Part II: The European Union in European Politics

Conceptualizing the EU

Overview: We don’t really know how to study the EU because it falls between the sub-disciplinary fields of politics [unusual thing that in some ways it seems like the tools of IR should help us better understand and, in other ways, maybe the tools of comparative politics]:

• methodological debates between IR (interactions between states) and Comparative Politics (comparison between systems: presidential vs. parliamentary, power established, power organized)

  • EU is more than an international organization reflecting IR approaches, and less than a state polity, reflecting Comparative Politics approaches.

  • They ask different questions: IR asks how did state agree to pool sovereignty, CP asks how does it operate?

    • EU falls between the cracks: is not a state, but not exactly an international organization (more than an IO - some aspects of sovereignty)

    • Sui generis - unique (no one perspective fully encapsulates the EU)

• focus on process of integration vs. focus on its condition or potential end state

  • (dependent variable problem—it doesn’t stand still—confederal or federal?)

  • May be moving on its way to federalism

International organization

Its institutions have little or no autonomy, and the EU makes its most important decisions through negotiations and bargains among governments. Best understood using theories of international relations.

• only have the authority sovereign states transfer and give them

Regional integration association

It is comparable with other regional blocs such as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) or the African Union, again using international relations approaches.

• many powers have been transferred to the regional level compared to any other regional organization

Unique (sui generis)

It emerged out of a unique set of circumstances, has unique qualities and goals, might never be replicated elsewhere, and might not even have emerged in Europe if the process of integration had started much later than it did.

Political system in its own right

It is a European superstate, and its structure and operating principles can be compared with conventional states. Best understood using the approaches of comparative politics, with a particular focus on federalism and confederalism.

• comparative politics approach

Hybrid

It is a mix of some or all the above.

The Centrality of the state in IR and Challenges to it

• Idea of states as sovereign and the most powerful in the international system (no higher authority than states and states are the central actors)

• Established centralized authority

  • authority governs the territory and the people within that territory

    • linkage between territory and authority within borders (free from external borders)

• Coterminous with fixed territory, means political and legal independence for the sovereign (no higher authority than the sovereign, no external actor can exercise authority within), legitimacy (authority is recognized by subjects/citizens and other sovereigns) - authority is lodged at the state level

• Territorial boundaries are contested (Hans Island - Canada and Denmark claim the island: ICJ ruled and the territory is split)

Rise of IOs

• Thousands emerged in the twentieth century

• Supranational authority - an IO has authority over states in certain areas (IAEA - states signed on get access to the peaceful uses of nuclear energy, but must agree to inspections from the agency to ensure they are not transfering peaceful use to military use)

• Small grants of supranational authority and states can leave (voluntaristic)

How is the EU like an international organization?

• Has member states

• States make negotiated payments (cannot tax)

• Negotiations and treaty based

• Member states choose some of the top officials

• Some institutions have little independence (mostly carrying out the wishes of member states)

How is the EU more than an IO?

• Ability to make binding laws to member states

• All states are equal in negotiation, but states can be outvoted with majority decision making (double qualified majority votes: 55% of member states vote in favour - in practice this means 15 out of 27; the proposal is supported by member states representing at least 65% of the total EU population) sovereignty gets undermined by the decision making process and legislative procedures

• States cannot negotiate on their own behalf and cannot pursue their individual interests

• In agriculture, environment, competition, policies are made through Europeanization and less through negotiation

The Emergence of Supranational Authority in the EU

• Authority above the level of the state

• EU institutions can pass laws that are binding on members

• Area where authority is practiced independent of member states

• Can force change within a member state

• Competence - member states have no authority and decisions are taken at the international level

The Process of European Integration

• Regional integration - the promotion of cooperation and collective action among a group of sovereign states based on shared interest, common goals and pooling of resources

• European integration is not the same as creating a sovereign state, but about pooling sovereignty. 

  • United States - 13 sovereign colonies (currencies, foreign policies) - integrate and established federal authorities 

  • Integrate while maintaining sovereign authority

Functionalism–David Mitrany, Jean Monnet, Robert Schuman

1. Do not form a constitution - create small grants of authority to cooperate in very distinct areas that are non-political

   1. cooperation in technical, “non-political” areas

   2. dominated by technocrats who are problem-solvers 

   3. create limited, transnational “authorities” to oversee cooperative activity

      • Decentralized approach

        1. Rid of tariffs between states (Agreement of free trade area with the easing of internal barriers to trade (such as tariffs and border restrictions) while maintaining a common external tariff against non-members)

           • Remove the barriers between two countries so goods can flow freely. Trade is up, GDP is up.

           • Country A and Country B get rid of tariffs between them. Country A doesn't like country D and imposes high tariffs against them. Country D then simply exports to country B and therefore evades the tariffs by exporting to one of the other partners.

           • By cooperating there are new problems that need to be solved

        2. Create a single market (The creation of a single market with the removal of internal barriers to the free movement of people, capital, goods and services.)

           • Moved from solving problems in one area to solving problems in a second area

           • Rid of external tariffs to third countries

           • First, you only agree to cooperate in this one small area, but it created new. 

           • It solved one problem, created growth and created growth, but it also created new problems that needed to be solved. 

           • Cooperation spills over from this one area into another one.

           • Single market with no internal tariffs, common external tariffs, but every country still has its own currency 

           • Business person can trade their goods in the countries that are part of the single market. But they have to pay for new currencies in order to actually do business in these different things

        3. Create a single currency (Efforts to promote monetary union, where smaller currencies are tied to a leading currency or efforts are made to agree a single currency.)

           • Single currency → debt crises and fiscal problems

        4. Create a political union (RIAs often talk in general terms about the value of peace and political cooperation, and even of political ‘unity’, but so far the idea of political union has been too controversial to be anything more than a theoretical goal.)

           • Bring all of these things together

           • Process of economic integration is an example of spillover. Functionalism argues that by solving one small problem, it creates new problems that need to be solved. Automatic logic that leads to greater and greater levels of integration.

   4. creates need for further rationalization to optimize cooperation by technocrats, who learn to think in a broader, community spirit 

      • “These functional arrangements might be regarded as organic elements of federalism in installments.” “Peace in Parts”

        • Problem-solving approach - shared problem in this small area, so agree to cooperate in this very small area to work collectively there

        • Europe will not be made all at once or according to a single plan. It will be built through concrete achievements which first create a de facto solidarity.” ~Schuman

      • Spillover - New problems that need to be solved - cooperation spills over from one area to another

      • By solving one small problem creates new problems that needs to be solved that leads to greater level of integration (bottom-up)

Neo-functionalism

1. Builds upon functionalism, but highlights the role of power, both in terms of the political elites involved in the process, and the delegation of power to a supranational authority. 

   • Idea—integration does not “escape power” it is a reflection of it.

2. Spillover: a process by which, a given action, related to a specific goal, creates a situation in which the original goal can be assured only by taking further actions, which in turn create a further condition and a need for more action.” Eg, integration of common market only works if there is a common currency and social security system as well.

   • Types: Functional, Technical, Political

Challenges to linear functionalist integration

1. Spillaround

2. Build-up

3. Retrenchment

4. Spill-back

Major challenge to functionalism—intergovernmentalism

• Critique of functionalism: reliance on an “invisible hand” of integration.

• Stanley Hoffmann: National governments, pursuing national interests alone have the legal sovereignty to move the process.

• Moravcsik’s theory of Liberal intergovernmentalism

  • looks at the domestic politics of member states with the role of governments in the EU member states in making major choices for European integration. 

  • Moravcsik argues that it is the commercial interests of major economic producers with the relative bargaining power of important governments that propels European integration.

  • Certain member states will drive the integration process and input its wishes into the European Union

    • Commercial interests of major powers that determine the shape of the European Union

The Comparative Politics Approach to the EU

• Less interested in the process of how previously autonomous states came to integrate, they are interested in the balance of powers and distribution of power—the policy process within the EU. They use “government” yardsticks to understand the degree to which the EU looks like a state.

Using the Metrics of a State: EU as an IO

• membership is voluntary

• balance of sovereignty remains with MS

• decision-making is consultative

• procedures used to direct the EU are consultative rather than coercive

Using the Metrics of a State: EU also has features of a state

• internationally recognized borders

• European system of law to which all members are subject

• it has authority that influences the lives of Europeans

• balance of power and responsibility in many areas has shifted to the EU level

• in some areas, EU functions as a unit (trade) and is recognized by other states as legitimate.

Federal Models - What can EU member states do that US states cannot?

• make treaties

• near monopoly on tax policy

• maintain independent militaires

• use their own currencies (Sweden Krona, Denmark Krone)

Federal Models - What can US federal government do that EU institutions cannot?

• cannot levy independent taxes (determined through treaty agreements)

• cannot make independent decisions on law and policy

• they do not enjoy the undivided loyalty of European citizens (citizens feel like their political loyalty lies with the national government)

• they do not have the sole power to negotiate all agreements on behalf of MS (requires competence)

Federal Models - But the EU DOES have some federal features

• complex system of treaties and laws that are uniformly applicable throughout the EU, to which all MS and citizens are subject, and which are Interpreted by the ECl

• In policy areas where the EU has been given competence (Intra-EU trade, agriculture, environment, and social policy-EU law supercedes that of national law.

  • Competence: authority where the EU can negotiate it on behalf of member states

  • Binding - all member states and subjects/citizens are subject to that authority

    • EU can take businesses to account, it can take individuals that are violating EU laws to account by having the European Union Court of Justice pursue infringement or enforcement. 

    • In areas where member states have given up this sovereignty to the EU and have signed a treaty to do that, the EU has some institutions that allows it to exercise authority over member states, over private businesses and over citizens

  • MS have to abide by EU laws (cannot contradict EU laws)

• directly elected legislature in the EP, whose power is increasing while national legislatures decrease

  • Directly elected to the EU by the citizens of the country who represent the nation at the EU level

• Although small, the EU budget does give the EU institutions an element of financial independence

  • Budget is independent from the member states

    • Small budget compared to member states, but it is still independent

  • EU institutions then have resources

  • Not through taxation in the normal way, but through treaty obligations where member states have to pay. 

  • Value added tax - a consumption tax that is levied on the value added at each stage of a product's production and distribution

    • Part of the value added tax goes to the EU

  • For members that do use the Euro, their monetary policy is set by the European Central Bank

• members use the euro, and their monetary policy is set by the European Central Bank

  • Strong federal authority over states

For the EU to become truly federal, it requires

• a directly elected European government and a constitution

  • There is no directly elected European government (in the same way that parliaments elect a government)

  • Instead, there is a hybrid way where member state governments go to the EU and they represent their state. They're not directly elected to a European government or from the parliament. 

  • A European government would have to come from the European Parliament

• a common tax system and a single currency

• a common military

  • EU would have sovereignty

• EU institutions would be able to act on behalf of all MS in EUFP.

Confederal Models - In what ways is the EU confederal?

• There is no European constitution capable of being amended and developed by proposals from the EU institutions. Instead, the EU is based on treaties designed and developed by intergovernmental conferences.

• The EU is a union of states, not a United States of Europe. It has administrative institutions, but it is a system of governance rather than a system of government.

• The interests of the citizens of the EU member states are represented indirectly through their governments (with the notable exception of the elected European Parliament).

• The EU member states are distinct political units, they have their own national defence forces and policies, they can sign bilateral treaties with non-EU states, and their governments can still argue that the EU institutions exist at their discretion.

• The EU may have its own flag and anthem, but most of the citizens of the member states still have a higher sense of allegiance towards national flags, anthems and other symbols, and cannot surrender their state citizenships and become citizens of the EU.

• The EU is a voluntary association, so its members are free to leave if they wish.

Critique of the CP approach

The weakness of CP approach is that there is no European GOVERNMENT -- a network of governing structures, but it does not really have the same institutional structure as a government.

Ducking the Theoretical Models--Multilevel Governance

• Focus is not on power, or structures, but on governance—how do things get done? Closer to policy process.

• Governance: the exercise of authority through interactions among a complex variety of actors, which in the case of the EU includes MS governments, EU institutions, interest groups, and other sources, but down plays the questions of authority or institutions to focus on the process.

• Multilevel Governance: A system in which power is shared between supranational, national, sub-national and local levels, with considerable interaction among all of them.

• MLG is a more recent iteration of the old conceptions of federalism and confederalism, without their sense of direction or certainty about where power lies. 

  • Less of a theory and more of a snapshot (descriptive)

  • Does not predict or tell us where the EU is going

Conclusion

• EU is sui generis (unique). It is more than an IO, but not quite a state. No one can agree on what it is, where it is going, and it continues to move and shape-shift. We know it is important, but it is challenging to understand, or outsiders as well as EU citizens. According to Johan Olsen, it is “A well-known, not-very-well-understood, actor.”

• EU shape-shifts along the dimensions of

  1. its authority: intergovernmental or supranational authority

  2. its sovereignty: (super) state or international organization (principal-agent)

  3. its structure: federation or confederation

Parable of the Blind Men and Elephants

• Five blind men whose job is to describe an elephant. The only way you can understand is by touching. 

  • The first blind man that's at the front of the elephant says an elephant is something that's like a hose (trunk). The second blind man that’s at the back of the elephant would say an elephant is like a whip (tail). The third blind man that’s on the side would say the elephant is like a tree with trunks (tusks) 

  • It depends on where you are for how you describe that elephant

  • Europeanization is like the blind men and the elephant depends, using this term Europeanization, depends on what sort of element of Europeanization discussed 

Johan Olsen

1. Changes in External Boundaries (Spreading)

   • The degree to which the continent is becoming a shared political space. Not just EU membership, but association agreements, European Neighborhood Policy, etc. 

     • EU has grown from 6 to 27 states (club that ate a continent)

     • Not just the EU - interacts with potential members and on the periphery (political conditionality - reflect the same dynamics as the EU)

       • Turkey got rid of the death penalty

       • Georgia

     • Europe/European ideas and ways of doing things are spreading

   • How far the EU’s governance mechanisms extend formally and informally.

   • How to account for the dynamics of expansion? 

2. Developing Institutions at the European Level (Centralization)

   • This definition signifies the building of collective action capabilities on the European level which provides enhanced coordination, coherence and authority of community institutions. This variant includes both strengthening of organizational capacity for collective action and development of common ideas, such as new norms and collective understandings.

     • Development of European-level interest groups, European-level party systems

     • Centralizing process

     • Development of new bodies and organizations at the European level

   • The Lisbon Treaty is often acknowledged to reflect this sort of Europeanization—appointed president of the European Council (rather than MS 6 month rotating presidency), HR/VP, and EEAS.

     • Presidency used to rotate… now there is a permanent person in the role at the European level

3. Penetration of National Systems of Governance (national level)

   • All multi-level governance systems (federal systems) have to work out a balance between central authority and local autonomy. Europeanization in this sense means that national and sub-national systems of governance have adapted to European political center and European-wide norms. Responses are different--penetration of domestic institutional arrangements by European developments is varied by country, by policy area, and by time period.

     • Within member states - impact by centralizing processes

4. Exporting Forms of Political Organizations (Externalization and Diffusion)

   • This meaning is less introverted than other conceptualizations. All the other variants of Europeanization are 20th century and onward phenomena. Historically, Europeanization has been understood as the external spread of form of life from Europe elsewhere, e.g., European imperialism (influence - internal political system)

     • Regions did not go back to their local governance, they become states

   • Here we are talking about a DIFFUSION process—norms, processes. Indeed, earlier on colonialism was a kind of diffusion process which penetrated and destroyed indigenous forms of governance, and ultimately replaced them with the European form of the nation-state.

5. Political Unification Project (Federalism)

   • This comprehensive definition refers to a Europe which is more distinct, unified and stronger with regard to territorial space, center-building, ability to compel domestic change in national and sub-national spheres, and having influence and impact on events outside the continent. A reconfiguration of sovereignty, not a pooling of retained sovereignty.

• So, Europeanization can refer to many dynamics. But we are going to focus on the dynamics that involve the nature of politics and policy between EU level institutions and national political systems in relation to particular policy arenas.

  • Must define the term and acknowledge the term has been used in other ways

Definition of Europeanization

• Europeanization is a process of a) construction, b) diffusion, and c) institutionalization of formal and informal rules, procedures, policy styles, ‘ways of doing things’, and shared beliefs and norms which are first defined and consolidated in the EU policy process and incorporated in the logic of domestic (national and sub-national) discourse, political structures and public policies.

  • C Raedelli (2004) ‘Europeanization: Solution or Problem?’ European Integration Online Papers

    • Building new institutions, spreading, and creating changes at the federal level

    • Centralizing and national actions

Competence

• Europeanization is strongest in the areas where the EU has exclusive competence (Competition, agriculture, etc) where it issues ‘hard law’ that must be implemented in MS’ domestic context. It is most contested where the EU does not have/ lower competence (shared and supportive).

  • Hard law - member states are obligated to make the kinds of changes, either in their own government, policies, or laws (EU has competence in that area) 

  • Soft law - those are areas where the EU has shared competence

• But it has even been used to study the Europeanization of foreign policy of member states, which remains subject to national authority. Common Foreign and Security Policy is a shared competence.

Exploring European Integration

• It is a way to explore whether European integration is

  • Empowering EUMS (Moravcsik) - European governments stronger

  • Hollowing out the authority of EUMS (Marks) - MS do not have the power they once had and are dependent on the European process

  • Transforming the State (Kohler-Koch)

    • Post-modern international system

Europeanization as a Two-Level Game

• Europeanization emerges from the theories related to a two level game, there is a reciprocal relationship between political negotiations at the domestic and international level. 

  • At the domestic level, actors pressure their national executives to pursue policies at the European level that are favorable to their interests.

    • Domestic level tries to influence the upper level and limit the costs to the domestic level. 

    • Member states project their policy preferences, ideas, and interests to the European level

    • States with different policy levels or capabilities are all going to try and get the European level to reflect their own approach.

  • At the European level, the Member State governments push for European policies that satisfy domestic pressures, while minimizing their adverse consequences at the domestic level (Putnam, 1988, p. 434).

• Two-level game approaches provide a link between the ascending (decision-making) and the descending (implementation) stage of the European policy process.

Policy Misfit

• Two level games operate because there is a MISFIT between the levels. 

  • Policy misfit—MS must adapt to legally binding decisions/legislation

• The more a European policy fits the domestic context, the lower the adaptation costs in the implementation process. In the absence of an elaborate policy structure, ‘misfitting’ European policies may still inflict significant costs since these structures have to be built up in the first place.

  • Uploading prevents competitive disadvantages for your own domestic industries

    • High standards - hope the entire system will adopt its more stringent standards because then it doesn't have a competitive disadvantage

    • Low standards - a country with really low or an entity with really low standards would want the standards to match their own low standards because they don't want to have to pay the price to upgrade their policies

  • All countries, whether they have a lower standard or a higher standard, are going to try and make sure that they influence the European level because they don't want to have to adjust their own domestic system or to lose out

Uploading

• The development of EU level institutions and policy frameworks to the preferred design of individual member states (MS push for their policies). MS project their policy preferences, ideas and interests to EU level as a shield or umbrella for national policy and/or as an influence multiplier.

  • Uploading prevents competitive disadvantages for domestic industry. Imposing strict standards on lower-regulating Member States maintains the competitive situation of the industry in higher-regulating countries. Likewise, European liberalization and deregulation policies open new markets for industries from low-regulating countries that benefit from lower production costs. Examples: Beer, Chocolate

  • Finally, uploading may enable national governments to address problems which preoccupy their constituencies but can no longer be dealt with effectively at the domestic level (e.g. organized crime, environmental pollution, or migration).

    • High standards

    • Low standards

Downloading

• A process of national adaptation to European policy agreements and/or institutional structures. These are seen as exerting pressure on both the form and outputs of national policies, norms, and structures.

  • Auel notes how parliaments have created European Affairs Committees to facilitate downloading processes. This could be seen as weakening Parliaments, but it might also provide capacity to influence European decisionmaking (or uploading!)

Crossloading

• A process by which national policies and politics derives from the transfer of ideas, norms and ways of doing things that are exchanged from and with fellow EUMS within European cooperation and coordination in a horizontal policy exchange mechanism. MS learn from each other horizontally, which is possible because they are involved in European political processes.

  • Occurs most where EU does not have competence (states learn from one another and their policies become more alike)

    • Open-Method of Coordination (OMC)

Open-Method of Coordination

• Set common goals and then MS implement as they see fit

  • Education, social policy

  • Members of EU share a goal, set benchmarks, and monitor each other

  • Strategy is not legislation, regulation - it is an agreed goal

  • Cross Loading - MS learn from one another

  • Not regulated by the EU, but increasingly the policies of member states begin to reflect one another and you get a kind of common policy without regulation

• Implementation—Open Method of Coordination

  • The open method of coordination (OMC) in the European Union may be described as a form of ‘soft’ law. It is a form of intergovernmental policy-making that does not result in binding EU legislative measures and it does not require EU countries to introduce or amend their laws. The OMC takes place in areas which fall within the competence of EU countries, such as employment, social protection, education, youth and vocational training.

  • The OMC has provided a new framework for cooperation between the EU countries, whose national policies can thus be directed towards certain common objectives. Under this intergovernmental method, the EU countries are evaluated by one another (peer pressure), with the Commission's role being limited to surveillance. The European Parliament and the Court of Justice play virtually no part in the OMC process.

• Key Elements of OMC:

  • Policy choices remain at the national level and European legislation is explicitly excluded.

  • At the same time, however, national policy choices are defined as matters   of common concern, and efforts concentrate on reaching agreement on common objectives and common indicators of achievement.

  • Moreover, governments are willing to present their plans for comparative   discussion and to expose their performance to peer review.

  • Nevertheless, co-ordination depends on voluntary co-operation, and there   are no formal sanctions against Member States whose performance does not match agreed standards.

• Higher Education Harmonization

  • Creation of the single market leads to free movement of goods, services, capital and people.  This movement creates the need to harmonize justice and internal affairs in order to deal with crime, immigration, asylum and the like.  How to deal with third party nationals, extradition, etc?  Evolution demonstrates theory of functionalism and spill-over.

    • Portability of educational credentials - mutual recognition of standards

    • Bologna Process:  harmonize higher education into a 3+2

      • Undergraduate degrees are three years

      • Masters degrees are in two year

      • Standardized and harmonized credits

    • European Credit and Transfer Accumulation System (ECTS) (1 year=60 ECTS)

    • Erasmus Generation vs. Turing Scholarships post-Brexit

• Maternity and Paternity Leave in the EU

• Minimum requirement of 14 weeks

Member States in Europeanization

Borzel (2002): MS have pursue diverging and often competing policy preferences. They also differ in their capacity to engage successfully in the European policy contest. Depending on their preferences and capacities, Member State governments may pursue three different strategies in defending their interests in the European policy contest.

Pace-Setters

• Pace-setting involves the active shaping of European policies according to domestic preferences. Ideally, domestic policies are exported to the European level and subsequently adopted by other Member States. If the strategy is successful, the subsequent downloading of the European policy creates few problems for the pace-setter, who can easily incorporate it into existing arrangements.

• Pace-setting not only presupposes established domestic policies but also the capacity to push them through the European negotiation process, very often against the opposition of other Member States with diverging policy preferences.

• Offering expertise and information to the European Commission in the drafting of policy proposals is a very effective way of injecting national preferences into the European policy process

• But being present in the various networks that prepare and accompany the European negotiation process demands considerable staff-power, expertise and information, which the Member States do not have to the same degree.

Foot-Draggers

• Foot-dragging is exactly the opposite of pace-setting. It aims at stopping or at least containing the attempts of other Member States to upload their domestic policies to the European level. While foot-dragging is seldom able to prevent costly policies altogether, it aims at obtaining some compensation in the form of side-payments or package deals. Since such compensation is often insufficient to cover the costs, foot-draggers tend to show a poor level of compliance with Community law, and they are therefore often denounced as ‘laggards’.

• Often more recent members are footdraggers (but not only!). Latecomers from Eastern and Central Europe may face a double disadvantage in the European regulatory contest. Since their regulatory structures are less developed, they lack policies to upload to the European level. But even if they had such policies, they would lack sufficient staff power, money, expertise and technology actively to shape European policies.

• Foot-draggers have neither the incentive nor the capacity to push or support strict European measures, they try to block or delay them, hoping at least to gain temporary exemptions (derogations), financial compensation (side-payments) or concessions in other issue areas (package deals).

Fence-Sitters

• Fence-sitting is a more ambivalent strategy, which consistently aims neither at initiating or promoting specific policies at the European level, nor at preventing the attempts of others to do so. Fence-sitters neither set the pace nor put the brake on EU policies. Rather, they tend to take an indifferent and neutral position, or they build changing coalitions with pace-setters and footdraggers, depending on the issue involved.

• Fence-sitters tend to lack the action capacity systematically to shape European policies according to their interests. With less pronounced policy preferences and/or constrained action capacities, Member States are likely to take a neutral or indifferent stance in the European policy-process, and to engage in changing coalitions, respectively. Fence-sitting is likely if do not anticipate any significant costs resulting from the uploading attempts of others because they have similar policies in place which can be easily adapted. Secondly, fence-sitters may miscalculate the costs involved in downloading a European policy or do not give much importance to the issue. 

• Thirdly, fence-sitters may hope to achieve policy results which they have not been able to deliver at the domestic level due to their constrained action capacities. By shifting the blame on to Brussels, governments strive to overcome decisional paralysis by claiming that they were outvoted or did not want to be isolated at the European level. Scape-goating Brussels for inconvenient policy decisions works particularly well in Member States with low action capacity but high public support for European integration.

  • Don’t stop policy but do often do not implement

• Fence-sitters, finally, may prefer to avoid costly European policies simply by not implementing them rather than raising opposition in the decision-making process. Instead of pressing for compensation or exemptions, they tend to minimize costs at the implementation stage by circumventing inconvenient obligations—and setting themselves up for infringement proceedings!

Where did the EU come from? Are there tensions between widening and deepening European integration? How does Brexit affect European integration?

• Widening - more countries/members join the EU (grown from 6 to incorporate 28)

  • Bring different political dynamics into the EU

  • One direction for most of EU history

    • Impossible to leave before the Lisbon Treaty (no legal provisions)

• Deepening - origins vs. today

Post-WWII Context of European Integration

• historical efforts to unify Europe since Rome

  • Under rule of law instead of through force

• situation of national powers after WWII

  • Germany and Italy as aggressors 

  • Belgium, the Netherlands, and France that had been invaded and occupied

  • Very recent oppositional relationship during WWII

• global and regional factors: US, USSR, European imperialism

  • US: Marshall Plan required cooperation to access US sources

  • USSR: refused to join and created their own systems of cooperation

  • Geopolitics: not any sort of grand diplomacy (heavily economic), decolonization, European integration was internal (not a grand political scheme)

    • Reflective of the geopolitics of WWII

• Founded as a peace project to bring these countries together (not to create the European Union)

  • These nations were at war within one another

  • No possibility of a federal agreement

Deepening Levels of Integration through the Treaties

Deepening - starts with this obscure cooperation in coal and steel to the EU becoming politically integrated perspective, pursuing a common foreign policy

• 1952—European Coal and Steel Community

  • Common market for only coal and steel - institutions to create a community for a market of coal and steel

    • Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands

• 1958—Treaty of Rome creates European Communities: Euratom and the European Economic Community that seeks to create a single market of goods, capital, service, labor

  • Euratom - European market in atomic energy

  • EEC - common market: free movement of people (difficult to accomplish), as well as common external tariff (difficult to accomplish - not succeeded until 1992) and no internal tariffs between member states

• 1987—Single European Act—introduces majority decision-making to complete the single market.

  • Decisions by majority decision-making sped things up: integration quickened (previously done by unanimity)

  • Not one country, one vote - weighted voting system that changed over time as more countries entered 

• 1993—Maastricht Treaty creates the European Union with political ambitions and CFSP

  • Creates European Union

  • EU cooperates politically in international affairs, common foreign security program

  • Inward entity → outward entity

  • Ambition to become a global actor in the world stage

  • Ambition for a single currency (2002)

• 1999—Amsterdam Treaty introduces membership criteria, flexible decision-making

  • Vote weight between member states

• 2003—Nice Treaty agrees institutional changes enabling enlargement to ECE applicants

  • Vote weight between member states

• 2004—Draft constitution signed, 17 ratifications, but rejected by French/Dutch referenda 

  • Attempt to pass a constitution

  • Would have changed from an IO with supranational capabilities to a federal system

  • Several countries need to ratify countries (17/25 approved - East and Central Europe)

• 2009—Lisbon Treaty enters into force, consolidates all previous treaties into one treaty and creates a single legal personality for the EU; creates a European External Action Service, President of the European Council, and High Representative for Foreign Affairs (aka EU foreign minister)

  • Substantive changes that were in the constitution and packaged them in the Lisbon Treaty

  • Consolidated all previous treaties (functioned under 6 treaties)

  • Single legal personality - EU legal authority was based on one new treaty

  • Did away with weighted voting → according to double majority voting

    • 60% of EU member states (15) and must represent 60% of the EU

      • Based on population and member states

• Treaty-based international organization (except for the potential draft constitution)

Widening of the European community, from 6 to 28+

• 1951 - Original Six: France, Germany, Italy, “Benelux” (Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg)

• 1973 - United Kingdom, Denmark, and Ireland (Norway rejects)

• 1981 - Greece

  • Democracy enlargement (emerged from dictatorship)

• 1986 - Portugal and Spain

  • Democracy enlargement (emerged from dictatorship)

• 1995 - Austria, Sweden Finland (Norway says no again)

  • Neutrals (after the end of the Cold War)

• 2004 - Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Slovenia, Cyprus, Malta

  • Big bang enlargement

  • Big enlargement of largely poor countries is the thing that put the brakes on European integration (net importers) - a lot of southern countries came to mistrust because they felt that resources that they had gotten decades before were now being diverted to Central and Eastern Europe. 

• 2007 - Bulgaria, Romania

• 2013 - Croatia

How does Widening Work?

• There are 3 main stages subject to approval by all EU countries.

  • Apply, evaluate, candidacy

  • Constant conversation with the European Commission

  • European Commission determines when they are ready to start negotiations to become a member 

  • Every single member of the EU must agree

• Step 1: Candidacy

  • A country wishing to join the EU must submit a membership application to the Council of the EU. The Council then asks the European Commission to check the applicant country’s ability to fulfill the membership criteria.

  • Based on the Commission's recommendations, the Council decides whether to grant the country candidate status and to begin formal negotiations for its accession to the Union. All EU Member States must agree on this decision.

    • Current candidate countries are:

      • Albania

      • Bosnia and Herzegovina

      • Georgia

      • Moldova

      • Montenegro

      • North Macedonia

      • Serbia

      • Türkiye

      • Ukraine

      • Kosovo is a potential candidate

        • None of them are actually in negotiations for final membership

      • Norway - fisheries and oil

• Step 2: Membership negotiations 

  • During membership negotiations, the candidate country prepares to implement EU laws and standards, also known as the acquis.

  • Throughout the negotiations, the Commission monitors the candidate's progress on these reforms and keeps the Council and European Parliament informed of this through regular reports and communications.

• Step 3: Accession

  • Once the negotiations are complete, the Commission gives its opinion on whether the candidate is ready to become a Member State. If the Commission recommends that the candidate is ready, an accession treaty is prepared. This document details the terms and conditions of the country's EU membership.

  • The accession treaty must then be approved by the European Commission, the European Council and the European Parliament before being signed and ratified by all EU Member States and the candidate country. 

  • The candidate country officially joins the EU on the date outlined in its accession treaty

• When the negotiations and accompanying reforms are completed and agreed by both sides, the country can join the EU – if all EU countries agree.

Copenhagen Criteria for Membership established with the 1992 European Council when Denmark held the presidency of the EU

1. stable democracy and rule of law

2. respect for HR and accession to European Convention for Human (not an EU document - Council of Europe document and fully implement)

3. properly functioning market economy and macro-economic fitness to join the single market (inflation rate within the same level as the EU, exchange rate in relation with the euro)

4. acceptance of acquis communitaire—All EU legislation and treaty obligation without reservation (every single applicant has to accept and implement all existing EU law without any opt-outs)

2016 Brexit Decision—first of many or one off?

• Exit is first articulated in the Lisbon Treaty, in terms of process for exit. Did not indicate the nature of post-divorce relations, which is why there were years of negotiations, which will continue even after the 2020 EU-UK Treaty was agreed and Britain left the EU on 31^st January 2020.

• How does Brexit impact the EU’s evolutionary processes of widening and deepening? Are more exits likely? 

• Video: How Brexit is changing the EU 

• Britain is not absent European politics, particularly in regard to Ukraine, where there is very close cooperation with EU member states and the EU.

• See the London Summit on 2 March 2024
  

• Brexit was much harder for the UK than it was for the EU because the EU didn't have to change any of its laws. Britain had to change all of its laws because most of its economic, trade, and competition laws have been changed for 35 or 40 years by its membership in the European Union. TO regain sovereignty, it had to change all of its laws. 

• The EU has become more popular among the citizens in the remaining states of the EU. Almost exactly from the time Britain left, an increase in the popularity of the EU among remaining states and among remaining citizens. 

Canada in the EU?

• Since Trump’s Tariff war and threats to make Canada the 51^st state, there have been calls in Europe and Canada for Canada to join the EU.

• Feb 2025 poll: 46% of respondents would support Canada joining, compared to 29% who would oppose it.

• Is it possible? Treaty on the European Union states "Any European State which respects the values referred to in Article 2 and is committed to promoting them may apply to become a member of the Union".

• What is a European state?

  • A 1992 document from the commission of the then-European Communities gives us a clue, however, highlighting the importance of geographical and cultural ties.

  • "The term 'European' has not been officially defined," it says. "It combines geographical, historical and cultural elements which all contribute to the European identity."

  • But, "Canada — just as Morocco in the past — does not satisfy the criterion of a 'European state'," according to Peter Van Elsuwege, professor of EU law at Ghent University. "In particular, Canada is geographically speaking not located in Europe, it is not a Council of Europe member state and does not have any ancient connections to the cultural development of Europe."

  • Canada can't legally join the EU because it's not culturally, politically or geographically European, and a hypothetical Canadian application would therefore require a legal overhaul of the treaties. But how many times have the treaties been overhauled?

Key Points: Where does authority for common European action lie?

• By examining the institutional make-up of the EU, we see how it reflects both intergovermentalism and supranationalism, confederalism and federalism, which makes it hard to characterize the EU.

• By examining the institutional configuration of the EU and the policy process, we see one of the key points of multilevel governance: political arenas (domestic and European) are interconnected (nested) rather than separate and actors (interest groups, etc) interact at multiple levels. 

Intergovernmentalism

• When national governments participate in decision-making and negotiations, participation is voluntary, decisions are unanimous, and IOs do not have independent powers and cannot compel states to take actions against their will. Authority for common action lies with states.

  • Sovereign authority - states are in the driver’s seat

Supranationalism

• Transfer of authority to European-wide institutions which are autonomous, have power of coercion which is independent of members. Decisions and actions can be taken over the will of some members. Decisions are not taken on the competing interests of members but on the interests of the whole community.

  • European interests

The Institutions

• How many presidencies can one government system have? 5 - European Parliament, European Council, European Commission, Council of Ministers (government), European Central Bank)

• In addition to Presidents of the Parliament, Council and Commission, there is 6 month rotating presidency of the Council of Ministers by an EU government, and the President of the European Central Bank

Intergovernmental Institutions of the EU (more like IO, confederal)

• The Member States

• The European Council—Heads of State Summitry

• The Council of Ministers—Ministry Configurations

• COREPER—Council of Permanent Representatives

Supranational Organizations of the EU (more federalist)

• European Commission

• European Parliament

• European Court of Justice

Hybrid Institutions—exist between the supranational and intergovernmental

• Vice President and High Representative for Foreign Affairs

  • (leads Foreign Affairs council and is VP of Commission)

    • “Foreign Minister”, but EU is not a sovereign state

• External Action Service

  • (Commission, Council Secretariat, and Seconded National Diplomats)

    • Foreign ministry with a diplomatic core

• Juncker’s 2017 proposal for a single EU President that combines Council

  • President and Commission President

    • https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/13/world/europe/juncker-eu-brexit.html

Changes in the Lisbon Treaty (Complicated the EU structure)

1. Permanent Presidency of the European Council

2. High Representative and the External Action Service

3. More Powerful Parliament

4. More Double-Majority Voting

5. Role for National Parliaments to review proposed EU legislation

6. European Citizens Initiative—Citizens’ Petitions to get Commission to take action (particular issue)

   • Direct access

Intergovernmental Institutions of the EU

• These are the institutions that most reflect an intergovernmental understanding of the EU, but how the intergovernmental institutions function muddies the concept of member state sovereign authority.

  • Member states are part of the EU (intergovernmentalism)

    • European Council, The Council of Ministers, COREPER—Council of Permanent Representatives

The Member States

• On paper, member states seem to have all the power (choose to enter the EU (Norway) and agree to sign treaties), They agree to the treaties and provide authority for the EU to act. The legal position of member states is shaped by 4 principles defined in the treaties and upheld in the Lisbon Treaty:

  • Competence, Conferral, Subsidiarity, Proportionality

Competence

• describes the areas where the EU has authority, and where MS have authority

  • MS give competence through treaties

Conferral

• EU can only act where it has been granted authority by MS; any areas not specifically listed in the treaties are reserved to states (eg, asylum, increasingly defense)

Subsidiarity

• EU can only act in areas outside its exclusive competence if the action needed cannot be addressed by MS

  • Decisions should be taken at the national level/member state level and should only act when they cannot be addressed

Proportionality

• The EU should not go beyond taking action needed to achieve the objectives of the treaties.

  • Conscientious of actions

The European Council—Heads of State Summitry

• Meetings of heads of government (PMs in Parliamentary systems, Presidents from Semi-presidential systems. (photo above from the March 6 emergency summit with Zelensky)

  • Held at least 4 times a year

  • Sets the overall guidelines for EU policies

  • President: Antonio Costa (Portugal)

• Works flexibly, informally behind closed doors (see Moodle photo March 25 class). They produce consensus “Conclusions” which may set the agenda of the EU, but the council has NO decision making power. Heads of EUMS do not have decision power over EU legislation (Council of Ministers does), but it is central to appointments of Council President and Commission President as well as HR/VP (EU Foreign Minister)

  • No decision-making power but are central to appointments

• Not an original part of the EU institutions! Only became a regular feature after 1975; gains a permanent president after the Lisbon Treaty (used to rotate among member states, as the Council of Ministers still does).

  • Past Presidents:

    • 2009-2014: Herman Van Rompuy (Belgium)

    • 2014-2019: Donald Tusk (Poland)

    • 2019-2015: Charles Michel (Belgium)

• Video on the Evolution of the European Council (10 minutes total/first 2 minutes in class)

The Council of Ministers (Formally, the Council of the European Union)

• Functions:

• The Council of the EU represents the member states' governments. It is where national ministers and experts from each EU country meet to:

  • negotiate and adopt EU laws

• conclude international agreements on behalf of the EU

• adopt the EU budget

• develop the EU's foreign and security policy

• coordinate member states' policies in specific fields

• Composition:

  • One minister from each EU country in different sectoral configurations (ministers within national parliaments)

    • At least 10 configurations, including Agriculture, Home Affairs, Finance, etc) (Short video on the configurations here)

  • Presidency: rotates every six months - Currently Poland (Jan-June 2025)

  • Intergovernmental organizations go down a level of sovereignty (individual ministries) - not a unified national interest (comes down into the domestic interests)

• Decides EU laws and budget together with Parliament

  • Decision must have the support of

    • 55% of Member States

    • Member States that represent 65% of the EU’s population

    • Blocking Decisions require at least 4 states representing 35% of EU’s population

      1. New since the Lisbon Treaty

• Member states are part of the European Union even when they're not part of these institutions, although the institutions are the way that most member states engage and this is going to represent the most intergovernmental image of the European Union. 

• Working Parties and Committees on different sectoral issues involve experts from national governments that examine every proposal in preparatory bodies and advise ministers.

  • (See old humorous video, Yes Minister or this Yes Minister that gets at nationalism through European institutions and gives an explanation of why Britain has always been Eurosceptic)

  • COREPER creates these working committees on different issues and those are diplomats that are posted to Brussels who follow what is happening on a day-to-day basis

  • Someone from a member state’s mission to the European Union who is responsible for a department will meet with the minister when they are coming to brief them and they communicate

COREPER—Council of Permanent Representatives

• Introduction video (3 minutes) 

• Formal Representation of each Member state to the EU—a bit like a Permanent Mission of each member state to the EU (like the UN). 

• Supports the Council of Ministers

• Meets daily, 2000 annually. They prepare positions for the Council of Minister meetings, that typically meet only 1-2 times a month.

• 150 working groups and committees—in contact with other member state representatives as well as their own national governments.

• Most intergovernmental institution of the intergovernmental institutions of the EU

  • What “normal diplomacy” looks like - each member state has a delegation that they send to the European Union

• Diplomats - come from the foreign ministries of the 27 member states and they are permanently posted to Brussels

• Most legislation for the EU is discussed here

• Ambassadors are negotiating proposed legislation

• EU track - diplomats that specialize in EU relations (not bilateral relations) 

  • Intergovernmental organization that does not function by normal intergovernmental dynamics

Supranational Organizations of the EU

European Commission, European Parliament, European Court of Justice

European Commission

• The College of Commissioners

  • 27 Commissioners, one from each EU country, serves a 5-year term (each country nominates a commissioner - obligated to reflect the collective European interests)

  • Proposes new legislation/regulations and, once its adopted monitors implementation

    • Executive side

  • Sole right to initiate/shape legislation and monitors implementation

  • Commission decisions can be of legislative nature such as legislative proposals addressed to the other institutions, or legal acts such as implementing and delegated acts. They can also be of non-legislative nature, such as communications on policy strategies and reports addressed to the other EU Institutions, or decisions to open infringement procedures.

    • Executive organ of the EU

    • Guardian of the treaties

    • Represents the EU on the international stage (alongside the High Representative and sometimes the president of the European Council)

How is the Commission selected?

1. Electing the President

   • Every five years, the European Council - made up of EU heads of state and government - proposes a candidate for the President of the European Commission to the European Parliament.

   • The candidate for President is proposed based on the political make-up of the Parliament following the European elections; typically, they will be chosen from the largest political family in the Parliament.

     • Spitzenkandidat (leading party’s candidate) - biggest plurality in the European Parliament

       • The Council of Ministers does not have to accept

     • Parliament has a role in putting forward candidates and determining who leads the European College (cabinet)

   • If an absolute majority of members of Parliament support the nominee, he or she is elected. 

2. Selecting the other Commissioners

   • The Council of the European Union (Ministers) and the Commission’s President-elect, adopts list of Commissioners-designate (who they think should serve as a role in the Commission - not in a specific position, just on the commission) based on suggestions from EU Member States. Though there is one Commissioner from each EU country, their job is to defend the interests of the EU as a whole – rather than national interests.

   • Each nominee for a Commissioner must appear before the parliamentary committee with responsibility for his or her proposed portfolio. Committee members then vote on the nominee’s suitability for the position. 

     • Important portfolios - areas where EU has exclusive competence

   • Once approved, the entire college--the President, the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and the other members of the Commission—are subjected as a body to a vote of consent by the Parliament.

     • Parliament only has the ability at the beginning to say no to a candidate

   • Following Parliament's vote, the President of the European Commission and the Commissioners are appointed by the European Council.

Accountability

• The European Commission is held democratically accountable by the European Parliament, which has the right to approve and dismiss the entire political leadership of the Commission.

  • Significant role - ability to dismiss entire commission

• (see current composition of the Commission here)

Directorates General (DGs)

• The permanent departments of the staff of the European Commission.  They are the 32,000 civil servants that work for the European Commission.  Must be a citizen of the EU to work with the Commission.

European Parliament

• Body that has grown most in its power in the last 70 years

• Legislative arm with Council of Ministers

• Meets in Strasbourg and Brussels

• Directly Elected since 1979 for 5 year terms (each citizen votes in EP elections)

  • Previously elected by national parliaments

• Led by President elected by EP, works in 20 standing committees

• Current Gender Balance:  40% women, 60% men (75% Finnish MEPs are women) (5 minute video)

• Note—Parliament cannot propose legislation; only the Commission can!

CoDecision

• Over the years and with subsequent changes in European treaties, the Parliament has acquired substantial legislative and budgetary powers that allow it to approve laws and legislation of the EU together with the representatives of the governments of the Member States in the Council.

  • Originally, the dominance was with the intergovernmental parties

  • Equal decision-making powers with the European Council of Ministers

• The Parliament acts as a co-legislator, sharing with the Council the power to adopt and amend legislative proposals and to decide on the EU budget. It also supervises the work of the Commission and other EU bodies and cooperates with national parliaments of EU countries to get their input. It oversees the budget and can monitor implementation.

• Approves College of Commissioners, and can dismiss.

Elections

• Elections for the European Parliament are held every 5 years. It is up to each country to manage the election, but there are some common principles they must apply. Last held 6-9 June 2024 (video- 1 minute).

  • Elections take place during a four-day period, from Thursday to Sunday.

  • The number of MEPs elected in each member state is in rough proportion to its population size (see below

  • The number of MEPs elected from a political party is proportional to the number of votes it receives.

  • EU citizens resident in another EU country can vote and stand for election there.

    • Parliamentarians are elected on an EU basis within the national context

  • Each citizen can vote only once.

• Find out how the European elections are organised in your country.

• https://elections.europa.eu/en/

• A total of 720 MEPs were elected in June 2024, 15 more compared to the previous elections.

• As a general rule, the number of MEPs is decided before each election. The total cannot exceed 750 plus the president.

• Elections are contested by national political parties but once MEPs are elected, most opt to become part of transnational political groups. Most national parties are affiliated to a European-wide political party.

  • National parties that run the election - parties in the national context organize the elections in the national environment

  • Once they go to the EP, they do not sit in a national context

  • Ideology, not nationality is most important in the European Parliament (trans-national parliament system)

• Turnout was just over 50% in 2024 European Parliament election. (national elections have around 70%)

• The number of MEPs elected from each EU country is agreed before each election and is based on the principle of degressive proportionality, which means each MEP from a larger country represents more people than an MEP from a smaller country. The minimum number of MEPs from any country is 6 and the maximum number is 96.

Current Europarties

Budget

• The European Parliament Budget (to run the EP) is 1.2% of the EU overall budget. See breakdown here which includes supporting members, and political groups, as well as staff expenditures.

European Court of Justice

• Role: Ensuring EU law is interpreted and applied the same in every EU country; ensuring countries and EU institutions abide by EU law. Settles disputes between national governments and EU institutions. 

  • It can also, in certain circumstances, be used by individuals, companies or organizations to take action against an EU institution, if they feel it has somehow infringed their rights.

    • Allows the individuals access to international courts, beyond national courts

  • The EU becomes closest to functioning as a supranational institution in relation to member states - the decision of the Court is binding on members

• Established in: 1952 with the European Coal and Steel Community

• Location: Luxembourg

• Website: Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU)

• Structure (3 minute video)

  • Court of Justice: 1 judge from each EU country, plus 11 advocates general - interpretation 

• General Court: 2 judges from each EU country - appeals court (states, individuals, firms)

Principles of the European Court of Justice

1. Mutual Recognition of Standards

• Member states are free to develop own standards, these cannot bar products produced in other EU states under different standards

  • Single market - EU has competence (firms must abide by EU law, but member states may also have standards)

  • Mutual recognition - all states are free to develop their own standards, but they cannot be used to prevent other products being sold in their own national markets

    • Reputation of higher quality of goods, higher, higher end product, and niche product 

2. Direct Effect

• EU law is directly and uniformly applicable in all EU states, and challenges can be made to the compatibility of national and EU law by states, firms, and individuals.

  • Commission has a job ensuring this happens

3. Supremacy of EU Law

• In areas where the EU has competence (authority) through the treaties, EU law supercedes national law in cases of incompatibility.

  • Change laws to be compliant

Rulings

• The CJEU gives rulings on cases brought before it. The most common types of case are:

  • interpreting the law (preliminary rulings) – national courts of EU countries are required to ensure EU law is properly applied, but courts in different countries might interpret it differently. If a national court is in doubt about the interpretation or validity of an EU law, it can ask the Court for clarification. The same mechanism can be used to determine whether a national law or practice is compatible with EU law.

  • enforcing the law (infringement proceedings) – this type of case is taken against a national government for failing to comply with EU law. Can be started by the European Commission or another EU country. If the country is found to be at fault, it must put things right at once, or risk a second case being brought, which may result in a fine.

  • annulling EU legal acts (actions for annulment) – if an EU act is believed to violate EU treaties or fundamental rights, the Court can be asked to annul it – by an EU government, the Council of the EU, the European Commission or (in some cases) the European Parliament.

    • Private individuals can also ask the Court to annul an EU act that directly concerns them.

  • ensuring the EU takes action (actions for failure to act) – the Parliament, Council and Commission must make certain decisions under certain circumstances. If they don't, EU governments, other EU institutions or (under certain conditions) individuals or companies can complain to the Court.

    • Not fulfilling responsibilities

  • sanctioning EU institutions (actions for damages) – any person or company who has had their interests harmed as a result of the action or inaction of the EU or its staff can take action against them through the Court.

    • Facebook, Meta - The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) 

Performance of Member States in relation to EU LAW

1. Transposition of Single Market Directives

   • Foot-draggers and fence-sitters

   • Countries failed to implement single market directives 

   • Transposition means that you have EU laws that then have to be transposed or passed at the national level

   • Financial services provide greatest challenges to transposition into national law

Infringement

• Infringement cases are brought by the European Commission against member states to the Court of Justice of the European Union in order to ENFORCE EU LAWS.  The Commission identifies possible infringements of EU law on the basis of its own investigations or following complaints from citizens, businesses or other stakeholders.

  • EU enforces laws against member states

    • Sanctions

• Formal Procedure

  • The procedure follows a number of steps laid out in the EU treaties, each ending with a formal decision:

1. The Commission sends a letter of formal notice requesting further information to the country concerned, which must send a detailed reply within a specified period, usually 2 months.

   • Effort to speak directly to state involved

2. If the Commission concludes that the country is failing to fulfil its obligations under EU law, it may send a reasoned opinion: a formal request to comply with EU law. It explains why the Commission considers that the country is breaching EU law. It also requests that the country inform the Commission of the measures taken, within a specified period, usually 2 months.

3. If the country still doesn't comply, the Commission may decide on a referral to the Court of Justice. Most cases are settled before being referred to the court.

   • Submission has the recourse to go into the Court of Justice

4. If an EU country fails to communicate measures that implement the provisions of a directive in time, the Commission may ask the court to impose penalties.

5. If the court finds that a country has breached EU law, the national authorities must take action to comply with the Court judgment.

• Non-compliance with a court decision

  • If, despite the court's judgment, the country still doesn't rectify the situation, the Commission may refer the country back to the court.

• Financial penalties

  • When referring an EU country to the court for the second time, the Commission proposes that the court impose financial penalties, which can be either a lump sum and/or a daily payment.

• Example:  In October 2024, The Commission referred Hungary to the Court of Justice because its national law ‘Defence of Sovereignty” seeking to investigate any activity that is foreign funded is in breach of EU law.

• This continues the infringement that was launched in 2021 (DW article with background)

• To explore ALL infringement cases by country, visit the Commission webpage on infringements: https://ec.europa.eu/atwork/applying-eu-law/infringements-proceedings/infringement_decisions/?langCode=EN

• But it is also the case that infringement can go unpunished.  It takes years, in some cases up to 12 years, to resolve a case. https://www.investigate-europe.eu/posts/infringement-cold-cases-member-states-left-unpunished-for-dozens-of-eu-law-violations

• Beyond the headline-grabbing examples of Poland and Hungary, defiance of EU law is becoming more common across the EU, affecting every area of daily European life, including on matters where EU citizens believe the EU executive is protecting them — product safety, food safety, privacy, etc.

• Inefficient parliaments → greatest number of issues

ECJ and the European Court of Human Rights?

• All EU members are signatories of the European Convention on Human Rights which was created by the 46 member Council of Europe which has its own institutional basis to promote human rights among all 46 members.  The EU and the ECJ thus defer to the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights when addressing human rights issues within the EU.  The European Court of Human Rights is enormous and deals with a wide variety of rights—see fact sheet, including many so-called “Dublin cases” related to the application of asylum law and who is responsible for examining asylum cases.

  • EU role is subservient to the ECHR

Summary

• Intergovernmentalism

  • Council of Ministers - member states being represented, not represented by foreign ministries, but in the Council of Ministers

  • COREPER - diplomatic representation - diplomats are not doing normal negotiations, but involved in looking at legislation at the EU level

    • Intergoverrnmental organizations are not completely intergovernmental

    • Things that look more like governing activties

• Supranationalism

  • Commission, Parliament, and the Court

    • Commission -  Composition of the executive branch looks different (not coalition government - elected by the national government (intergovernmental dynamics)

    • Court - the only EU institution that truly operates on a transnational basis

    • Parliment - compel member states to take action (comes close to looking like a national parliament)

EU Elections

• Elections for the European Parliament are held every 5 years. It is up to each country to manage the election, but there are some common principles they must apply.  Last held 6-9 June 2024

  • Elections take place during a four-day period, from Thursday to Sunday.

    • Different rules on elections (weekends vs. non-weekends)

  • The number of MEPs elected in each member state is in rough proportion to its population size (see below

  • The number of MEPs elected from a political party is proportional to the number of votes it receives.

  • EU citizens resident in another EU country can vote and stand for election there.

  • Each citizen can vote only once.

Find out how the European elections are organised in your country.https://elections.europa.eu/en/

European Political Groups in the European Parliament

• The Members of the European Parliament sit in political groups – they are not organised by nationality, but by political affiliation. There are currently 8 political groups in the European Parliament.

  • Organization at the European level, but not the same as at the national level because these groups have to accommodate a wide variety of national parties

• The minimum number of Members needed to form a political group is 23, and at least one-quarter of the Member States (currently seven) must be represented within each group. Members may not belong to more than one political group.

  • Some Members do not belong to any political group and are known as non-attached Members.

  • Political groups can be formed at any time during the parliamentary term.

  • Political groups enjoy certain advantages: they play an important role in setting the Parliament’s agenda, are allocated more speaking time during debates and have more office space, staff and funds. They also decide on the set-up of parliamentary committees.

  • Non-strict party discipline: no votes of no confidence

• The position adopted by the political group is arrived at by discussion within the group. No Member can be forced to vote in a particular way.

• EU Political Groups play the role of ‘representing without governing’ because they do not form a government at the EU level as majority or coalition parties do at the national level.

EUROPARTIES—The Trans-European party structure

• A European political party, informally Europarty, is a type of European political alliance recognised as a political party operating transnationally in Europe and within the institutions of the EU.

  • Goes beyond European Parliament (within the institutions)

  • Europarties are very formally recognized trans-European parties and they participate in different Euro groups. 

• They are regulated under EU law (Regulation 1141/2014) and their operations are supervised by the Authority for European Political Parties and European Political Foundations (APPF).

• European political parties – mostly consisting of national member parties, and few individual members – have the right to campaign during the European elections, for which they often adopt manifestos outlining their positions and ambitions. Ahead of the elections, some of them designate their preferred candidate (known as Spitzenkandidat or lead candidate) to be the next President of the European Commission.

  • Efforts to make it more like a national parliament (firm connection between the Commission and the Parliament) 

  • Example:

    • In 2024, ALDE (which participates in the Renew Group in the EP) has 51 MEPs and 5 members of the European Commission.

    • In the 27 EU member states, there are 2 with ALDE-affiliated Prime Ministers: Kristen Michal (Estonian Reform Party) in Estonia and Alexander De Croo (Open VLD) in Belgium.

    • ALDE Party members are also in governments in ten other EU member states: Cyprus, France, Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Ireland, Luxembourg, Lithuania, Germany and the Netherlands.

Funding of Europarties

• Final amounts of public funding to European parties for 2021

  1. EPP (30.5%)

  2. PES (20.5%)

  3. ALDE (15.1%)

  4. EGP (12.4%)

  5. ECR (5.6%)

  6. EL (5.2%)

  7. Patriots (3.4%)

  8. EFA (2.6%)

  9. EDP (2.6%)

  10. ECPM (2.1%)

• European parties use public and private funding to finance their activities; public funding refers exclusively to funding from the general budget of the European Union, and cannot directly come from Member States or third countries, or entities under their control. European public funding accounts for the vast majority of European parties' income.

  • Public Funding: Each year, the European Parliament allocates a total amount of money to fund European political parties qualifying for European public funding: 10% of this amount is distributed via a lump sum, allocated equally to all qualifying European parties, while 90% is distributed in proportion to each party's share MEPs.

  • Private funding:  European parties mostly receive financial contributions from their national member parties, which, in turn, almost always receive public funding from Member States. Donations from private sector firms andindividuals only play a limited role.

• The European Parliament Budget (to run the EP) is 1.2% of the EU overall budget. See breakdown here which includes supporting members, and political groups, as well as staff expenditures.

The Case of Hungary’s Fidesz Party: Kicked out of EPP

• After years of deferring a decision about the Fidesz as tensions between the EU and Hungary grew over rule of law violations. the EPP began to address the problem two months before the 2019 European elections. 190 of the 193 EPP delegates supported the agreement to partially suspend its membership: Fidesz excluded from EPP meetings and internal elections, but remained in the European People's Party Group of the European Parliament. In February 2020, the EPP extended the suspension of Fidesz indefinitely.

• In April 2020, the Hungarian Parliament had passed a law declaring a state of emergency within Hungary, granting Prime Minister Viktor Orbán the right to rule by decree.

• In 2021, Fidesz decided to leave the European People's Party as well. 

• In June 2024, The Hungarian Christian Democratic People's Party (KDNP), who serve in government with Fidesz, left the European People's Party. That same month, members of the newly elected Hungarian Tisza Party led by Peter Magyar, a former Fidesz insider, applied to join EPP.

Referenda

• There are often National Referenda on key points of EU integration through accession to treaties.

  • Membership Referenda (depends on the constitutional requirements of the MS

  • New Treaties (commonly Ireland, Denmark—opt outs stem from this)

  • Adopting the Euro (Denmark and Sweden NO)

  • Constitutional Treaty—all states had to ratify for it to enter into force.  In 10 of the 25 countries, referenda were required for ratification, and others chose to have a referendum. !7 countries ratified the Constitutional Treaty (including referenda in Spain and Luxembourg) before France and Netherlands voted No.  Because it was a constitutional treaty, there was no ability simply to renegotiate.

Citizens Initiatives since Lisbon

• Must register the initiative with the European Commission

  • Requires the support of at least 1 million EU citizens,  with thresholds (minimum numbers) in at least 7 EU countries. They must fill in a specific statement of support form. 12 month timeframe

  • As of March 2025, 110 European Citizens' Initiatives (ECIs) had been validly registered, with 10 of them reaching the required 1 million signatures and being submitted to the European Commission for examination. 

  • 10 Key CI that have received attention from the European Commission can be found here.

The Policy Cycle in the EU

1. Agenda-setting/Initiation

   • Getting things on the agenda -  know what to legislate/make policy on

2. Formulation and Decision-making/Adoption

3. Implementation

4. Evaluation/Adjudication

Assumptions about Multi-level Governance Process in the EU:

1. Decision making competences are shared by actors at different levels

   • Individual, state, supranational

2. Collective decision making entails a loss of autonomy for member states

   • Integrated with other member states and institutions

3. Political Arenas are interconnected rather than separate (or nested)

   • National parliaments are penetrated by EU process (have to be integrated at the national level)

Who Drives the EU political agenda?

• Elitist and and pluralist model

• member states themselves outside of EU institutions—realism

• Issues for Agenda-setting: Democratic deficit and authority gap (difference between what EU institutions want to do and what EU citizens and governments allow)

Pluralist Model

• Pluralist model: citizens initiative with 1 million signatures of EU citizens from at least 7 MS. Also, European Parliament suggestions to Commission—note, this suggests supranationalism

  • Interest groups advocate for certain things (bubbles up from society → reflected in campaigns, etc.)

  • Advocate for things to be paid attention to

  • Lobbying (economic, common-market, producer’s unions)

  • Citizens Initiatives (Lisbon Treaty) - force the Commission to take note and respond for institutions to take action/pay attention (requires a response)

    • Education, human rights, climate, environment, animal rights (environment, market-oriented)

      • EU may not have competence in some areas

      • Everyday life

      • Tend to be youth-driven

  • Bottom-up

Elitist model

• Elitist model: European Council, Coreper, Council of Ministers (during presidency), Commission—note—this suggests intergovernmentalism

  • Public does not pay much attention and political players influence agenda

  • Intergovernmental bodies driving the agenda

    • Council - agree to a presidency conclusion and then that becomes something important that the EU has to focus on (elitist model)

    • Coreper - can put something on the agenda by suggesting it to the Council of Ministers or back home, and then it is brought up at the Council of Ministers

    • Council of Ministers President - member-states outside EU institutions can influence the agenda; energy by that government, and most of them have something they want the EU to pay attention (set the agenda of what they want the EU to focus on)

    • Commission - heads of state and government came together and decide to deal with something and put it onto the agenda 

  • Top-down

Formulation

• Council debates objectives, Commission drafts a work program [reach out to other bodies, information, outreach], publishes white papers [plan released for comments and criticism], and develops proposals for new laws/budget.

  • Ukraine, migration

• 30% of proposals come from international obligations

  • Binding treaties (WTO, COE, ECHR)

• 20-25% are follow-up from other European institutions

  • Parliament, Council of Ministers

    • Citizens Initiatives

• 20% involve updating current EU laws

• 10-15% arise out of obligations from existing treaties or legislation

Competence in the EU—when can the EU act?

• Exclusive, shared, and supporting competencies

Exclusive Competence

The Union has exclusive competence to make directives and conclude international agreements when provided for in a Union legislative act.

• the customs union

• the establishing of the competition rules necessary for the functioning of the internal market

• monetary policy for the Member States whose currency is the euro

• the conservation of marine biological resources under the common fisheries policy

• common commercial policy

Shared competence

Member States cannot exercise competence in areas where the Union has done so.

• the internal market

• social policy, as defined in this Treaty

• economic, social and territorial cohesion

• agriculture and fisheries, excluding the conservation of marine biological resources

• environment

• consumer protection

• transport

• trans-European networks

• energy

• the area of freedom, security and justice

• common safety concerns in public health matters, as defined in this Treaty