Beyond a constraining dissensus: The role of national parliaments in domesticating and normalising the politicization of European integration

Abstract

At the heart of the growing politicization of the EU lies a concern with how European integration potentially undermines forms of communal self-government linked to established political identities. This concern originates not from the much discussed democratic deficit of EU institutions but from a 'democratic disconnect' between domestic democratic institutions and processes and the decisions made at the EU level by national executives and EU officials. Our contention is that enhancing the role of national parliaments in EU decision-making offers a way to reconnect the integration process with the communal self-rule of the member states. We ground this argument in an account of the normative basis of the EU that we dub 'republican intergovernmentalism'. We argue that national parliaments offer a means for what we term the domestication and normalization of EU policy-making within the democratic processes of the member states. However, these effects will only occur if mainstream domestic parties employ these new parliamentary powers to develop competing EU policies that reflect their core ideological positions and those of their voters. We propose the introduction of a Parliamentary Legislative Initiative as a mechanism to provide an incentive for them to do so.

Effectiveness of the European Semester: Explaining Domestic Consent and Contestation

“…By the same token, parties have fulfilled their constitutive representative role. The findings demonstrate that the European Semester has become an opportunity for parliamentary parties to "domesticate" European economic governance (Kröger and Bellamy 2016). However, for national political actors, the remaining challenge is to balance constituent demands with the economic interests of the Eurozone and the European Union as a whole.…”

Parliaments, Public Opinion and Parliamentary Elections in Europe

“…Regardless of the implementation of a 'green card' and the formal recognition of a role of 'agenda-setters' to NPs, it is the new attitude towards the EU shown by these legislatures that is particularly important in the current context of growing anti-European sentiments across Europe (Kröger and Bellamy 2016). NPs want to 'contribute actively to the good functioning of the Union' by bringing the inputs of national public opinions into the EU decision-making process.…”

“…In this framework, the minimum support outlined for the activation of the 'yellow card' procedure could be used, with two votes assigned to each parliament (UK House of Lords 2015: 3). 33 In addition, for the sake of representativeness, but also because it would amount to granting NPs with a right to 'parliaments' initiative', one could imagine too that the minimum threshold required for the European citizens' initiative -at least one quarter of all Member States -34 would also be applied here (Kröger and Bellamy 2016).…”

Safeguarding, shifting, splitting or sharing? Conflicting conceptions of popular sovereignty in the EU-polity

“…Multiple avenues seem possible to achieve this levelling up. Some argue that the Early Warning Procedure should gain a positive counterpart: a green card procedure (Kröger and Bellamy 2016). National parliaments should become empowered to propose EU legislation as well as veto it.…”