Transcript 1. dia - Magyarorszag

The co-decision procedure from the
point of view of the European
Commission
European Commission
Secretariat General - Codecision Unit
Joachim D’Eugenio
1
The “institutional triangle”
THE EU:
A Union of Peoples and States
European
Parliament
Commission
Council of
Ministers
The Commission as an Institution:
promoting the common interest
The Commission has four main roles:
• proposes legislation to the Parliament and the Council
• manages and implements EU policies and budget
– Execution power given by the Parliament and the Council
– Own decision power (ex: competition policy)
• enforces European law (with the Court of Justice)
• represents the EU on the international stage
The functioning of the Commission (1)
Collegiality principle
- Decisions are taken by the “College” of
27 commissioners
- These decisions and their execution imply the collective
responsibility of all its members
Principle of administrative coherence
- All the services of the Commission make up one
administrative body serving the College
Number of decisions taken by the College
The functioning of the Commission (2)
DGs and services
• The personnel of the Commission is divided among (36)
departments called «general directorates» (DG) or «services»
(ex: the Legal Service)
• The Secretariat General (SG) has a “special role/status”
• Each DG is in charge of (a) particular area(s).
Its Director General is responsible in front of the commissioner
in charge of the area
• The DGs prepare the legislative documents of the Commission.
These documents only become official after being “adopted” by
the College
• The DGs manage the adopted programmes and policies
The role of the Secretariat General
• Main mission:
- Guarantee the realization of the political priorities of
the Commission, as defined
by the President
• Added value :
- Work planning
- (Inter-)Institutional perspective, coherence (incl.
ensuring collegiality)
- Help political choices / arbitrage and mediation
- Horizontal initiatives / policy strategies
(e.g. “packages”)
Codecision in a nutshell
 Parliament and Council co-decide with equal rights. No
agreement --> no act.
 Up to three readings with a possibility to conclude at each
stage
 If no agreement by the end of second reading
--> “conciliation”
 Commission: initiative, participation, mediation and
promotion of EU interest
8
Codecision: Legal bases covered
LISBON
80?
2009?
All EC policies except agriculture, fisheries, taxation, economic
and monetray policy, trade, competition
9
1st and 2nd reading agreements
 1st reading deal: Institutions agree on a set of

amendments voted in committee/plenary and
endorsed by Council
2nd reading deal:
 EP has no amendment to the Common position (« negotiated common
position »)
 EP and Council agree on a set of amendments voted in plenary and
endorsed by Council
 Agreement negotiated in “trilogues” and formalised
through exchange of letters
10
Conciliation and trilogue
meetings (hosted by EP)
Distribution of agreements over
the past years
Developments since 1999
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
19992000
2001
1st reading
2002
2003
2004
2nd reading
2005
2006
2007
2008
Conciliation
Length of negotiations
May 2004December 2006
1st reading
2nd reading
Conciliation
Average time in
15.7 months
32.0 months
36.4 months
codecision
1st reading agreements
(Development of average duration)
2007
17,3
14
Differences between
1st and 2nd reading deals
 Find right balance between early adoption and protection

of original proposal
Possibility of 1st reading deal not to be pursued
unadvisedly for sensitive files
(e.g. budget, legal, or institutional aspects)
 Problem of 1st reading deal: less transparency and accountability
between and within institutions
 2nd reading: better institutional setting for deal
15
More efficient and flexible
than it looks…
• Joint Declaration – 1999 (revised in 2007)
(OJ C 145, 30.06.2007, p. 5)
• Promote fast adoption and avoid conciliation
• Work in parallel – Exchange of information
• Informal contacts at all stages for identifying positions and
reconciling views
• Conciliation becoming the exception
16
Commission’s (formal) interventions
• Original Proposal
• Modified Proposal
– anytime until common position
– Formal modification: after 1s reading
(approx. within 6 weeks procedure)
– Oral modification with a view to political agreement
• Communication on Common Position (CP)
– To be prepared as early as political agreement is reached
– To be transmitted to EP with CP
• Opinion on EP 2nd reading (indicating Commission position)
– Oral presentation before plenary to facilitate a 2nd reading agreement
– Formal submission, if possible, within 3 weeks after plenary
– Preparation of conciliation
17
Commission’s role
in codecision
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
(Right of) Initiative
Expertise (e.g. impact assessments)
Participation in Council and EP work
Mediator but…
Key role in securing early adoption
Preparation of execution/implementation
“Guardian of the Treaty”
Promotion of EU interest
18
Commission’s role:
1st and 2nd reading deals
• 1999 Joint Declaration:
• to facilitate tripartite contacts (can take initiative)
• “to exercise its right of initiative in a constructive
manner with a view to reconciling the positions of the
EP and the Council”
• Intermediary and (possibly) Mediator but also advocate
of its proposal (with Treaty tools to protect it – unanimity in Council if
Commission does not accept amendments)
• Institutional matters
(right of initiative, legal basis, substantial modifications, Commission
Declarations, comitology, budgetary issues)
19
Commission’s role: Conciliation
 The Commission proposal is not the basis of the negotiation
anymore
 Commission = Mediator
 (Art 251-4: “…shall take all the necessary initiatives with a view to
reconciling the positions of the EP and the Council.” --> Opinion on EP’s
2nd reading amendments: may suggest compromise)
 But also … “Guardian of the Treaty”
 No formal power – No unanimity rule
 Presence in all meetings
20
Key Commission actors
Political Level
• Lead Commissioner
• Lead DG (Director-General/Director)
negotiating in trilogues and Coreper
Administrative Level
• Lead DG (Head of Unit, Administrator(s), inter-inst.
coordinators)
• Secretariat General, Commission’s Legal Service,
associated DGs (in particular in cross-cutting files (e.g. climate change))
21
Commission’s role:
Internal decision making
• DG chef de file
• Secretariat General Coordination/Collegiality/Coherence
• Inter-institutional Relations Group (GRI)
(weekly order of events PreGRI->GRI->HEBDO->College)
• Empowerment of Commissioners
22
GRI
Inter-institutional Relations Group
 Collegiality and collective decision making
 Information and early warning
 Authorization to pursue contacts and negotiate deals
(support/suggest compromise, propose declarations, modify proposal, etc)
 GRI Fiches
• All EP plenary votes in 1st and 2nd reading
(authorization and empowerment)
• Council decisions (case by case)
(Presidency compromise package)
• Preparation of conciliation committee
23
More info ?
http://ec.europa.eu/codecision
Thank You
24