The Treaty of Lisbon, which entered into force on 1 December 2009, made the European Council (EUCO) an official institution of the European Union. It consists of the head of state or government of each member state of the EU, as well as without a vote, the president of the European Commission (José Manuel Barroso) and the EUCO president elected for two and a half years by the 27 national leaders (Herman Van Rompuy).
The first two years of the European Council have coincided with the profound financial and economic crises in the eurozone and the European Union generally, leading to repeated summits of varying kinds.
For the second time, president Van Rompuy has put a summary of his thoughts on record in an annual publication, now:
The European Council in 2011 (January 2012; 74 pages)
This is not a novelty, because the English and a few other versions were published in January.
There are, however, a few reasons for me to mention – even to recommend – the publication now.
I have now read the overview presented by Van Rompuy. His ”official” account of history in the making is an important source, regardless of how readers feel about the subject and the success this far.
The publication has now become available in 22 EU languages. (You can either toggle the language switch for the language of your choice, or proceed to the page for Council publications.)
The third reason is that you are able to find the official EUCO conclusions and the extraordinary summit statements neatly in one place for future reference.
The introduction and the conclusions are available in the same manner for the previous year, in:
The European Council in 2010 (January 2010; 45 pages; also available in 22 languages)
Ralf Grahn
speaker on EU affairs, especially digital policy and law
P.S. 1: For better or for worse, between the global issues and the national level, the European Union shapes our digital future and online freedoms. More than 900 euroblogs are aggregated by multilingual Bloggingportal.eu. Is your blog already listed among them? Are you following the debates which matter for your future?
P.S. 2: A few moments ago, the petition launched by @Avaaz for the European Parliament (and the national parliaments) to reject #ACTA had already been signed by 2,377,656 netizens, but more are welcome until the official funeral of the anti-piracy treaty.
Showing posts with label statement. Show all posts
Showing posts with label statement. Show all posts
Sunday, 19 February 2012
Monday, 6 September 2010
Help me find legal and political decisions concerning EU “State of the Union” debate
The European Commission’s agenda from 6 September to 3 October 2010 tells us:
I looked for the framework agreement between the European Commission and the European Parliament, annexed to the European Parliament’s Rules of Procedure (July 2010): Annex XIV, from page 177 (including its annexes).
Even if there are many commendable provisions on how the Commission shall keep the European Parliament informed, I failed to find an annual address on the “State of the Union” or a speech resembling that scheduled for September.
The newsletter from the European Parliament on the 6-9 September 2010 Strasbourg plenary session offers us the following information about the State of the Union debate with President Barroso:
The Legislative Observatory Oeil adds the following referral regarding the procedure: EP 110-p2. Let us quote the first two paragraphs of Rule 110:
If Barroso’s “statement” has morphed into a “State of the Union” debate, does this mean that all other members of the Commission, the Council and the European Council can, from now on, use the same epithet for their statements to the EP plenary?
How about the president of the European Council, Herman Van Rompuy, whose duty it is to make a statement after each meeting of the European Council?
Since I must have missed some pertinent points, could the European Commission or the European Parliament, please give me more accurate information about the legal and political decisions concerning this major institutional novelty, the State of the Union address?
Ralf Grahn
P.S. Comments relevant to the topic discussed in each Grahnlaw blog post are most welcome. However, the number of spam comments has skyrocketed. This is the sad reason for comment moderation, so it may take a while before your valued comment appears.
It is easier to understand a language than to use it correctly. As Eurobloggers we could and should promote interaction among Europeans across borders and between linguistic communities. Grahnlaw has adopted a multilingual comment policy:
I do my best to read comments in Danish, Dutch, English, Finnish, French, German, Italian, Norwegian, Portuguese, Spanish or Swedish, even if the Grahnlaw blog and my possible replies are in English.
During his second mandate, the President has agreed with the European Parliament to give a yearly address on the State of the Union. This has been incorporated into the Framework Agreement that has been agreed with the European Parliament. President Barroso will give an assessment of where the Union stands and outline the political challenges for the next 12 months.
I looked for the framework agreement between the European Commission and the European Parliament, annexed to the European Parliament’s Rules of Procedure (July 2010): Annex XIV, from page 177 (including its annexes).
Even if there are many commendable provisions on how the Commission shall keep the European Parliament informed, I failed to find an annual address on the “State of the Union” or a speech resembling that scheduled for September.
The newsletter from the European Parliament on the 6-9 September 2010 Strasbourg plenary session offers us the following information about the State of the Union debate with President Barroso:
Commission President José Manuel Barroso will give his first-ever State of the Union address to the European Parliament in Strasbourg on Tuesday. The ensuing debate will enable MEPs to review with Mr Barroso the developments in the European Union since the EP elections of June 2009 and the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty in December 2009.
The Legislative Observatory Oeil adds the following referral regarding the procedure: EP 110-p2. Let us quote the first two paragraphs of Rule 110:
Rule 110 Statements by the Commission, Council and European Council
1. Members of the Commission, the Council and the European Council may at any time ask the President of Parliament for permission to make a statement. The President of the European Council shall make a statement after each of its meetings. The President of Parliament shall decide when the statement may be made and whether it is to be followed by a full debate or by 30 minutes of brief and concise questions from Members.
2. When placing a statement with debate on its agenda, Parliament shall decide whether or not to wind up the debate with a resolution. It shall not do so if a report on the same matter is scheduled for the same or the next part-session, unless the President, for exceptional reasons, proposes otherwise. If Parliament decides to wind up a debate with a resolution, a committee, a political group or at least 40 Members may table a motion for a resolution.
If Barroso’s “statement” has morphed into a “State of the Union” debate, does this mean that all other members of the Commission, the Council and the European Council can, from now on, use the same epithet for their statements to the EP plenary?
How about the president of the European Council, Herman Van Rompuy, whose duty it is to make a statement after each meeting of the European Council?
Since I must have missed some pertinent points, could the European Commission or the European Parliament, please give me more accurate information about the legal and political decisions concerning this major institutional novelty, the State of the Union address?
Ralf Grahn
P.S. Comments relevant to the topic discussed in each Grahnlaw blog post are most welcome. However, the number of spam comments has skyrocketed. This is the sad reason for comment moderation, so it may take a while before your valued comment appears.
It is easier to understand a language than to use it correctly. As Eurobloggers we could and should promote interaction among Europeans across borders and between linguistic communities. Grahnlaw has adopted a multilingual comment policy:
I do my best to read comments in Danish, Dutch, English, Finnish, French, German, Italian, Norwegian, Portuguese, Spanish or Swedish, even if the Grahnlaw blog and my possible replies are in English.
Tuesday, 3 March 2009
European Parliament: Hearing the Commission
According to the second paragraph of Article 197 of the Treaty establishing the European Community (TEC), Members of the Commission may attend all meetings and shall, at their request, be heard on behalf of the Commission.
Under the consolidated Treaty of Lisbon, the first paragraph of Article 230 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) would shorten this to: The Commission may attend all the meetings and shall, at its request, be heard.
In the Framework Agreement mentioned below, the Commission seeks to ensure that, as a general rule, Members of the Commission are present at plenary sittings for agenda items falling under their responsibility, whenever Parliament so requests.
***
Statements
According to the Rules of Procedure, the Commission (as the Council and the European Council) can ask the EP President for permission to make a statement:
Rule 103 Statements by the Commission, Council and European Council
1. Members of the Commission, Council and European Council may at any time ask the President for permission to make a statement. The President shall decide when the statement may be made and whether it is to be followed by a full debate or by thirty minutes of brief and concise questions from Members.
-----
Rule 104 provides for information from the Commission about its latest decisions:
Rule 104 Statements explaining Commission decisions
After consulting the Conference of Presidents, the President may invite the President of the Commission, the Commissioner responsible for relations with the European Parliament or, by agreement, another Commissioner, to make a statement to Parliament after each meeting of the Commission, explaining the main decisions taken. The statement shall be followed by a debate of at least thirty minutes in which Members may put brief and concise questions.
***
Relations more broadly
The provisions on hearing in the Chamber cover only a part of the multi-faceted relations between the European Parliament and the Commission.
Therefore we take a broader view of the relations between these institutions and look at how some of them have been regulated in the Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament (16th edition, October 2008).
***
Interinstitutional agreements
The “institutional triangle” ─ the European Parliament, the Commission and the Council ─ have developed complementary rules through so called interinstitutional agreements.
The EP’s Rules of Procedure offer the following general principles concerning these agreements:
CHAPTER 6 INTERINSTITUTIONAL AGREEMENTS
Rule 120 Interinstitutional agreements
1. Parliament may enter into agreements with other institutions in the context of the application of the Treaties or in order to improve or clarify procedures.
Such agreements may take the form of joint declarations, exchanges of letters or codes of conduct or other appropriate instruments. They shall be signed by the President after examination by the committee responsible for constitutional affairs and after approval by Parliament. They may be annexed to the Rules of Procedure for information.
2. Where such agreements imply the modification of existing procedural rights or obligations or establish new procedural rights or obligations for Members or bodies of Parliament, or otherwise imply modification or interpretation of the Rules of Procedure, the matter shall be referred to the committee responsible for examination in accordance with Rule 201(2) to (6) before the agreement is signed.
***
Framework Agreement
There are several interinstitutional agreements, but Annex XIII to the EP Rules of Procedure contains the Framework Agreement on relations between the European Parliament and the Commission, which aims to ensure that their powers and prerogatives are exercised as effectively as possible.
Here is a summary of matters covered.
The rules concern the political accountability of the Commission, information at every stage of legislative and budgetary processes, as well as on the Commission’s legislative and work programme. The Commission undertakes to inform the EP about action taken on the basis of requests by the European Parliament.
The Commission promises information about negotiations on international agreements from the preparatory stage onwards.
The Commission presents proposals for the European Union’s multiannual programming, with a view to achieving consensus on inter-institutional programming between the Institutions concerned.
As a general rule, the Member of the Commission responsible for an item under consideration in a parliamentary committee shall be present at the relevant committee meeting, when invited. Members of the Commission shall be heard at their request.
Annex 1 of Annex XIII concerns the forwarding of confidential information to the European Parliament and Annex 2 presents a timetable for the Commission legislative and work programme.
Ralf Grahn
Under the consolidated Treaty of Lisbon, the first paragraph of Article 230 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) would shorten this to: The Commission may attend all the meetings and shall, at its request, be heard.
In the Framework Agreement mentioned below, the Commission seeks to ensure that, as a general rule, Members of the Commission are present at plenary sittings for agenda items falling under their responsibility, whenever Parliament so requests.
***
Statements
According to the Rules of Procedure, the Commission (as the Council and the European Council) can ask the EP President for permission to make a statement:
Rule 103 Statements by the Commission, Council and European Council
1. Members of the Commission, Council and European Council may at any time ask the President for permission to make a statement. The President shall decide when the statement may be made and whether it is to be followed by a full debate or by thirty minutes of brief and concise questions from Members.
-----
Rule 104 provides for information from the Commission about its latest decisions:
Rule 104 Statements explaining Commission decisions
After consulting the Conference of Presidents, the President may invite the President of the Commission, the Commissioner responsible for relations with the European Parliament or, by agreement, another Commissioner, to make a statement to Parliament after each meeting of the Commission, explaining the main decisions taken. The statement shall be followed by a debate of at least thirty minutes in which Members may put brief and concise questions.
***
Relations more broadly
The provisions on hearing in the Chamber cover only a part of the multi-faceted relations between the European Parliament and the Commission.
Therefore we take a broader view of the relations between these institutions and look at how some of them have been regulated in the Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament (16th edition, October 2008).
***
Interinstitutional agreements
The “institutional triangle” ─ the European Parliament, the Commission and the Council ─ have developed complementary rules through so called interinstitutional agreements.
The EP’s Rules of Procedure offer the following general principles concerning these agreements:
CHAPTER 6 INTERINSTITUTIONAL AGREEMENTS
Rule 120 Interinstitutional agreements
1. Parliament may enter into agreements with other institutions in the context of the application of the Treaties or in order to improve or clarify procedures.
Such agreements may take the form of joint declarations, exchanges of letters or codes of conduct or other appropriate instruments. They shall be signed by the President after examination by the committee responsible for constitutional affairs and after approval by Parliament. They may be annexed to the Rules of Procedure for information.
2. Where such agreements imply the modification of existing procedural rights or obligations or establish new procedural rights or obligations for Members or bodies of Parliament, or otherwise imply modification or interpretation of the Rules of Procedure, the matter shall be referred to the committee responsible for examination in accordance with Rule 201(2) to (6) before the agreement is signed.
***
Framework Agreement
There are several interinstitutional agreements, but Annex XIII to the EP Rules of Procedure contains the Framework Agreement on relations between the European Parliament and the Commission, which aims to ensure that their powers and prerogatives are exercised as effectively as possible.
Here is a summary of matters covered.
The rules concern the political accountability of the Commission, information at every stage of legislative and budgetary processes, as well as on the Commission’s legislative and work programme. The Commission undertakes to inform the EP about action taken on the basis of requests by the European Parliament.
The Commission promises information about negotiations on international agreements from the preparatory stage onwards.
The Commission presents proposals for the European Union’s multiannual programming, with a view to achieving consensus on inter-institutional programming between the Institutions concerned.
As a general rule, the Member of the Commission responsible for an item under consideration in a parliamentary committee shall be present at the relevant committee meeting, when invited. Members of the Commission shall be heard at their request.
Annex 1 of Annex XIII concerns the forwarding of confidential information to the European Parliament and Annex 2 presents a timetable for the Commission legislative and work programme.
Ralf Grahn
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Subscribe To Grahnlaw
Posts
All Comments
