From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The European Parliament (Europarl or EP) is
the
directly elected parliamentary body of the
European Union (EU). Together with the
Council of the European Union (the Council), it
forms the
bicameral
legislative branch of the
Union's institutions and has been described as one
of the most powerful legislatures in the world.[1]
The Parliament and Council form the highest
legislative body within the Union. However their
powers as such are limited to the competencies
conferred upon the
European Community by
member states. Hence the institution has little
control over policy areas held by the states and
within the other two of the
three pillars of the European Union. The
Parliament is composed of 785 MEPs (Member
of the European Parliament) who serve the second
largest democratic electorate in the world (after
India) and the largest trans-national democratic
electorate in the world (492 million).[2]
It has been directly elected every five years by
universal suffrage since 1979. Although the
European Parliament has legislative power that such
bodies as those above do not possess, it does not have
legislative initiative like most national
parliaments. While it is the "first institution" of
the European Union (mentioned first in the treaties,
having ceremonial precedence over all authority at
European level[3]),
the Council has greater powers over legislation than
the Parliament where
codecision procedure (equal rights of amendment
and rejection) does not apply. It has, however, had
control over the
EU budget since the 1970s and has a veto over the
appointment of the
European Commission.[4]
The European Parliament has two meeting places,
namely the
Immeuble Louise Weiss in
Strasbourg, France, which serves for plenary
sessions and is the official seat and the
Espace Léopold/Leopoldwijk complex in
Brussels, Belgium, the smaller of the two, which
serves for preparatory meetings and complementary,
non-plenary sessions. The cost of having all MEPs and
their staff moving several times a year from one place
to another has been of concern to some. The
Secretariat of the European Parliament, the
Parliament's administrative body, is based in
Luxembourg.[5][6]
The
President of the European Parliament (its
speaker) is currently
Hans-Gert Pöttering (EPP),
elected in January 2007. He presides over a
multi-party chamber, the two largest groups being the
European People's Party-European Democrats (EPP-ED)
and the
Party of European Socialists (PES). The last
Union-wide elections were the
2004 Parliamentary Elections, however
Romania and
Bulgaria joined in 2007 and are electing their
members this year (see
European Parliament election, 2007); the next
union-wide parliamentary elections are in 2009 (see
European Parliament election, 2009).
[edit]
History
- Further information:
History of the European Union
The Parliament, like the other institutions, was
not designed in its current form when it first met on
1952-09-10.
One of the oldest common institutions, it began as the
"Common Assembly" of the
European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC). It was a
consultative assembly of 78
parliamentarians drawn from the national
parliaments of member states (see
dual mandate), having no legislative powers.[7][8]
This change since its foundation was highlighted by
Professor David Farrell of the
University of Manchester;[1]
|
“ |
For much of its life, the European Parliament
could have been justly labelled a 'multi-lingual
talking shop'. But this is no longer the case: the
EP is now one of the most powerful legislatures in
the world both in terms of its legislative and
executive oversight powers. |
” |
Its development since its foundation is testament
to the evolution of the Union's structures without one
clear "master plan". Some such as Tom Reid of the
Washington Post said of the Union, "nobody would
have deliberately designed a government as complex and
as redundant as the EU".[9]
Even the Parliament's
two seats, which have switched several times, is a
result of various agreements or lack of agreements.[7]
[edit]
Consultative assembly
The body was not mentioned in the original
Schuman Declaration, it was instead proposed by
Jean Monnet on the second day of negotiations as
an institution which would counterbalance and monitor
the
executive while providing democratic legitimacy.[7]
The wording of the
ECSC Treaty demonstrated the leaders desire for
more than a normal consultative assembly by using the
term "representatives of the people" and allowed for
direct election. Its early importance was highlighted
when the Assembly was given the task of drawing up the
draft treaty to establish a
European Political Community. In this the "Ad
Hoc" Assembly was established with extra members
but after the failure of the proposed
European Defence Community their project was
dropped.[10]
Despite this the
European Economic Community and
Euratom were established in 1958 by the
Treaties of Rome. The Common Assembly was shared
by all three communities (which had separate
executives) and it renamed itself the "European
Parliamentary Assembly". The three communities
merged in 1967 and the body was renamed to the
current "European Parliament" in 1962.[7]
In 1970 the Parliament was granted power over areas
the
Community's budget, which were expanded to the
whole budget in 1975.[11]
Under the Rome Treaties, the Parliament should have
become elected. However the Council did not put in
place the necessary agreements and only did so after
the Parliament threatened to take the Council to the
European Court of Justice. However the Council did
not agree on the envisaged uniform voting system.[12]
[edit]
Elected Parliament
In 1979, its members were
directly elected for the
first time. This set it apart from similar
institutions such as those of the
Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe or
Pan-African Parliament which are appointed.[7][13][14]
After that first election, the parliament held its
first session on
11 July
1979, electing
Simone Veil MEP as its President. Veil was also
the first female President of the Parliament since it
was formed as the Common Assembly.[15]
The Parliament quickly made use of its legitimacy.
For example in 1984, inspired by its previous work on
the Political Community, it drafted the "draft Treaty
establishing the European Union" (also known as the 'Spinelli
Plan' after its rapporteur
Altiero Spinelli MEP). Although it was not
adopted, many ideas were later implemented by other
treaties.[16]
Further more the Parliament began holding votes on
proposed
Commission Presidents from the 1980s, before it
was given any formal right to veto.[17]
Since the election the membership of the European
Parliament has simply expanded whenever new nations
have joined (the membership was also adjusted upwards
in 1994 after
German reunification). Following this the
Treaty of Nice imposed a cap on the number of
members to be elected, 732.[7]
Like the other institutions, the Parliament's
seat was not yet fixed. The provisional
arrangements placed Parliament in
Strasbourg, while the Commission and Council had
their seats in Brussels. In 1985 the Parliament,
wishing to be closer to these institutions, built a
second chamber in Brussels and moved some of its work
there despite protests from some states. A final
agreement was eventually reached by the
European Council in 1992. It stated the Parliament
would remain in Strasbourg but must also hold part
sessions in Brussels. This two seat arrangement was
contested by Parliament but was later enshrined in the
Treaty of Amsterdam. To this day the
institution's locations are a source of
contention.[18]
[edit]
Recent history
The Parliament had been gaining more powers from
successive treaties, namely through the extension of
codecision procedure,[19]
and in 1999, the Parliament forced the resignation of
the
Santer Commission.[20]
The Parliament had refused to approve the
Community budget over allegations of fraud and mis-management
in the Commission. The two main parties took on a
government-opposition dynamic for the first time
during the crisis which ended in the Commission
resigning en masse, the first of any forced
resignation, in the face of an impending censure from
the Parliament.[21]
In 2004, following the largest trans-national
election in history, despite the
European Council choosing a President from the
largest political group (the EPP), the Parliament
again exerted pressure on the Commission. During the
Parliament's hearings of the proposed
Commissioners MEPs raised doubts about some
nominees with the
Civil liberties committee rejecting
Rocco Buttiglione from the post of
Commissioner for Justice, Freedom and Security
over his views on
homosexuality. That was the first time the
Parliament had ever voted against an incoming
Commissioner and despite Barroso's insistence upon
Buttiglione the Parliament forced Buttiglione to be
withdrawn. A number of other Commissioners also had to
be withdrawn or reassigned before Parliament allowed
the
Barroso Commission to take office.[22][23]
In addition to the extension of codecision, the
Parliament's democratic mandate has given it greater
control over legislation against the other
institutions. In voting on the
Bolkestein directive in 2006, the Parliament voted
by a large majority for over 400 amendments that
changed the fundamental principle of the law. The
Financial Times described it in the following
terms:[24]
|
“ |
The European parliament has suddenly come into its
own. It marks another shift in power between the
three central EU institutions. Last week's vote
suggests that the directly elected MEPs, in spite
of their multitude of ideological, national and
historical allegiances, have started to coalesce
as a serious and effective EU institution, just as
enlargement has greatly complicated negotiations
inside both the Council and Commission. |
” |
In 2007, for the first time,
Justice Commissioner
Franco Frattini included Parliament in talks on
the second
Schengen Information System even though MEPs only
needed to be consulted on parts of the package. After
that experiment, Frattini indicated he would like to
include Parliament in all justice and criminal
matters, informally pre-empting the new powers they
would gain in 2009 under the
Lisbon Treaty.[25]
[edit]
Powers and functions
The Parliament and Council are essentially two
chambers in the bicameral legislative branch of the
European Union, with legislative power being
officially distributed equally between both chambers.
However there are some differences from national
legislatures; for example, neither the Parliament nor
Council have the power of legislative initiative. In
Community matters, this is a power uniquely
reserved for the European Commission (the executive).
Meaning that while Parliament can amend and reject
legislation, and make a proposal for legislation,
it needs the Commission to draft a bill before
anything can become law.[26]
The Parliament also has a great deal of indirect
influence, through
non-binding resolutions and
committee hearings, as a "pan-European
soapbox" with the ear of
thousands of Brussels-based journalists. There is
also an indirect effect on
foreign policy; the Parliament must approve all
development grants, including those overseas. For
example, the support for
post-war Iraq reconstruction, or incentives for
the cessation of
Iranian nuclear development, must be supported by
the Parliament. Parliamentary support was also
required for the transatlantic passenger data-sharing
deal with the United States.[27]
[edit]
Legislative procedure
The Parliament's hemicycle (debating chamber)
in Strasbourg
With each new treaty, the powers of the Parliament
have expanded. Its powers have been primarily defined
through the
Union's legislative procedures. The method which
has slowly become the dominant procedure (about
three-quarters of policy areas) is the
Codecision procedure, where powers are essentially
equal between Parliament and Council.[28]
Codecision provides an equal footing between the two
bodies. Under the procedure, the Commission presents a
proposal to Parliament and the Council. They then send
amendments to the Council which can either adopt the
text with those amendments or send back a "common
position". That proposal may either be approved or
further amendments may be tabled by the Parliament. If
the Council does not approve these, then a
"Conciliation Committee" is formed. The Committee is
composed of the Council members plus an equal number
of MEPs who seek to agree a common position. Once a
position is agreed, it has to be approved by
Parliament, again by an
absolute majority.[29][28]
In addition to codecision, the Parliament's mandate as
the only directly democratic institution has given it
leeway to have greater control over legislation than
other institutions, for example over its changes to
the Bolkestein directive in 2006.[24]
Other procedures include:
Cooperation, meaning the Council can overrule the
Parliament if it is unanimous;
Consultation, which require just consultation of
the Parliament; and
Assent procedure, where the Parliament has a veto.
The Commission and Council, or just Commission, can
also act completely independently of the Parliament,
but the use of these procedures are very limited. The
procedure also depends upon which type of
institutional act is being used.[28]
The strongest act is a
regulation, an
act or
law which is directly applicable in its entirety.
Then there are
directives which bind members to certain goals
which they must achieve. They do this through their
own laws and hence have room to manoeuvre in deciding
upon them. A
decision is an instrument which is focused at a
particular person/group and is directly applicable.
Institutions may also issue
recommendations and opinions which are merely
non-binding, declarations.[30]
There is a further document which does not follow
normal procedures, this is a "written declaration"
which is similar to an
early day motion used in the
Westminster system. It is a document proposed by
up to five MEPs on a matter within the EU's activities
used to launch a debate on that subject. Having been
posted outside the entrance to the hemicycle, members
can sign the declaration and if a majority do so it is
forwarded to the President and announced to the
plenary before being forwarded to the other
institutions and formally noted in the minutes.[31]
[edit]
Budget
The legislative branch officially holds the Union's
budgetary authority, powers gained through the
Budgetary Treaties of the 1970s. The
EU's budget is divided into compulsory and
non-compulsory spending. Compulsory spending is that
resulting from
EU treaties (including
agriculture) and international agreements; the
rest is non-compulsory. While the Council has the last
word on compulsory spending, the Parliament has the
last word on non-compulsory spending.[32][33]
The institutions draw up budget estimates and the
Commission consolidates them into a draft budget. Both
the Council and the Parliament can amend the budget
with the Parliament adopting or rejecting the budget
at its second reading. The signature of the
Parliament's president is required before the budget
becomes law.[32][33]
The Parliament is also responsible for discharging
the implementation of previous budgets, on the basis
of the annual report of the
European Court of Auditors. It has refused to
approve the budget only twice, in 1984 and in 1998. On
the latter occasion it led to the resignation of the
Santer Commission.[34][12]
[edit]
Control of the executive
The
President of the European Commission is proposed
by the Council (in practice by the
European Council) and that proposal has to be
approved by the Parliament (by a simple majority),
essentially giving the Parliament a veto, but not a
right to propose, the head of the executive. Following
the approval of the Commission President, the members
of the Commission are proposed by the President in
accord with the member-states. Each Commissioner comes
before a relevant parliamentary committee hearing
covering the proposed portfolio. They are then, as a
body, approved or rejected by the Parliament.[35][17]
In practice, the Parliament has never voted against a
President or his Commission, but it did seem likely
when the Barroso Commission was put forward. The
resulting pressure forced the proposal to be withdrawn
and changed to be more acceptable to parliament.[22]
That pressure was seen as an important sign by some of
the evolving nature of the Parliament and its ability
to make the Commission accountable, rather than being
a rubber stamp for candidates. Furthermore, in voting
on the Commission, MEPs also voted along party lines,
rather than national lines, despite frequent pressure
from national governments on their MEPs. This cohesion
and willingness to use the Parliament's power ensured
greater attention from national leaders, other
institutions and the public—who previously gave the
lowest ever turnout for the Parliament's elections.[36]
The Parliament also has the power to
censure the Commission if they have a two-thirds
majority which will force the resignation of the
entire Commission from office. As with approval, this
power has never been used but it was threatened to the
Santer Commission, who subsequently
resigned of their own accord. There are a few
other controls, such as: the requirement of Commission
to submit reports to the Parliament and answer
questions from MEPs; the requirement of the
President-in-office of the
European Council to present their programme at the
start of their
presidency; the right of MEPs to make proposals
for legislation and policy to the Commission and
Council; and the right to question members of those
institutions (e.g. "Commission
Question Time" every Tuesday).[35][17]
[edit]
Supervisory powers
The Parliament also has other powers of general
supervision, mainly granted by the
Maastricht Treaty.[37]
The Parliament has the power to set up a Committee of
Inquiry, for example over mad cow disease or CIA
detention flights—the former led to the creation of
the
European veterinary agency. The Parliament can
call other institutions to answer questions and if
necessary to take them to
court if they break EU law or treaties.[38]
Further more it has powers over the appointment of the
members of the
Court of Auditors[39]
and the president and executive board of the
European Central Bank. The
ECB president is also obliged to present an annual
report to the parliament.[38]
The
European Ombudsman is elected by the Parliament,
who deals with public complaints against all
institutions.[38]
Petitions can also be brought forward by any
EU citizen on a matter within the EU's sphere of
activities. The
Committee on Petitions hears cases, some 1500 each
year, sometimes presented by the citizen themselves at
the Parliament. While the Parliament attempts to
resolve the issue as a mediator they do resort to
legal proceedings if it is necessary to resolve the
citizens dispute.[40]
[edit]
Members
-
National apportionment of MEP seats
|
|
The
parliamentarians are known in
English as Members of the European Parliament (MEPs).
They are elected every 5 years by
universal adult suffrage and sit according to
political allegiance, about a third are women. Prior
to 1979 they were appointed by their national
parliaments.[41][42]
As
states are allocated seats according to
population, the total number of MEPs should be 732;
however, since
1 January
2007 there are 785 MEPs. This is due to the
accession of Romania and Bulgaria, as the allocation
of seats does not take into account members that join
mid-term. Under the existing rules the number of
members would be reduced again to 732 following the
2009 election[41][43]
however the rules are due to be changed under the
Lisbon Treaty. Instead, there would be 751
members, however the President would no longer be
counted as a voting member once in office so in
practice there would be 750 members.[44]
In addition, the maximum number of seats allocated to
a state would be lowered to ninety-six, from the
current ninety-nine, and the minimum number of seats
would be raised to six, from the current five. These
seats are distributed according to "degressive
proportionality", meaning that the larger the state,
the more citizens that are represented per MEP. It is
intended that the new system, including revising the
seating well in advance of elections, can avoid
political
horse trading when the numbers have to be revised.[45]
At present, members receive the same salary as
members of their national parliament. However as of
2009 a new members statue will come into force which
gives all members an equal pay of 7000
euro each, subject to a community
tax and can also be taxed nationally. MEPs would
retire at 63 and receive the whole of their
pension from the Parliament. Travelling expenses
would also be given based on actual cost rather than a
flat rate as is the case now.[46]
In addition to their pay, members are granted a number
of privileges and
immunities. To ensure their free movement to and
from the Parliament they are accorded by their own
states, the facilities accorded to senior
officials travelling abroad and by other state
governments the facilities of visiting
foreign representatives. When in their own state
they have all the immunities accorded to national
parliamentarians, and in other states they have
immunity from
detention and
legal proceedings. However immunity cannot be
claimed when a member is found committing a criminal
offence and the Parliament also has the right to strip
a member of their immunity.[47]
[edit]
Political groups
-
MEPs in Parliament are organised into seven
different
parliamentary groups, including thirty-four
non-attached members known as
non-inscrits. The two largest groups are the
European People's Party-European Democrats (EPP-ED)
and the
Party of European Socialists (PES). These two
groups have dominated the Parliament for much of its
life, continuously holding between 50 and 70 percent
of the seats together. No single group has ever held a
majority in Parliament.[48]
Groups are often based around a single
European political party such as the
socialist group. However they can, like the
liberal group, include more than one European
party as well as national parties and independents.[49]
For a group to be recognised, it needs 20 MEPs from
six different countries. Once recognised groups
receive financial subsidies from the parliament and
guaranteed seats on Committees, creating an incentive
for the formation of groups. However some controversy
occurred with the establishment of the
Identity, Tradition, Sovereignty (ITS) due to its
ideology; the members of the group are far-right, so
there were concerns about public funds going towards
such a group.[50]
There were attempts to change the rules to block the
formation of ITS, however that never came to fruition.
They were, however, blocked from gaining leading
positions on committees—a right that is meant to be
afforded to all parties.[51]
When this group engaged in infighting, causing the
withdrawal of some members, its size fell below the
recognisable limit causing its collapse.[52]
[edit]
Grand coalition
Given that the Parliament does not form the
government in the traditional sense of a Parliamentary
system, its politics have developed along more
consensual lines rather than majority rule of
competing parties and coalitions. Indeed for much of
its life it has been dominated by a
grand coalition of the People's Party and
Socialist Party. The two major parties tend to
co-operate to find a compromise between their two
groups leading to proposals endorsed by huge
majorities.[53]
However there have been some occasions where real
party politics have emerged, for example over the
resignation of the Santer Commission;[21]
When the initial allegations against the Commission
emerged, they were directed primarily against
Édith Cresson and
Manuel Marín, both socialist members. When the
parliament was considering refusing to discharge the
Community budget,
President
Jacques Santer stated that a no vote would be
tantamount to a
vote of no confidence. PES supported the
Commission and saw the issue as an attempt by the EPP
to discredit their party ahead of the 1999 elections.
PES leader,
Pauline Green MEP, attempted a vote of confidence
and the EPP put forward counter motions. During this
period the two parties took on similar roles to a
government-opposition
dynamic, with PES supporting the executive and EPP
renouncing its previous coalition support and voting
it down.[21]
Politicisation such as this has been increasing, in
2007 Simon Hix of the
London School of Economics noted that;[1]
|
“ |
Our work also shows that politics in the European
Parliament is becoming increasingly based around
party and ideology. Voting is increasingly split
along left-right lines, and the cohesion of the
party groups has risen dramatically, particularly
in the fourth and fifth parliaments. So there are
likely to be policy implications here too. |
” |
During the fifth term, 1999 to 2004, there was a
break in the grand coalition resulting in in a
centre-right coalition between the Liberal and
People's parties.[54]
This was reflected in the Presidency of the Parliament
with the terms being shared between the EPP and the
ELDR, rather than the EPP and PES.[55]
In the following term the liberal group grew to hold
88 seats, the largest number of seats held by any
third party in Parliament.[56]
[edit]
Elections
-
Election results by European party, 1979 to
2004
Elections have taken place, directly in every
member-state, every five years since 1979. As of 2004
there have been six. Occasionally, when a member joins
mid-term, a
by-election will be held to elect their members.
This has happened four times, the last time was when
Romania and Bulgaria joined in 2007 (see below).
Elections take place across several days according to
local custom and, aside from having to be
proportional, the
electoral system is chosen by the member-state.
This includes allocation of
sub-national constituencies; while most members
have a national list, some, like the UK and France,
divide their allocation between regions. Seats are
allocated to member-states according to their
population, with no state having more than 99, but no
fewer than 5, in order to maintain proportionality.[57]
The most recent Union-wide elections to the
European Parliament were the
European elections of 2004, held in June of that
year. They were the largest simultaneous transnational
elections ever held anywhere in the world, since
nearly 400 million citizens were eligible to vote. The
proportion of MEPs elected in 2004 who were female was
30.2%; in 1979 it was just 16.5%. The
next Union-wide elections will be in 2009. There
are a number of proposals to "dress up" the next
elections to attract greater public attention to them.
These include most notably the idea of linking them
more closely to the Commission presidency. This would
be by having political parties running with candidates
for the job, so the largest party would essentially be
forming the government, as in the
parliamentary system of government. It is hoped
such changes would add legitimacy and counter the
falling turnout[58][59][60]
which has dropped consistently every year since the
first election, and from 1999 it has been below 50%.[61]
In 2007 both
Bulgaria and Romania are electing their MEPs in
by-elections, having joined at the beginning of 2007.
The Bulgarian election saw the lowest ever turnout for
a European election, just 28.6%.[62]
The Romanian elections were delayed due to internal
political issues[63]
but will be held on November 25, 2007.[64]
[edit]
Proceedings
The hemicycle in Brussels
Each year the activities of the Parliament cycle
between committee weeks where reports are discussed in
committees and interparliamentary delegations meet,
political group weeks for members to discuss work
within their political groups and session weeks where
members spend 3½ days in
Strasbourg for part-sessions. In addition six
2-day part-sessions are organised in
Brussels throughout the year. Four weeks are
allocated as constituency week to allow members to do
exclusively constituency work. Finally there are no
meetings planned during the summer weeks.[65]
The Parliament has the power to meet without being
convened by another authority. Its meetings are partly
controlled by the treaties but are otherwise up to
Parliament according to its own "Rules of Procedure"
(the regulations governing the parliament).[66]
During sessions, members may speak after being
called on by the President, with a time limit of one
minute. Members of the Council or Commission may also
attend and speak in debates.[67][68]
Partly due to the need for translation, and the
politics of consensus in the chamber, debates tend to
be calmer and more polite than, say, the
Westminster system.[69]
Voting is conducted primarily by a show of hands, that
may be checked on request by electronic voting.[70]
Votes of MEPs are not recorded in either case however,
that only occurs when there is a roll-call ballot.
That is when each MEP in turn is called by name, in
alphabetical order, to state their support or
opposition. This is a historical system used when the
Parliament was much smaller in membership and is
rarely used now. Votes can also be a completely secret
ballot (for example when the President is elected).[71]
All recorded votes, along with minutes and
legislation, are recorded in the
Official Journal of the European Union and can be
accessed online.[72]
Members are arranged in a
hemicycle according to their political groups who
are ordered mainly by left to right, but some smaller
groups are placed towards the outer ring of the
Parliament. All desks are equipped with microphones,
headphones for translation and electronic voting
equipment. The leaders of the groups sit on the front
benches at the centre, and in the very centre is a
podium for guest speakers. The remaining half of the
circular chamber is primarily composed of the raised
area where the President and staff sit. Further
benches are provided between the sides of this area
and the MEPs, these are taken up by the Council on the
far left and the Commission on the far right. Both the
Brussels and Strasbourg hemicycle roughly follow this
layout with only minor differences.[73][74]
With access to the chamber limited, entrance is
controlled by ushers who aid MEPs in the chamber (for
example in delivering documents). The ushers also act
as a form of police in enforcing the President, for
example in ejecting an MEP who is disrupting the
session (although this is rare). The first head of
protocol in the Parliament was French, so many of the
duties in the Parliament are based on the French model
first developed following the
French Revolution. The 180 ushers are highly
visible in the Parliament, dressed in black
tails and wearing a silver chain, and are
recruited in the same manner as the
European civil service. The President is allocated
a personal usher.[75]
[edit]
President and organisation
-
.jpg/180px-Hans-Gert_Poettering_(2007).jpg)
President Hans-Gert Pöttering
The President, currently
Hans-Gert Pöttering MEP of the EPP, is essentially
the
speaker of the Parliament. He or she presides over
the plenary when it is in session and the President's
signature is required for all acts adopted by
co-decision, including the EU budget. The President is
also responsible for representing the Parliament
externally, including in legal matters, and for the
application of the rules of procedure. He or she is
elected for two-and-a-half-year terms, meaning two
elections per parliamentary term.[76][77]
In most countries, the protocol of the
head of state comes before all others, however in
the EU the Parliament is listed as the first
institution, and hence the protocol of its President
comes before any other European, or national,
protocol. The gifts given to numerous visiting
dignitaries depends upon the President. President
Josep Borrell MEP of Spain gave his counterparts a
crystal cup created by an artist from Barcelona which
had engraved upon it parts of the
Charter of Fundamental Rights among other things.[78]
A number of notable figures have been President of
the Parliament and its predecessors. The first
President was
Paul-Henri Spaak MEP, one of the
founding fathers of the Union. Other founding
fathers include
Alcide de Gasperi MEP and
Robert Schuman MEP. The two female Presidents were
Simone Veil MEP in 1979 (first President of the
elected Parliament) and
Nicole Fontaine MEP in 1999, both Frenchwomen.[79]
During the election of a President, the plenary is
presided over by the oldest member of the Parliament.
In 2004 and 2007 this was
Giovanni Berlinguer MEP. While the oldest member
is in the chair, they hold all the powers of the
President, but the only business that may be addressed
is the election of the President.[80]
Below the President, there are 14
Vice-Presidents who chair debates when the
President is not in the chamber. There are a number of
other bodies and posts responsible for the running of
parliament besides these speakers. The two main bodies
are the
Bureau, which is responsible for budgetary and
administration issues, and the
Conference of Presidents which is a governing body
composed of the presidents of each of the parliament's
political groups. Looking after the financial and
administrative interests of members are six
Quaestors.
[edit]
Committees and delegations
-
A Committee room in the Parliament
The Parliament has 20
Standing Committees consisting of 28 to 86 MEPs
each (reflecting the political makeup of the whole
Parliament) including a
chair, a bureau and secretariat. They meet twice a
month in public to draw up, amend to adopt legislative
proposals and reports to be presented to the plenary.[81]
The
rapporteurs for a committee are supposed to
present the view of the committee, although notably
this has not always been the case. In the events
leading to the resignation of the Santer Commission,
the rapporteur went against the
Budgetary Control Committee's narrow vote to
discharge the budget, and urged the Parliament to
reject it.[21]
Committees can also set up sub-committees (e.g. the
Subcommittee on Human Rights) and temporary
committees to deal with a specific topic (e.g. on
extraordinary rendition). The chairs of the
Committees co-ordinate their work through the "Conference
of Committee Chairmen".[81]
When co-decision was introduced it increased the
Parliaments powers in a number of areas, but most
notably those covered by the
Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food
Safety. Previously this committee was considered
by MEPs as a "Cinderella
committee", however as it gained a new importance, it
became more professional and rigorous attracting more
and more attention to its work.[12]
Delegations of the Parliament are formed in a
similar manner and are responsible for relations with
Parliaments outside the EU. There are 34 delegations
made up of around 15 MEPs, chairpersons of the
delegations also cooperate in a conference like the
committee chairs do. They include "Interparliamentary
delegations" (maintain relations with Parliament
outside the EU), "joint parliamentary committees"
(maintaining relations with parliaments of states
which are candidates or associates of the EU), the
delegation to the
ACP EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly and the
delegation to the
Euro-Mediterranean Parliamentary Assembly.[81]
MEPs also participate in other international
activities such as the
Euro-Latin American Parliamentary Assembly, the
Transatlantic Legislators' Dialogue and through
election observation in third countries.[82]
[edit]
Translation and interpreting
Interpreting booths in the hemicycle
simultaneously translate debates between 23
languages
Speakers in the European Parliament are entitled to
speak in any of the
EU's 23 official languages, ranging from
English and
French to
Maltese and
Irish. Simultaneous interpreting is offered in all
plenary sessions, and all final texts of legislation
are translated. With twenty-three languages, the
European Parliament is the most multilingual
parliament in the world[83]
and the biggest employer of interpreters in the world
(employing 350 full time and 400 free-lancers when
there is higher demand).[84]
Citizens may also address the Parliament in
Basque,
Catalan/Valencian and
Galician.[85]
Usually a language is translated from a foreign
tongue into a translator's native tongue. Due to the
large number of languages, some being minor ones,
since 1995 translation is sometimes done the opposite
way, out of a translator's native tongue (the "retour"
system). In addition, a speech in a minor language may
be translated via a third language for lack of
interpreters ("relay" interpreting) —for example, when
translating
Estonian into
Maltese.[86]
Interpreters need to be proficient in two other Union
languages besides their native language. Due to the
complexity of the issues, translation is not word for
word. Instead, interpreters have to convey the
political meaning of a speech, regardless of their own
views. This requires detailed understanding of the
politics and terms of the Parliament, involving a
great deal of preparation beforehand (e.g. reading the
documents in question). Difficulty can often arise
when MEPs use colourful language, jokes and word play
or speak too fast.[87][88]
While some see speaking their native language as an
important part of their identity, and can speak more
fluently in debates, the translation and the cost of
it has been criticised by some. A 2006 report by
Alexander Stubb MEP highlighted that by only using
English,
French and
German costs could be reduced from
€118,000 per day (for 21 languages then—Romanian
and
Bulgarian having not yet been included) to €8,900
per day.[89]
Although many see the ideal single language as being
English due to its widespread usage, there is a
campaign to make French the single tongue for all
legal texts, due to its more precise legal language,
overcoming ambiguity between translations of
legislation. Although this would not directly affect
translation in the plenary, it would shift the balance
towards French when discussing draft legislation.[90]
-
The cost of two seats has been a cause of
controversy (the Strasbourg building)
The Parliament is based in three different cities
with numerous buildings. A protocol attached to the
Treaty of Amsterdam requires that 12 plenary
sessions be held in
Strasbourg (none in August but two in September),
which is the Parliament's official seat, while extra
part sessions as well as committee meetings are held
in
Brussels.
Luxembourg hosts the
Secretariat of the European Parliament.[5]
The Strasbourg seat is seen as a symbol of
reconciliation between France and Germany (Strasbourg
having been fought over by the two countries in the
past). However it is questioned over the cost of
having two seats for the parliament. While Strasbourg
is the official seat, and sits alongside the
Council of Europe (with which the "mutual
cooperation" is being continuously "fostered"[91]),
Brussels is home to nearly all other major EU
institutions, with the majority of Parliament's
work already being carried out there. Therefore
despite Strasbourg being the main seat, it is the one
most questioned, although some do believe Strasbourg
should be the single capital.[92]
Critics have described the two-seat arrangement as
a "travelling circus",[93]
and there is a strong movement to establish Brussels
as the sole seat. This is due to the fact that the
other political institutions (the Commission, Council
and European Council) are located there, and hence
Brussels is treated as the 'capital'
of the EU. This movement has received strong backing
through numerous figures, including the Commission
First-Vice President who stated that "something that
was once a very positive symbol of the EU reuniting
France and Germany has now become a negative symbol—of
wasting money, bureaucracy and the insanity of the
Brussels institutions".[6]
The
Green party has also noted the environmental cost
in a study led by
Jean Lambert MEP and
Caroline Lucas MEP; in addition to the extra 200
million euro spent on the extra seat, there are over
20,268 tonnes of additional carbon dioxide,
undermining any environmental stance of the
institution and the Union.[93]
The campaign is further backed by a million-strong
online petition started by
Cecilia Malmström MEP.[94]
In 2006 there were allegations of irregularity in the
charges made by the city of Strasbourg on buildings
the Parliament rented which harmed the city's image
further.[95]
A poll of MEPs also found 89% of the respondents (39%)
wanting a single seat, and 81% preferring Brussels.[96]
Another, more academic, survey found 68% support.[1]
However the Parliament, the only assembly in the world
with more than one seat, does not have the right to
choose its own meeting place, this is left up to the
Council with the possibility of a change being vetoed
by one state.[97]
Notably France, which has not been affected by any
campaigning, with
French President
Nicolas Sarkozy stating that its seat is
"non-negotiable".[98]
[edit]
Future of the Parliament
The
Lisbon Treaty, to be signed on
2007-12-13,
largely retains the reforms outlined in the rejected
Constitutional Treaty.[99]
Overall, powers would be increased. For example,
nearly all policy areas would fall under co-decision
procedure (now called the "ordinary legislative
procedure") meaning that the Parliament would have
practically equal powers to those of the Council (now
officially the Council of Ministers). In the remaining
minority of areas in which the powers remain unequal,
the Council must consult the Parliament and/or seek
its approval on the legislation. The Parliament also
gains greater powers over the entirety of the EU
budget, not just non-compulsory expenditure, through
the ordinary legislative procedure. In terms of the
composition of the Parliament there would be little
change, however the minimum number of seats would be
increased from 5 to 6 and the maximum number would be
reduced from 99 to 96. There would also be basic rules
on the distribution of seats in the Parliament, rather
than them being negotiated at each enlargement.
Decisions about the composition of the Parliament are
currently made by the Council, this would remain so
but the decision would be made based on a proposal
from the Parliament itself.[100][101]
The European Council would be bound to take into
account the latest elections when proposing the
Commission President, something that they willingly
did after the 2004 election. As currently, the
Parliament's consent is needed for the President to
take office, however the Lisbon Treaty now uses the
word "elect" rather than "approve" to refer to this
procedure. This is an area however in which the
Council of Ministers plays no part.[100][101]
It will remain to be seen whether calling it an
election will spur political groups to use their power
and mandate to force their own candidates upon the
European Council in the same way as, for example, the
British House of Commons does in its relation to
their Queen. There have been suggestions that the
parliament's political groups may propose their own
candidates before the 2009 election.[59][102]
The closest a party has come to doing this is prior to
the 2004 elections when the People's Party mentioned
four or five people they'd like to be President. The
fractious nature of the European-level parties has in
part been why a coherent candidate has not been
proposed. However there are plans to strengthen the
political parties before the elections.[103][60]
In 2007,
Franco Frattini indicated he would like to act as
though the treaty was already in force, in respects to
the Parliament's powers over justice and criminal
matters, in order to inject more democracy and ensure
the Parliament had over sight on forthcoming
legislation Frattini did not wish to delay until 2009.[25]
In addition to the institutional reforms brought by
the Lisbon Treaty, in 2007 the President set up the
Special working group on parliamentary reform to
improve the efficiency and image of the Parliament.
Some ideas include livening up the plenary sessions
and a
State of the Union debate.[104]
One of the group's key reform ideas, extra debates on
topical issues, was rejected by MEPs[105]
causing
liberal leader
Graham Watson MEP to withdrew from reform group.[106]
However MEPs did back a proposals for greater use of
the
European symbols, following their rejection in the
Lisbon Treaty. It was suggested the Parliament take
the
avant-garde in using the symbols as it had
done in adopting the flag in 1983, which was three
years before the Communities as a whole.[107][108]
An interim report was presented in September 2007 and
proposed cutting down time allocated for guest
speakers and non-legislative documents. In 2006, 92
"own initiative" reports (commenting rather than
legislating) were tables and 22% of debating time was
spent debating such reports, while only 18% was spent
on legislative bills. The group is due to produce a
final report in 2008, and put the recommendations into
practice by the 2009 elections[104]
however Watson has stated that he doubts the
left-right coalition in Parliament can pass the
proposals due to opposition from more conservative
members. Other members such as the co-chair of
ID,
Jens-Peter Bonde MEP, had wanted more radical
proposals. Bonde did however vote for the report,
stating that "it is psychologically important to show
that we want to become a more political parliament."[106]
[edit]
See also
[edit]
References
- ^
a
b
c
d
Professor Farrell: "The EP is now one of the most
powerful legislatures in the world".
European Parliament (2007-06-18).
Retrieved on
2007-07-05.
- ^
Parliament - an overview. Welcome.
European Parliament. Retrieved on
2007-06-12.
- ^
Parliament's Protocol Service - mission
impossible?.
European Parliament. Retrieved on
2007-06-21.
- ^
Parliament's powers and procedures.
European Parliament. Retrieved on
2007-06-12.
- ^
a
b
Consolidated versions of the treaty on European
Union and of the treaty establishing the European
Community (PDF).
Eur-lex. Retrieved on
2007-06-12.
- ^
a
b
Wallström, Margot (2006-05-24).
My blog: Denmark, Latvia, Strasbourg.
European Commission. Retrieved on
2007-06-12.
- ^
a
b
c
d
e
f
European Parliament.
European NAvigator. Retrieved on
2007-06-12.
- ^
EPP-ED Chronology—1951–1960.
European People's Party. Retrieved on
2007-07-05.
- ^
Reid, Tom (2004). The United States of Europe.
London:
Penguin Books, 272.
ISBN 0-141-02317-1.
-
^
Composition of the European Parliament.
European NAvigator. Retrieved on
2007-06-12.
-
^
Power of the purse of the European Parliament.
European NAvigator. Retrieved on
2007-10-11.
- ^
a
b
c
Hoskyns, Catherine; Michael Newman (2000).
Democratizing the European Union: Issues for the
twenty-first Century (Perspectives on
Democratization.
Manchester University Press.
ISBN 978-0719056666.
- ^
Framework.
Council of Europe. Retrieved on
2007-07-05.
- ^
Overview of the Pan-African Parliament.
Pan-African Parliament. Retrieved on
2007-07-05.
- ^
The history of the European Parliament.
European Parliament. Retrieved on
2007-07-05.
-
^
The European Parliament's proposals.
European NAvigator. Retrieved on
2007-10-11.
- ^
a
b
c European Parliament
Website.
Oversight over the Commission and Council.
Retrieved on
2007-07-01.
-
^
The seats of the institutions of the European
Union.
European NAvigator. Retrieved on
2007-07-18.
-
^
Power to legislate of the European Parliament.
European NAvigator. Retrieved on
2007-10-11.
- ^
Topan, Angelina (2002-09-30).
The resignation of the Santer-Commission: the
impact of 'trust' and 'reputation' (PDF).
European Integration Online Papers. Retrieved on
2007-06-12.
- ^
a
b
c
d
Ringer, Nils F. (February 2003).
The Santer Commission Resignation Crisis
(PDF).
University of Pittsburgh. Retrieved on
2007-10-07.
- ^
a
b
Bowley, Graham (2004-10-18).
Buttiglione affair highlights evolving role of
Parliament : Questions arise on democracy at the
EU.
International Herald Tribune. Retrieved on
2007-07-01.
- ^
Tobais, Troll (2004-11-02).
“We have to democratise procedures”. Café
Babel. Retrieved on
2007-06-12.
- ^
a
b
How the European parliament got serious.
Financial Times (2006-02-23).
Retrieved on
2007-06-12.
- ^
a
b
Beunderman, Mark (2007-11-09).
Frattini seeks to apply new EU treaty rules before
2009. EU Observer. Retrieved on
2007-11-09.
- ^
Fact Sheets 1.3.8 The Commission.
European Parliament. Retrieved on
2007-06-14.
-
^
Schnabel, Rockwell; Francis Rocca (2005). The
Next Superpower?: the Rise of Europe and its
Challenge to the United States. Oxford:
Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 111.
ISBN 978-0742545489.
- ^
a
b
c
Parliament's powers and procedures.
European Parliament. Retrieved on
2007-06-12.
-
^
Decision-making in the European Union.
Europa (web portal). Retrieved on
2007-09-18.
- ^
Community legal instruments.
Europa (web portal). Retrieved on
2007-09-18.
-
^
Written declarations.
European Parliament. Retrieved on
2007-11-01.
- ^
a
b
Budgetary power.
European Parliament. Retrieved on
2007-06-12.
- ^
a
b
How is the budget decided?.
European Parliament. Retrieved on
2007-06-12.
-
^
Budgetary control: 1996 discharge raises issue of
confidence in the Commission.
Europa (web portal) (1999). Retrieved on
2007-10-15.
- ^
a
b
Oversight over the Commission and Council.
European Parliament. Retrieved on
2007-06-12.
- ^
Murray, Alasdair (2004).
Three cheers for EU democracy.
Centre for European Reform. Retrieved on
2007-07-07.
- ^
Maastricht Treaty 15 years on: birth of the
"European Union".
European Parliament (2007-02-07).
Retrieved on
2007-07-06.
- ^
a
b
c
Supervisory power.
European Parliament. Retrieved on
2007-06-12.
- ^
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament.
Rule 101: Appointment of the Members of the Court
of Auditors.
European Parliament. Retrieved on
2007-07-07.
-
^
Rickards, Mark (2007-11-03).
MEPs get taste of people power.
BBC News. Retrieved on
2007-11-03.
- ^
a
b
Composition of the European Parliament.
European NAvigator. Retrieved on
2007-06-12.
-
^
Members.
European Parliament. Retrieved on
2007-10-27.
- ^
Parliament all set for enlargement.
Europa (web portal). Retrieved on
2007-06-14.
-
^
Goldirova, Renata (2007-10-19).
EU agrees new 'Lisbon Treaty'. EU Observer.
Retrieved on
2007-11-19.
- ^
Distribution of EP seats: Constitutional Affairs
Committee approvals proposal.
Europa (web portal) (2007-10-02).
Retrieved on
2007-10-07.
-
^
Statue for Members of the European Parliament.
Europa (web portal). Retrieved on
2007-10-27.
-
^
7. Protocol on the privileges and immunities of
the European Union (PDF).
Eur-Lex (2004-12-16).
Retrieved on
2007-10-27.
-
^ Kreppel,
Amie (2002).
The European Parliament and Supranational Party
System (PDF).
Cambridge University Press. Retrieved on
2007-06-12.
- ^
Party Politics in the EU (PDF). civitas.org.uk.
Retrieved on
2007-06-12.
-
^
Brunwasser, Matthew (2007-01-14).
Bulgaria and Romania bolster far right profile in
EU Parliament.
International Herald Tribune. Retrieved on
2007-07-07.
- ^
Far-Right Wing Group Sidelined in European
Parliament.
Deutsche Welle (2007-02-02).
Retrieved on
2007-07-07.
- ^
Mahony, Honor (2007-11-14).
MEPs welcome fall of far-right group. EU
Observer. Retrieved on
2007-11-14.
- ^
Settembri, Pierpaolo (2007-02-02).
Is the European Parliament competitive or
consensual ... "and why bother"? (PDF).
Federal Trust. Retrieved on
2007-10-07.
-
^
Interview: Graham Watson, leader of group of
Liberal Democrat MEPs. Euractiv (2004-06-15).
Retrieved on
2007-11-01.
- ^
European Parliament elects new president.
BBC News (1999-07-20).
Retrieved on
2007-11-01.
-
^
The Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe
is born. Graham Watson MEP website (2004-07-14).
Retrieved on
2007-10-07.
- ^
The European Parliament: electoral procedures.
European Parliament. Retrieved on
2007-06-12.
- ^
Spongenberg, Helena (2007-02-26).
EU wants to dress up 2009 elections on TV. EU
Observer. Retrieved on
2007-07-08.
- ^
a
b
Palmer, John (2007-01-10).
Size shouldn't matter.
The Guardian. Retrieved on
2007-06-28.
- ^
a
b
Mahony, Honor (2007-06-27).
European politics to get more political. EU
Observer. Retrieved on
2007-06-28.
- ^
Bulgaria votes for European Parliament legislators.
International Herald Tribune (2007-05-20).
Retrieved on
2007-05-20.
- ^
New GERB party narrowly wins Bulgaria's first
European Parliament election.
Southeast European Times (2007-05-21).
Retrieved on
2007-07-08.
- ^
Romanian PM postpones European Parliament
elections. Euractiv (2007-03-13).
Retrieved on
2007-07-08.
- ^
Parliament's Romanian and Bulgarian Observers
speak out.
European Parliament (2006-10-04).
Retrieved on
2007-07-08.
- ^
European Parliament 2007 calendar of activities
(PDF).
European Parliament. Retrieved on
2007-06-12.
- ^
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament.
Rule 127: Convening of Parliament.
European Parliament. Retrieved on
2007-06-12.
- ^
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament.
Rule 141: Calling speakers and content of speeches.
European Parliament. Retrieved on
2007-06-12.
- ^
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament.
Rule 142: Allocation of speaking time.
European Parliament. Retrieved on
2007-06-12.
- ^
Yeomans, Chris (2004-11-02).
Democracy 1, Autocracy 0?. Café Babel.
Retrieved on
2007-07-09.
- ^
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament.
Rule 164: Disputes on voting.
European Parliament. Retrieved on
2007-06-12.
- ^
How do MEPs vote?.
European Parliament (2006-06-28).
Retrieved on
2007-07-06.
- ^
The different types of document available on
Europarl.
European Parliament. Retrieved on
2007-07-07.
- ^
Brussels seating plan (PDF).
European Parliament. Retrieved on
2007-06-12.
- ^
Strasbourg seating plan (PDF).
European Parliament. Retrieved on
2007-06-12.
- ^
The European Parliament Ushers.
European Parliament. Retrieved on
2007-06-21.
- ^
Duties of the President.
European Parliament. Retrieved on
2007-06-12.
- ^
Functions.
European Parliament. Retrieved on
2007-06-15.
-
^
Parliament's Protocol Service.
European Parliament (2006-07-28).
Retrieved on
2007-10-28.
- ^
Former E.P. Presidents.
European Parliament. Retrieved on
2007-06-15.
- ^
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament.
Rule 11: Oldest member.
European Parliament. Retrieved on
2007-06-12.
- ^
a
b
c
How the Parliament is Organised.
European Parliament. Retrieved on
2007-06-12.
- ^
European Parliament: In Detail.
European Parliament. Retrieved on
2007-07-09.
- ^
Press Release: Irish language arrives in European
Parliament. European Parliament Irish Office (2007-01-11).
Retrieved on
2007-06-12.
- ^
The European Parliament's Interpreters..
European Parliament (2006-04-12).
Retrieved on
2007-06-21.
- ^
The European Parliament allows the written
communication of citizens in Basques in Basque,
Catalan and Galician.. Ciemen (2006).
Retrieved on
2007-06-21.
- ^
The European Parliament's Interpreters: Some facts
and figures..
European Parliament. Retrieved on
2007-06-21.
- ^
The European Parliament's Interpreters: To be or
not to be … an interpreter..
European Parliament. Retrieved on
2007-06-21.
- ^
The European Parliament's Interpreters: More than
words..
European Parliament. Retrieved on
2007-06-21.
- ^
In European Parliament, debate—in 21 languages—can
be pricey. Christian Science Monitor (2006-09-12).
Retrieved on
2007-06-12.
- ^
Campaign to make French sole legal language in EU.
International Herald Tribune (2007-02-07).
Retrieved on
2007-06-12.
- ^
The Council of Europe and the European Union sign
an agreement to foster mutual cooperation.
Council of Europe (2007-05-23).
Retrieved on
2007-06-12.
- ^
Wheatly, Paul (2006-10-02).
The two-seat parliament farce must end. Café
Babel. Retrieved on
2007-06-12.
- ^
a
b
Greens condemn EU parliament's 'traveling circus'.
4ecotips (2007-04-26).
Retrieved on
2007-07-05.
- ^
Malmström, Cecilia.
OneSeat.eu. Retrieved on
2007-06-12.
- ^
Kroeger, Alix (2006-04-27).
EU and Strasbourg in rent row.
BBC News. Retrieved on
2007-07-05.
- ^
Euro MPs want to scrap Strasbourg base: poll.
EU Business (2007-06-13).
Retrieved on
2007-06-22.
-
^ Alvaro,
Alexander (2006-07-06).
Europe's strangest migrants. Café Babel.
Retrieved on
2007-11-01.
- ^
Banks, Martin (2007-05-24).
Sarkozy slated over Strasbourg seat. EU
Politix: The Parliament. Retrieved on
2007-06-22.
- ^
European Council (2007-06-22).
Brussels European Council 21/22 June 2007:
Presidency Conclusions (PDF).
Council of the European Union. Retrieved on
2007-06-22.
- ^
a
b
The Union's institutions: The European Parliament.
Europa (web portal). Retrieved on
2007-06-28.
- ^
a
b
Draft treaty modifying the treaty on the European
Union and the treaty establishing the European
community (PDF).
Open Europe (2007-07-24).
Retrieved on
2007-07-28.
-
^
Leadership of the EU.
Federal Union. Retrieved on
2007-08-27.
-
^
The EP elections: Deepening the democratic deficit.
Euractiv (2004-06-16).
Retrieved on
2007-07-27.
- ^
a
b
Improving the public perception and efficiency of
the work of the European Parliament - mandate for
a working group on reform of the Parliament.
European Parliament (2007-02-15).
Retrieved on
2007-06-28.
- ^
Kubosova, Lucia (2007-07-12).
MEPs turn down modernising reform. EU
Observer. Retrieved on
2007-07-12.
- ^
a
b Kubosova, Lucia (2007-09-20).
MEPs want to see fewer heads of state in plenary.
EU Observer. Retrieved on
2007-07-12.
- ^
Beunderman, Mark (2007-07-11).
MEPs defy member states on EU symbols. EU
Observer. Retrieved on
2007-07-12.
- ^
The European Flag.
Council of Europe. Retrieved on
2007-07-12.
[edit]
Further reading
-
Attwool, Elspeth (2000). To the Power of
Ten: UK Liberal Democrats in the European
Parliament (Centre for Reform Papers).
Centre for Reform.
ISBN 978-1902622170.
-
Butler, David; Martin Westlake (2005).
British Politics and European Election.
London:
Palgrave Macmillan.
ISBN 978-1403935854.
-
Farrell, David; Roger Scully (2007).
Representing Europe's Citizens?: Electoral
Institutions and the Failure of Parliamentary
Representation.
Oxford University Press.
ISBN 978-0199285020.
-
Hix, Simon; Abdul Noury, Serard Roland (2007).
Democratic Politics in the European Parliament
(Themes in European Governance). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
ISBN 978-0521694605.
-
Hoskyns, Catherine; Michael Newman (2000).
Democratizing the European Union: Issues for the
twenty-first Century (Perspectives on
Democratization.
Manchester University Press.
ISBN 978-0719056666.
-
Corbett, Richard; [|Jacobs,
Francis] & Shackleton, Michael (2007),
The European Parliament (7 ed.), London:
John Harper Publishing,
ISBN 978-0955114472, <http://www.johnharperpublishing.co.uk/pp007.shtml>
-
Judge, David; David Earnshaw (2003). The
European Parliament (European Union). London:
Palgrave Macmillan.
ISBN 978-0333598740.
-
Kreppel, Amie (2001). The European Parliament
and Supranational Party System: A Study in
Institutional Development (Cambridge Studies in
Comparative Politics). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
ISBN 978-0521000796.
-
Van der Laan, Lousewies (2003). The Case
For a Stronger European Parliament. London:
Centre for European Reform.
ISBN 1901229491.
-
Lodge, Juliet (200-04-18). The 2004 Elections
to the European Parliament. London:
Palgrave Macmillan.
ISBN 978-1403935182.
-
Maier, Michaela (2006). Campaigning in Europe,
Campaigning for Europe: Political Parties,
Campaigns, Mass Media and the European Parliament
Elections 2004 (Medien). Lit Verlag.
ISBN 978-3825893224.
-
Rittberger, Berthold (2007). Building Europe's
Parliament: Democratic Representation Beyond the
Nation State.
Oxford University Press.
ISBN 978-0199231997.
-
Schmitter, Philippe (2000). How to Democratize
the EU … and Why Bother? (Governance in Europe).
Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
ISBN 978-0847699056.
-
Scully, Rodger (2005). Becoming European?:
Attitudes, Behaviour, and Socialization in the
European Parliament.
Oxford University Press.
ISBN 978-0199284320.
-
Smith, Julie (1999). Europe's Elected
Parliament (Contemporary European Studies).
London:
Continuum International Publishing Group.
ISBN 978-0333598740.
-
Steuenberg, Bernard; Jacques Thomassen (2002).
The European Parliament on the Move: Toward
Parliamentary Democracy in Europe (Governance in
Europe).
Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
ISBN 978-0742501263.
-
Watson, Graham (2004). EU've Got Mail!:
Liberal Letters from the European Parliament.
Baghot Publishing.
ISBN 978-0954574512.
[edit]
External links
Coordinates:
48°35′51″N
7°46′09″E
/ 48.597512,
7.769092
.jpg)
