Assemblée Nationale, Bundestag and the European Union

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anja Thomas

The growing importance of national parliaments is one feature of the stronger differentiation within the EU. Habermasian expectations of an increasing consensus on political norms seem to be invalidated by current events. In her book, in which she draws on her award-winning PhD thesis, Anja Thomas makes an important theoretical and empirical contribution to our understanding of the social causes of this development. Analysing EU affairs in the Assemblée nationale and Bundestag since 1979, she uncovers a paradox: increasing experience with the EU leads to national institutions growing in importance for MPs’ discourse on the role of parliaments in the EU. Revisiting social theory, in particular Max Weber’s ‘old’ institutionalism, the author presents a new model that explains this phenomenon. This book should be read by students of both parliaments in the EU and European integration processes. This work was distinguished with the Prix Pflimlin 2017.

Affilia ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 243-246 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen Lyons

Recent events in the United Kingdom have implications for the migration of women. Migrant women feature significantly in the staffing of the National Health Service and the social care sector, both currently under economic and political pressure. International labor mobility is also evident in the social work profession, though transnational social workers constitute only a very small proportion of the workforce. The recent vote to leave the European Union (EU) raises questions about the trend from recruitment of social workers from English-speaking countries to those from the EU. The role of social workers in relation to migrants is considered.


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 46
Author(s):  
Juan Carlos Martín ◽  
Concepción Román

During March and April 2020, the European Union (EU) was the center of the COVID-19 pandemic. Many national governments imposed severe lockdown policies to mitigate the health crisis, but the citizens’ support to these policies was unknown. The aim of this paper was to analyze empirically how citizens in the EU have reacted towards the measures taken by the national governments. To this end, a microeconometric model (ordered probit) that explains the citizens’ satisfaction by a number of attitudes and sociodemographic factors was estimated using a wide database formed by 21,804 European citizens in 21 EU countries who responded a survey between 23 April and 1 May 2020. Our results revealed that Spaniards were the least satisfied citizens in comparison with Danes, Irelanders, Greeks, and Croats, who were the most satisfied nationals. The years of education and the social class also played a determinant role. We also found that the most important determinant was the political support to the government, and that those who were more worried by the economy and the protection of individual rights were usually more critical of the measures than those who were more worried by the health consequences.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-22
Author(s):  
Katharina L. Meissner ◽  
Guri Rosén

Abstract As in nearly all European Union (EU) policy areas, scholars have turned to analysing the role of national parliaments, in addition to that of the European Parliament (EP), in trade politics. Yet, there is limited understanding of how the parliamentarians at the two levels interact. This article fills the gap by conceptualizing these interactions as a continuum ranging between cooperation, coexistence and competition. We use this continuum to explore multilevel party interactions in EU trade talks and show how cooperation compels politicization – national parliamentarians mainly interact with their European colleagues in salient matters. However, we argue that the impact of politicization on multilevel relations between parliamentarians in the EP and national parliaments is conditioned by party-level factors. Hence, we account for how and why politicization triggers multilevel party cooperation across parliaments in the EU through ideological orientation, government position and policy preferences and show how this takes place in the case of trade.


Author(s):  
Dieter Grimm

This chapter examines the role of national parliaments in the European Union. It first considers the general trend towards de-parliamentarization in the EU before describing the European situation by distinguishing three separate phases, in which the national parliaments have different functions: the transfer of sovereign rights from the Member States to the EU, the exercise of those transferred rights by the EU, and the implementation of European decisions by the Member States. The chapter then explores the question of whether the European Parliament is capable of compensating at the European level for the erosion of legislative authority at the national level. Finally, it discusses the proposal that the European Parliament be vested with the powers typically possessed by national parliaments as a solution to the EU’s legitimacy crisis and argues that full parliamentarization is not the answer.


2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sacha Garben

An assessment of the balance between ‘the market’ and ‘the social’ by reference to the areas of social policy, the internal market and economic governance – Imbalance resulting from a consitutional displacement of the legislative process (EU and national) and instead decision-making by the judiciary and the executive – Proposals to address the imbalance by reinforcing the role of the EU legislative process and limiting other forms of European integration.


2014 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
pp. 240-270 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mads Dagnis Jensen ◽  
Dorte Martinsen

Co-decisions between the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament are increasingly adopted as early agreements. Recent EU studies have pinpointed how this informal turn in EU governance has altered the existing balance of power between EU actors and within EU institutions. However, the implications of accelerated EU decision-making are expected to have repercussions beyond the EU system and in other institutions impinging on the role of national parliaments. This study examines the implications of an alteration of EU political time on national parliaments’ ability to scrutinize their executives in EU affairs. A mixed method approach has been applied. This strategy combines survey data on national parliaments’ scrutiny process and response to early agreements for 26 EU countries with a case study examination of national parliaments in Denmark, the UK and Germany. The burgeoning research agenda on EU timescapes is applied. This study finds that the clocks of most national parliaments are out of time with the EU decision-mode of early agreements, which severely hampers the national parliaments’ ability to scrutinize national governments.


2020 ◽  
pp. 327-339
Author(s):  
Marios Costa ◽  
Steve Peers

The creation of the internal market is one of the central purposes of the European Union (EU). This chapter examines the common themes that affect the four freedoms which constitute the internal market in the EU: the free movement of goods, of people and of capital; and the freedom to provide services. It analyses the relationship between these four freedoms and highlights the role of the Court of Justice (CJ) in defining the freedoms’ scope, particularly as regards the social aspect of these freedoms. The chapter also suggests that these freedoms have operated to limit Member States’ regulatory freedom in wide-ranging policy fields.


2019 ◽  
pp. 127-140
Author(s):  
Stijn Smismans

This chapter discusses the extent to which decision-making in the European Union can be considered democratic and legitimate. The chapter clarifies the concepts ‘democracy’ and ‘legitimacy’, and describes how, although initially the legitimacy of the European polity was not perceived as a problem, it became more problematic as the EU gained more competences. The European democratic deficit became an important issue of debate only during the 1990s after the Maastricht Treaty had transferred considerable powers to the EU. The main solution to the democratic deficit has been inspired by the parliamentary model of democracy and involves strengthening the European Parliament (EP), while also paying attention to the role of national parliaments and regional and local authorities. The chapter also shows how the governance debate at the start of the twenty-first century broadened the conceptual understanding of democracy in the EU by addressing the complexity of European governance (see also Chapter 7). By looking at different stages of policy-making and different modes of governance, while dealing with issues such as transparency and the role of civil society, the chapter discusses a wider range of issues associated with the democracy and legitimacy of the Union. It assesses the impact on EU democracy of the Constitutional Treaty and the Lisbon Treaty. The chapter concludes by warning that three main crises, namely the economic, migration, and security crises, have revived nationalist and populist movements exacerbating the challenges to the EU’s legitimacy.


2019 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 13
Author(s):  
Mehdi Galiere

<p>The paper discusses two different approaches to education and the way they are embedded in different discourses on education. The market-oriented approach is compared to the democratic approach. In the paper, the discourse of the European Union is considered as an example of hegemonic neoliberal discourse while the discourse produced by the Summerhill School and the Self-Managed High School of Paris is addressed as a  counterhegemonic discourse. Drawing on Critical Discourse Studies scholars such as Norman Fairclough, and critical pedagogic approaches such as Basil Bernstein’s and Paulo Freire’s, it will be shown that the difference in the ways these institutions represent the social world around them have a strong influence on their discourses on what education is for and should be like. For the European Union, education is a utilitarian means facilitating the adaptation of society to the economic system through the acquisition of predefined skills, while for the democratic approach it is rather a practice developing common decision-making and empowerment through an understanding of the world as a whole.</p>


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document