooperation easier to
pursue, reducing the number of member states needed to start a project as well as the
opportunities to block such a project.
Chapter 3 – Carrying the EU Forward: The Era of Lisbon
3.3 The 2003–04 Intergovernmental Conference and the Constitutional Treaty
The document was designed to replace all the existing treaties and become the single
constitutional document of the EU. Policy and powers changed rather less. The nature of the
EU, its style of operation, its institutions, and the revision process were all altered. The CT
abolished the three-pillared Union with a more singular EU. This inherited the legal
personality of the Community, along with its symbols and the primacy of its law. Member
states were given the right to leave. The CT changed the way the EU made rules through
the ordinary legislative procedure (OLP).
,3.5 The main elements of the Treaty of Lisbon
- First, in structural terms, the Treaty of Lisbon brought matters into line with common
practice. Hence the Community disappeared, and the EU became the sole structure
of integration, inheriting the Community’s powers, legal personality, institutions, and
policy mix
- Second, despite the talk of a ‘superstate’, the Treaty of Lisbon made it abundantly
clear that the EU is a body based on powers conferred by the member states,
enshrined in the treaties, and subject to subsidiarity and proportionality.
- Third, EU policies were not greatly expanded by the Treaty of Lisbon.
- Fourth, in terms of decision-making, the Treaty of Lisbon renamed co-decision as
the ordinary legislative procedure (OLP) and established it as the default legislative
process.
- Fifth, the Treaty of Lisbon introduced significant changes to institutional
arrangements. The EP received extra powers, notably over the budget and treaty
change.
- A sixth facet was a new emphasis on values and rights.
3.6 The Treaty of Lisbon: an appraisal
- The Treaty of Lisbon was complex and difficult to understand.
- The Treaty of Lisbon sought to make the EU more democratic and efficient, but this
has not always been acknowledged.
- Despite the range of changes introduced, and the criticisms made of it, its effects
have not been revolutionary.
- Article 50 TEU sets out the procedure for a member state’s exit from the EU.
3.8 The significance of the Treaty of Lisbon
The Treaty of Lisbon was a second attempt to realise reforms that many EU leaders thought
necessary to make an enlarging EU fit for the world into which it was moving in the first
decades of the 2000s, but in a format more acceptable to popular opinion.
3.11 Conclusion
Despite all of the talk of the Constitutional Treaty and the Treaty of Lisbon creating a
superstate, what has emerged from the successive rounds of treaty reform over the last
three decades or so is an EU dependent on its member states and defined by its treaties.
Chapter 10 - The European Commission
10.1 Introduction
The Commission encompasses elements of both intergovernmentalism (national
dimension) and supranationalism (European dimension).
10.2 The functions of the Commission
The European Commission, like a government, is composed of a political executive wing
(the Commissioners and their cabinets) and an administrative wing (the departments and
services). It functions as a mediator among the 27 member states, and between the EU
Council and the European Parliament (EP). In much the same way as are national
executives, the Commission is responsible for the initiation and formulation of policies,
usually in the form of legislative, budgetary, or programme proposals. The Commission
, drafts the legislation that is passed on to the two legislative bodies, the EP and the Council.
It is in this sense that, in the majority of policy areas, such as the Single Market and Justice
and Home Affairs (JHA), the Commission performs an important agenda-setting role. Other
actors, such as the European Council (the heads of state and government), the EP, national
governments, and interest groups, may also take initiatives and advance policy proposals,
but it is generally up to the Commission to decide whether these ideas will be picked up and
subsequently passed on to the legislature in the form of a formal legislative proposal.
In line with the functions performed by national executives, the Commission also has an
important role to play in the implementation of EU policies. What this means is that the
Commission is responsible for the monitoring of implementation within the EU’s member
states. The Commission also presents policy documents to heads of state and government
at European Council meetings and at intergovernmental conferences (IGCs).
- The European Commission has a variety of functions to perform in the EU system,
including agenda-setting, the implementation of policy and the management of
programmes, and external relations.
- The Commission is involved at almost all stages of the European policy process.
- The Commission plays a more limited role in foreign, security, and defence policy.
10.3 Commission influence
● Although most intergovernmentalists consider the Commission to play an important
role in the EU polity, it is seen as an agent acting on behalf of member states, thus
without its own political will.
● Neo-functionalists and institutionalists argue that the Commission has an
independent impact on policy outcomes.
10.4 The President and the Commissioners
● Commissioners are nominated by national governments, but they are expected to
adopt a European perspective rather than a national one, and they seem to do so to
a considerable extent.
10.5 Commissioners’ cabinets
● Each Commissioner is supported by a personal staff, known as a cabinet.
● The cabinet, traditionally a ‘national enclave’ within the Commission, has become
significantly more multinational since 1999.
● As well as working on a Commissioner’s portfolio, a cabinet is expected to monitor
the work of other Commissioners so as to keep their Commissioner well-informed.
10.7 Committees, networks, and EU agencies
When it comes to the implementation of EU policies at the national level, the Commission
has to rely on member state administrations, since the Commission does not itself possess
agencies at this level. This may result in considerable variation in administrative practices
across countries. Such Commission-led and, increasingly, EU agency-led networks of
national agencies within most policy fields may contribute to more harmonised application of
EU law and other EU policies across member countries.
Most legislation is now made using the ordinary legislative procedure (OLP). This
procedure used to be called ‘co-decision. In broad terms it means that the EU Council,
comprising national ministers or their representatives, and the European Parliament, made
up of elected representatives, together ‘co-decide’ EU laws. Together, then, they make up
the EU’s legislature. The Commission, by contrast, is often labelled the EU’s executive
body. The Commission is not a government as such but has some government-type
functions in that it proposes new laws.
Chapter 2 – The European Union: Establishment and Development
2.2 – Integration and cooperation in Europe: ambitions, tensions, and divisions
Initial steps in promoting economic integration had been taken in April 1948 with the
establishment of the Organisation for European Economic Cooperation (OEEC). Created
at the insistence of the US government to administer US financial assistance from the
Marshall Plan, the OEEC was also committed to promoting trade liberalisation. For
integrationists, the OEEC, like the Council of Europe, lacked ambition. Incorporating as
many states as possible promoted inclusivity, but it tended to mean that the goals to be
achieved were limited to the pragmatically possible. The European Coal and Steel
Community (ECSC) was established in 1952 along with the creation of Europe’s first
supranational institutions. The Treaty of Paris encouraged ideas of pursuing sectoral
integration in other areas. In 1956 the European Economic Community (EEC) was
established, it would also involve the free movement of workers and capital, certain social
policy activities and an investment bank. With the establishment by Austria, Denmark,
Norway, Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom of the looser,
intergovernmental European Free Trade Association (EFTA) in 1960, an ‘outer seven’ was
created and the division of Western Europe into two trade blocs was formalised.
2.3 The Communities and a Europe of ‘the Six’
The 1970s was a challenging decade for the Communities and for integration. International
currency instability, the 1973 oil crises, and inflation brought an end to the sustained
economic growth of the post-war period. Governments in Europe generally reacted to the
economic crisis by pursuing national as opposed to coordinated European Responses. A
boost of sorts came with the regularisation of meetings of heads of state and government as
the ‘European Council’ from 1975 onwards and so the beginnings of greater
institutionalised intergovernmentalism.
2.4 Establishing the European Union
The Single Market project, conceived in 1984–85, was a major stage in the process of
European integration. It not only provided the Communities with a new sense of purpose, it
would also ultimately act as a significant catalyst for integration in other areas. The agreed
Single European Act (SEA) introduced a range of new competences (environment,
research and development, and economic and social cohesion); established in 1992.
Agreement was reached on launching a new IGC in 1991. Before long a second IGC—on
political union—was being proposed. The motivation was less the spillover from the renewed
internal dynamism of the Communities, but more the momentous geopolitical changes that
were taking place in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE). Communist regimes had been
,collapsing since 1989, the Cold War had ended, and there was now the prospect of German
unification. Out of these emerged the Treaty on European Union (TEU).
Agreed by the member states at Maastricht in 1991, the TEU— often referred to as the
‘Maastricht Treaty’—was designed to expand the scope of European integration, to reform
the EC’s institutions and decision-making procedures, and to bring about EMU. The principle
of subsidiarity was introduced. Moreover, the TEU saw the establishment of new institutions
and bodies, including the European Central Bank, the Committee of the Regions and the
Ombudsman.
2.5 Reviewing the Union: the 1996 Intergovernmental Conference and the Treaty of
Amsterdam
2.6 Preparing for enlargement and the twenty-first century: the 2000
Intergovernmental Conference, the Treaty of Nice and the ‘Future of Europe’ debate
Opening up the possibility of large-scale enlargement made the need to address the
Amsterdam leftovers more urgent. Hence an IGC was called. What the member states
agreed at Nice attracted much criticism. Although it was rightly heralded as paving the way
for enlargement, for many it produced suboptimal solutions to the institutional challenges
increased membership raised. The Treaty of Nice also made closer cooperation easier to
pursue, reducing the number of member states needed to start a project as well as the
opportunities to block such a project.
Chapter 3 – Carrying the EU Forward: The Era of Lisbon
3.3 The 2003–04 Intergovernmental Conference and the Constitutional Treaty
The document was designed to replace all the existing treaties and become the single
constitutional document of the EU. Policy and powers changed rather less. The nature of the
EU, its style of operation, its institutions, and the revision process were all altered. The CT
abolished the three-pillared Union with a more singular EU. This inherited the legal
personality of the Community, along with its symbols and the primacy of its law. Member
states were given the right to leave. The CT changed the way the EU made rules through
the ordinary legislative procedure (OLP).
,3.5 The main elements of the Treaty of Lisbon
- First, in structural terms, the Treaty of Lisbon brought matters into line with common
practice. Hence the Community disappeared, and the EU became the sole structure
of integration, inheriting the Community’s powers, legal personality, institutions, and
policy mix
- Second, despite the talk of a ‘superstate’, the Treaty of Lisbon made it abundantly
clear that the EU is a body based on powers conferred by the member states,
enshrined in the treaties, and subject to subsidiarity and proportionality.
- Third, EU policies were not greatly expanded by the Treaty of Lisbon.
- Fourth, in terms of decision-making, the Treaty of Lisbon renamed co-decision as
the ordinary legislative procedure (OLP) and established it as the default legislative
process.
- Fifth, the Treaty of Lisbon introduced significant changes to institutional
arrangements. The EP received extra powers, notably over the budget and treaty
change.
- A sixth facet was a new emphasis on values and rights.
3.6 The Treaty of Lisbon: an appraisal
- The Treaty of Lisbon was complex and difficult to understand.
- The Treaty of Lisbon sought to make the EU more democratic and efficient, but this
has not always been acknowledged.
- Despite the range of changes introduced, and the criticisms made of it, its effects
have not been revolutionary.
- Article 50 TEU sets out the procedure for a member state’s exit from the EU.
3.8 The significance of the Treaty of Lisbon
The Treaty of Lisbon was a second attempt to realise reforms that many EU leaders thought
necessary to make an enlarging EU fit for the world into which it was moving in the first
decades of the 2000s, but in a format more acceptable to popular opinion.
3.11 Conclusion
Despite all of the talk of the Constitutional Treaty and the Treaty of Lisbon creating a
superstate, what has emerged from the successive rounds of treaty reform over the last
three decades or so is an EU dependent on its member states and defined by its treaties.
Chapter 10 - The European Commission
10.1 Introduction
The Commission encompasses elements of both intergovernmentalism (national
dimension) and supranationalism (European dimension).
10.2 The functions of the Commission
The European Commission, like a government, is composed of a political executive wing
(the Commissioners and their cabinets) and an administrative wing (the departments and
services). It functions as a mediator among the 27 member states, and between the EU
Council and the European Parliament (EP). In much the same way as are national
executives, the Commission is responsible for the initiation and formulation of policies,
usually in the form of legislative, budgetary, or programme proposals. The Commission
, drafts the legislation that is passed on to the two legislative bodies, the EP and the Council.
It is in this sense that, in the majority of policy areas, such as the Single Market and Justice
and Home Affairs (JHA), the Commission performs an important agenda-setting role. Other
actors, such as the European Council (the heads of state and government), the EP, national
governments, and interest groups, may also take initiatives and advance policy proposals,
but it is generally up to the Commission to decide whether these ideas will be picked up and
subsequently passed on to the legislature in the form of a formal legislative proposal.
In line with the functions performed by national executives, the Commission also has an
important role to play in the implementation of EU policies. What this means is that the
Commission is responsible for the monitoring of implementation within the EU’s member
states. The Commission also presents policy documents to heads of state and government
at European Council meetings and at intergovernmental conferences (IGCs).
- The European Commission has a variety of functions to perform in the EU system,
including agenda-setting, the implementation of policy and the management of
programmes, and external relations.
- The Commission is involved at almost all stages of the European policy process.
- The Commission plays a more limited role in foreign, security, and defence policy.
10.3 Commission influence
● Although most intergovernmentalists consider the Commission to play an important
role in the EU polity, it is seen as an agent acting on behalf of member states, thus
without its own political will.
● Neo-functionalists and institutionalists argue that the Commission has an
independent impact on policy outcomes.
10.4 The President and the Commissioners
● Commissioners are nominated by national governments, but they are expected to
adopt a European perspective rather than a national one, and they seem to do so to
a considerable extent.
10.5 Commissioners’ cabinets
● Each Commissioner is supported by a personal staff, known as a cabinet.
● The cabinet, traditionally a ‘national enclave’ within the Commission, has become
significantly more multinational since 1999.
● As well as working on a Commissioner’s portfolio, a cabinet is expected to monitor
the work of other Commissioners so as to keep their Commissioner well-informed.
10.7 Committees, networks, and EU agencies
When it comes to the implementation of EU policies at the national level, the Commission
has to rely on member state administrations, since the Commission does not itself possess
agencies at this level. This may result in considerable variation in administrative practices
across countries. Such Commission-led and, increasingly, EU agency-led networks of
national agencies within most policy fields may contribute to more harmonised application of
EU law and other EU policies across member countries.
