You are here: UK Essays » Essays » Politics » Integration Council European

Cookie Information

Privacy Information

Free Essays - Essays

Integration Council European

What impressions do you have of the European Union as a policy-making body?

The European Union (EU) has grown from an international organisation to something unique (George and Bache, 2001), in both its structure and development. EU agreements are pervasive in the policy-making of its member states; indeed in 1988 Jacques Delors, then President of the European Commission, suggested that 80% of socio-economic legislation in member states is framed by EU legislation (Wallace and Wallace, 2000).

Therefore, the need for EU policy-making to be effective and constructive is of the utmost importance. The range of institutions involved in the EU policy-making process, including the European Council, the Council of Ministers (also called the Council of the European Union), the European Parliament and the European Commission, mean there is no single process to be identified. This paper aims to determine the effectiveness of the EU as a policy-making body, first by an explanation of the institutions and policy agendas of the EU. Following this, the route that these institutions may take in the future and the overall utility of the policy-making process in a wider context will be examined.

The multi-level policy-making environment of the EU, in its present form following the 1992 Maastricht Treaty, is structured around a number of distinct institutions. The European Council is led by a national leader for six months at a time – a rotating presidency – and has “supreme political authority” (Stark, 2007) despite having no formal legislative powers. It is the machine driving policy agenda, by the President and often in favour of their nation. The European Council can result in a lack of leadership – a problem for the highest body in the EU – and so acts merely as a playground for the “squabbling” of member states (McCormick, 2007).

The European Commission has been accused of having similar troubles with member states using it as a means to their own ends (George and Bache, 2001). Being the executive branch responsible for the day-to-day running of the EU, it is the only institution that may officially propose a bill. Given the importance of bill proposal and the distraction from this process by the Commission’s other duties, I would argue that this is not an effective manner of passing new legislation and that it should focus on the formulation rather than implementation of law.

The Council of Ministers and the European Parliament are the two legislative institutions of the EU. The three pillars of the EU, the European Community, Common Foreign and Security Policy, Justice and Home Affairs are all dealt with by the Council of Ministers, but European Parliament only has a say in the European Community pillar. In my opinion, spreading the weight of the legislative task between institutions may appear disparate but is in fact highly valuable.

The policy agenda of the EU is wide (Wallace and Wallace, 2000), effecting all three pillars set out by the Maastricht Treaty. The EU started as the European Coal and Steel Community, thus energy policy is particularly important, as is the Common Agricultural policy. The EU gives a large amount of aid annually for economic development, thus regional development policy, especially given the recent EU expansion into Eastern Europe, is a core aim.

Foreign policy, whilst occupying a central position according to the Maastricht Treaty, is distinctly lacking; one of the most significant reasons why the Union is more than an international organisation but cannot qualify as a ‘superpower’ such as the United States (McCormick, 2007). However, there are a number of policy issues almost completely ignored by the Union, including healthcare, welfare and education (Richardson, 1996).

Under the proposed Lisbon Treaty however, there would be a number of changes to the current system of policy-making and institutional structure of the EU. The European Council would be headed by a single fixed president with a renewable two and a half year mandate, and the council would have an increasing say over the second and third pillars of the Union (www.europa.eu). This in my opinion would go some way to ease the problem of apparent ‘squabbling’ between nations, but with no legislative powers the council would remain weak. The Council of Ministers and European Parliament would be expected to make decisions in nearly all policy areas by co-decision, making a fairer system, but decreasing efficiency.

The European Commission would decrease in size, but particular policy representatives would be created, such as for foreign policy – a wise move for underrepresented policy areas. Any future changes in the EU must take into account the current world order, and following the recent enlargement of the EU, there rightly is concern that the current model of policy-making will not translate well to those Eastern European countries only recently entering democracy (Wallace and Wallace, 2000). Issues such as globalisation and terrorism are central to policy ideas, against which the EU takes a multilateral approach, following a culture of institutionalised cooperation, and thus spreading this within itself (Wallace and Wallace, 2000). I believe having a broader set of institutional frameworks to follow further up the multilateral hierarchy gives the EU important experience in its own policy-making, making it far more effective.

Whilst the EU is a complex policy-making body, it is an effective one, creating 100 pieces of legislation annually (Hix, 2005). Richardson (1996) warns of viewing the EU as bad or even unusual, stating that it is merely “messy” and is much like many other international and national bodies. With one of its aims being to promote multilateral institutional frameworks, the EU is continually honing its legislative processes. Concerns do arise when each individual institution is examined, with many seeming almost ineffectual – a notable example being the European Council.

Other issues surface when the balance between Western and Eastern Europe is inspected, considering that the policy framework is based on the Western experience alone. It is clear that the Lisbon Treaty, to be ratified in the coming months, aims to go well along the road to true integration of Eastern Europe into the policy-making process. However, given increasing Euro-scepticism from old core member states, it is not certain that this constitution in disguise will pass unimpeded.

Bibliography

• George, S. and Bache, I, 2001, “Politics in the European Union”, Oxford

• Hix, S., 2005, “The political system of the European Union”, Basingstoke, Macmillan

• McCormick, J., 2007, “The European superpower”, Palgrave Macmillan

• Pollack, M.A., 2000, “The end of creeping competence? EU policy-making since Maastricht”, Journal of Common Market Studies, 38 (3), 519-538

• Richardson, J., 1996, “Policy-making in the EU”, London, Routledge

• Wallace, H. and Wallace, W., 2000, “Policy-making in the European Union”, Oxford

• www.europa.eu

Sign up and be the first to receive our latest offers: