Parliamentary co-evolution: national parliamentary reactions to the empowerment of the European Parliament

Abstract

Existing research on the European Union's (EU) multilevel parliamentary system builds on the hypothesis of parallel evolution, situating explanations for European Parliament (EP) empowerment at the EU level and explanations for national parliamentary powers in EU affairs at the national level. We propose the hypothesis of co-evolution, which specifies a connection between national and European arenas of parliamentarization. We study whether the EP's empowerment enhances or reduces pressure on national parliaments to strengthen their own EUrelated competences. First, we argue that national parliamentary parties take conscious positions on the powers of the EP. Second, support for the EP among the party composition of national parliaments tells us whether parliaments regard the EP as a competitor or ally, feeling pressed, or relieved of the pressure, to strengthen their EU-related competences.

Demoi-cracy in the European Union: principles, institutions, policies

“…Are they able to cooperate pro--actively to shape EU politics or do they focus on national reactions to European integration? Winzen et al (2014) address the first question. According to their analysis, parliaments in the European multi--level system develop partly in co--evolution.…”

“…Whereas elites are aware of the multiple--demoi problem, the preferred solutions are structured according the intergovernmentalist--federalist divide. Similarly, Winzen et al (2014) suggest that political elites are aware of the multi--level interaction of institutions in the EU and that preferences for EU--related oversight competences of national parliaments depend on how national MPs evaluate the EP. These preferences seem to follow traditional ideological lines between culturally conservative and culturally liberal political parties rather than an explicit appreciation of demoi--cracy, however.…”

Open method of co-ordination fordemoi-cracy? Standards and purposes

“…In our view, these third-way channels refer to the role of national parliaments in the EU construct (Bellamy and Castiglione 2013;Winzen et al 2014), as well as to the national stakeholders and civil society organizations participation, as they are both crucial in fulfilling the normative aspirations in the government by the people(s). In a sense, the channels are in fact crucial linchpins in the complex (multi-level, multi-sector, horizontal) forms of political interactions in the EU as a composed political order.…”

Epilogue: the challenge of Europeandemoi-cratization

“…Transformative dynamics in a demoi-cracy are about trade-offs and relationships rather than isolated legal-institutional features. The contributions demonstrate that this is not a simple story as epitomized by Borras and Radaelli's (2014) matrix of demoi-cratic credentials in the Open Method of Co-ordination (OMC) or the variety of attitudes to the European Parliament (EP) on the part of national parliaments and their constitutive parties discussed by Winzen et al (2014). Specifically, this collection is premised on the core analytical distinction between two dimensions of integration, one multi-level or vertical and the other multi-centric or horizontal, each of which in turn can be subject to more or less demoi-cratization.…”