The Council of the European Union and the European Commission - Literature review Example

CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF LISBON TREATY by of the of the of the School 6 January, A Review of the Lisbon Treaty In the past, the European Union had made several agreements and treaties, which brought about improvement when they were all consolidated into a single one document. This earlier attempt of consolidation in the constitutional treaty, while enacting institutional reform failure led to the development of the Lisbon treaty. Many countries were already in the union, but were not satisfied with certain EU policies. The perception was that certain EU policies could undermine their economies and sensitive social issues, which could influence nations’ identities and free will decisions. The Lisbon Treaty came out as the amendment of the existing EU treaties to address concerns of the group of countries and people, who had earlier rejected the constitution treaty, for the option of the retaining their national sovereignty. It was signed on 13 December 2007, by the EU leaders in Lisbon after thorough work out at intergovernmental conference, previously held in July the same year (Archick and Mix, 2010, p. 3). Lisbon treaty worked towards clarifying the responsibilities and the way forward for the EU, and clearly informing the society of its main objective as an institution. Most of the proposed plans intended to be approved in the constitution treaty were reflected in the Lisbon treaty. According to Archick and Mix, “analysts assessed that over 90% of the substance of the constitutional treaty had been preserved in the Lisbon Treaty” (2010, p. 3). In the treaty, issues of EU legal personality, which extend to emphasize the concept of individuals from EU member states to be EU citizen, are addressed as stated in article 8 of provisions on democratic principles in Lisbon treaty. It also paved way for changes in voting system to embrace Qualified Majority Voting (QMV) in effective decision making. Two extra posts exist created in the treaty for the permanent president of the European council and foreign policy post. The structural change in the EU commission altered the decision process of the EU council, giving new power to the European parliament, extending ECJ powers into home affairs and in return, affecting areas in judicial, human rights, and foreign policies (civitas.org.uk, 2011). The Lisbon treaty could have been effective much earlier, but some EU member states delayed the ratification of the treaty till 2009, when all the member states gave their approval. Democratic Deficit The European Union institutional structure has been accused of lacking proper procedure in decision making, which affects all member states once an issue is approved or rejected. Some countries and regions have no influence in the decisions made, which only end up being under the control of powerful states. The Lisbon treaty has been termed as one strategy in an attempt to cure democratic deficit in the European Union. However, even if the treaty has been ratified, some countries have done so in conditions that for some areas of application, they have an option to rely on their individual consent as a nation. According to Klenanc, democratic deficit occurs when the competence shifts from a national level to a supranational level, preventing smooth integration of the EU (2011, p. 14). The council of European Union and European commission, European parliament, European Central Bank, and European court of justice has been exercising specific powers, enough to block one group from being considered in reaching at a crucial decision. As a result, the institutions can be termed to lack accountability, and for some, the legitimacy as individual member states. European Parliament before the Lisbon Treaty The European parliament has always been on evolution, seeking to strengthen its powers in several legislative areas. As many perceived it, it only began as a deliberative organ with few national members as delegates, but later recognized as the only European organ with directly elected members, after it started receiving power with the induction of cooperative procedure to act on legislative issues (Klenanc, 2011, p. 20). However, the influence and power it had, had been much less than those of some EU institutions, whose role would be expected to be in-line with the parliament decision. The EU parliamentary budget powers have been an extension since the core basis of the Treaty of Luxemburg in 1970, followed by the 1975 treaty to enhance their influence to connect with the Maastricht treaty of 1992, which introduced co-decision procedure in certain domains of legislature, while enhancing cooperation procedures to other EU institutions (europe.bg, 2008). The co-decision procedure has been expanding with every single treaty agreed upon, to a variety of legal basis. The European Parliament has been practicing the power of final approval to the commission membership over the last two decades; where it has been using the platform to co- decide on legislation on an equal level with EU council. The European parliament (EP) has been having the voice to control and influence key areas, but since the power was only limited to a specific domain and to a certain level, many think it suffered from democratic deficit. The fact remains that it has served efficiently in providing resolution after debates, in cases where consulted. However, the democratic deficit becomes visible when it receives information, which given the power, it could have influenced the decisions made. The parliament has been active in the assent procedure, especially in the accession process, consultation and co-decision, political influence by establishing its own initiatives and engaging in debates on key issues, budgetary control and powers in union’s annual budget in financial spending, setting up committees of inquiry as well as ensuring democratic accountability in monetary policy (Eub2, 2009). Basically, before the treaty, the influence of the parliament could only be accounted in few policy areas exercising partial control over the issues. Even if it needs more democracy, there will always be a limit to avoid creating a situation of dictatorship, while solving the other. European Parliament after Lisbon Treaty After the Lisbon treaty, the parliament received enhanced control to additional and existing legal issues, whose influence was only limited to consultation, if not being entirely informed. The treaty came in at a time when Europe was under strain, due to the zones financial crisis, which meant that as the parliament received more powers. It also had to cater for more responsibilities in the face on European challenges and welfare. It is evident that the treaty is another extension of co-decision procedure, making it the ordinary legislative procedure to apply to almost all fields of action, which now requires that the council of ministers and the directly elected European parliament engage in a qualified majority voting, so that a piece of legislation can be approved into law; this enhances transparency and democratic accountability in the EU policy making (Archick and Mix, 2010, p. 5). The crisis that the Euro zone has been experiencing cannot be addressed effectively in an individual state level, but with effective coordination through the EU parliament influence, accommodative measures, and efficient and coherent ways in addressing European issues could be easy. The co-decision policy can now be used by the EP to influence solutions in additional areas like agriculture, legal migration, energy policy, sports, fisheries and EU funds, shifting its responsibility from consultancy. Since the introduction of the Lisbon treaty, approximately all aspects of judicial cooperation, police and other policies in domains such as freedom, security, and judicial, became subject to the general legislative procedure (co-decision) (Lehmann, 2011, p. 3). Changes have also occurred to the external trade, even if the rule of co-decision is exempted from certain areas to avoid conflict with fundamental aspects of member states. All this effort is to ensure that the parliament exercises political control, and gets fully involved in legislative processes on behalf of the public, who elect them from different states. Most of the authority in drafting of the legislation has been stripped off from the commission, which held exclusive authority in decision making, enabling the council and EP to be co-legislators. Parliamentary budgetary powers: More roles in the setting budget have increased, which requires a new financial regulation for the parliament to fully exercise its role, and after the transition of power. Apart from the earlier tasks in budgetary issues, the parliament must approve the multiannual financial framework, and should ensure cooperation with the European Central Bank, which tables reports in the parliament for accountability. For the will of the democratic governance, the treaty abolished earlier distinction between compulsory and non compulsory expenditures, effectively resulting to the concept of co-decision in determining of all expenditures of the EU, between the parliament and the council (europa.eu, n.d.). Both institutions will be deciding on sensitive areas as mentioned earlier, but notably, the parliament gains control over agriculture budget. Under the treaty, the parliament will be satisfied with the single reading of annual budget, which is hoped to enhance transparency in setting priorities and allocation of resources. Appointment of the president of the commission: The EP has a new role to approve the selected commission president, by the heads of government in European Union, with regard to the European election. According to Mayoral, the EP would approve the proposed presidential candidate by the European council through qualified majority voting, where if the candidate fails to acquire the majority vote, the council should propose a new candidate for the EP to approve again (2011, p. 3). The High Representative of the Union for foreign affairs and security policy would also come into effect, after the parliament consent to secure future consistency of European actions. Generally, all these reforms have been brought forth to reinforce on the role of the European parliament, indirectly on national parliament and avail citizens initiatives so as to strengthen democratic legitimacy of the European Union. (Mayoral, 2011, p. 1). The Lisbon treaty was an amendment to enhance democracy in the European Union, after the European parliament appeared to receive attention in most of the unions’ institutions. However, as more roles come in for the European Parliament, some changes in duration of duty execution could occur due to workload, as more time would be needed to complete the tasks. With qualified majority voting and co-decision procedures, representation of citizens’ voice is implemented through the parliament votes. Bibliography A Brief History of the European Parliament. 2008. [online] Available at: [Accessed 6 January 2013]. A More Democratic and Transparent Europe [online] Available at: [Accessed 6 January 2013]. Archick, K. and Mix, D.E. 2010. The European Union’s Reform Process: The Lisbon Treaty [online] Available at: [Accessed 5 January 2013]. Eub2. 2009. Powers of the European Parliament – Briefing [online] Available at: [Accessed 5 January 2013]. Klenanc, M. 2011. Cure for democratic deficit in the EU: The Lisbon Treaty? With Comparative analysis of the French, German and Hungarian constitutional court’s “Lisbon Judgment.” Available at: [Accessed 5 January 2013]. Lehmann, W. 2011. The European Parliament: Powers. [online] Available at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/ftu/pdf/en/FTU_1.3.2.pdf [Accessed 5 January 2013]. Mayoral, J. 2011. Democratic improvements in the European Union under the Lisbon Treaty : Institutional changes regarding democratic government in the EU [online] Available at: [Accessed 6 January 2013]. The Treaty of Lisbon (2007). 2011. [online] Available at: [Accessed 5 January 2013]. Read More