The European Integration EU Governance and Institutions

1. Competences and Hierarchyofnorms The European IntegrationEU Governance and Institutions Prof. Giovanni Coinu gcoinu@unica.it

2. European Union(S)

3. European Union(s) First group: Euro-Atlantic organizations the Euro-Atlantic organizations came into being as a result of the alliance between the United States of America and Europe after the Second World War 1948 - OEEC (Organization for European Economic Cooperation) was created at the initiative of the United States. 1949 - NATO was founded as a military alliance with the U.S. and Canada 1954 - Western European Union (WEU) was created to strengthen security policy cooperation between the countries of Europe 1960 - The OEEC + U.S. + Canada then became the OECD

4. European Union(s) Secondgroup: CouncilofEurope and OSCE The feature common to the second group of European organizations is that they are structured to enable as many countries as possible to participate These organizations would not go beyond customary international cooperation 1949 – Council of Europe designed only with international cooperation in mind (ECHR) 1994 – OSCE (Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe) includes the creation of a ‘safety net’ to enable conflicts to be settled by peaceful means

5. European Union(s) Third group: The European Union Member States have ceded some of their sovereign rights to the EU and have conferred on the Union powers to act independently In exercising these powers, the EU is able to issue sovereign acts which have the same force as laws in individual States Easy to say in theory …

6. The Treaties 1958The treaties of Rome: The European Economic Community The European Atomic Energy Community (EURATOM) 1952The European Steel and Coal Community 2009Treaty of Lisbon 1987The European Single Act: the Single Market 1993Treaty of European Union – Maastricht 2003Treaty of Nice 1999Treaty of Amsterdam

7. Original Aims and Objectives • Offering its citizens freedom, security and justices without internal frontiers • Insuring the free movement of persons, goods, services and capital • Promoting and establishing common economic and monetary policies

8. Enlargements: 6to 28 Croatia 2013

9. Enlargments and Integration Process More Member States More people More goals to be achieved More governance issues The 4 processes came across and went on together

10. Eastern Countries 1989 - Fallof the BerlinWall The EU openstoEasternEuropeanCountries 1993–TreatyofEuropeanUnion “a new stage in the processofcreatinganevercloserunionamong the peoplesofEurope”

11. Preparing for the Big Enlargment 1999–Treatyof Amsterdam 2003–TreatyofNice Bothfocused on preserving the EU’scapacityforeffectiveaction in anUnionenlargedfrom 15 to “n” members

12. Laeken Declaration 2001 - Declaration on the Future of the EU “tobecome more democratic, transparent and effective and to open the road to a Constitution” First time “Constitution” isused in the EU Integrationprocess Special Convention fordrafting a Constitution

13. Ratification Process Thisattempt at a Constitutionfailed in the ratificationprocess Different procedure: through National Parliaments or Referendum France and The Netherlandsvotedagainst Why?

14. How big are the EU countries? Surface area in1 000 km² 544 506 410 357 313 305 295 244 230 131 111 93 92 83 30 49 77 68 63 62 43 43 34 20 9 3 0.3 Italy Spain France Poland Finland Sweden Estonia Germany Denmark Latvia Greece Slovakia Belgium Malta Hungary Luxemburg Bulgaria Ireland Netherlands Romania Austria Cyprus Slovenia Lithuania United Kingdom Portugal Czech Republic

15. How many people live in the EU? Population in millions, 2009 500 million total 82.1 64.4 61.6 60.1 45.8 38.1 21.5 16.5 10.6 11.3 10.8 10.5 10.0 9.3 8.4 7.6 5.3 5.5 5.4 4.5 3.3 2.3 2.0 1.3 0.8 0.5 0.4 Italy Spain France Poland Finland Sweden Estonia Germany Denmark Latvia Greece Belgium Slovakia Malta Hungary Luxemburg Bulgaria Netherlands Ireland Romania Austria Cyprus Slovenia Lithuania United Kingdom Portugal Czech Republic

16. GDP per inhabitant 2008GDP per inhabitant Index where the average of the 27 EU-countries is 100

17. How does the EU spend its money? 2011 EU budget: €141.9 billion Citizens, freedom, security and justice 1% The EU as a global player: including development aid 6% Other, administration 6% Natural resources: agriculture, environment 41% Sustainable growth: jobs, competitiveness, regional development 46%

18. EU Institutions • EuropeanParliament • EuropeanCouncil • Council • Commission • Court ofJusticeof the EU • EuropeanCentralBank • Court ofAuditors • AdvisoryBodies • Economic and Social Committee • Committee of the Regions

19. The European Parliament • It shall, jointly with the Council, exercise legislative and budgetary functions • Members shall not exceed seven hundred and fifty in number, plus the President • No Member State shall be allocated more than ninety-six seats • It shall elect the President of the Commission

20. The European Council (EC) • It defines the general political directions and priorities • It shall not exercise legislative functions • It consists of the Heads of State or Government, together with its President and the President of the Commission • The EC shall meet twice every six months • The EC shall elect its President, by a qualified majority, for a term of two and a half years • The President of the EC insures the external representation of the Union

21. The Council • It shall, jointly with the EP, exercise legislative and budgetary functions • It consists of a representative of each MS at ministerial level • It shall act - normally - by a qualified majority • Presidency shall be held on the basis of equal rotation between MS

22. The Commission • Union legislative acts may only be adopted on the basis of a Commission proposal • Shall promote the general interest of the Union and take appropriate initiatives to that end • Shall be completely independent • Insures the application of the Treaties • Oversees the application of Union law • Executes the budget and manage programs • Insures the Union’s external representation • The President is proposed by the Council and elected by the Parliament

23. The Court of Justice of EU • Includes the Court of Justice, the General Court and some specialized courts • Rules on actions brought by a Member State, an institution or legal person or individuals • Gives preliminary rulings, at the request of courts • Rules in other cases provided for in the Treaties • Shall be assisted by Advocates-General • Judges shall be appointed by common accord of the MS governments for six years • One judge from each Member State

24. Separation of Powers • The European Council gives general political directions, but does not have legislative power. • Parliament and Council shares the legislative powers • The Commission has the power of proposal and is the EU executive body • Commissioners are proposed by the Council and appointed by the Parliament • The Commission is responsible to the Parliament • The Parliament can propose a motion of censure • If it is approved by a 2/3 majority, the Commission shall resign as a body

25. Legislative Power • Parliament + Council • 4 different types of legislative process: • co-decision (ordinary) • cooperation • assent • consultation

26. Co-decision Legislative Process • Proposal: Commission • First reading: Parliament + Council • Second reading (within 3 months): Parliament + (within 3 months) Council • Conciliation • Third reading (within 6 weeks): the Council overbears

27. Majorities • Parliament: simple majority of the members • Council: • simple majority • qualified majority: 55% of members + 65% population 72% of members + 65% population • blocking minority: 35 % population + 1member

28. EU Legislation • Regulations • are directly applicable to MS and require no further action to have legal effect • Directives • which are addressed to and are binding on MS, but the Ms may choose the method by which to implement it • generally, a MS must enact national legislation to comply with a directive. • Decisions • which are binding on those parties to whom they are addressed • Recommendations and Opinions • which have no binding force

29. Enlargement In 2004 took place the widest one: • Poland,Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovakia, Lithuania, Latvia, Slovenia, Estonia, Cyprus, Malta • wide differences: population, largeness, economical development, and political history • EU population has increased by 27% but EU GDP by only 4%

30. EU Population and GDP 2003 Source: Italian EU Presidency 2003

31. Ever heard about this very dangerous man?

32. GDP Growth 2005-2007 Source: Eurostat 2011

33. Socio-politicalconsequences • Country of Origin Principle • providing services to consumers in another MS on the basis of the laws of the country of origin or establishment • would have encouraged cross-border competition • It provoked intense debate and mass protests in various MS • was a sign that "Anglo-Saxon" style economics was running rampant over the EU • competition between workers in different parts of EU resulting in a downward spiral in income levels • social dumping warning

34. Polish plumber symbol of the cheaper workers coming from Eastern Europe comes from a speech by Bolkestein in France became a catch-phrase during "No" camp for referendum on the EU Constitution in 2005 many voters expressed fears that western countries would be overrun with immigrants from new MS

35. Polish plumber It became a fictional character for a Polish Tourism Board advertisement in France

36. Institutionalconsequences • How to weight different Countries in the EU Bodies • by political relevance • by time of membership • by surface • by inhabitants • by GDP • by financial contribution to EU

37. Institutionalconsequences There is currently no widely accepted normative definition of a small state. The intuitively categorized small states do not constitute a coherent group of members according to any of the above mentioned criteria. Finland, for instance, is geographically the fifth largest, rich and a net payer, but it has only some five million inhabitants. If you classify Luxembourg as small with a population of 400 thousand inhabitants, you can not classify Netherlands as small in the same way with its population of 15,8 million. Until few years ago Spain (39,4 M.) was considered as the watershed between small and large member states.

38. Institutionalconsequences Those data makes us to modify the traditional meaning of small states. New member states push the threshold of “EU state smallness” definition below. At the same time some of the older small member states has become medium-sized with respect to the largest ones, but respectively large with respect to the new smallest ones.

39. Institutionalconsequences The issue is, obviously, not the threat to be absorbed by another bigger state. The focus point will instead be the balance of institutional powers between small and large member states in terms of seating and voting strength. From a small states point of view, in order to prevent largest states from using the Union for pursuing their national interest only or interests common only to the largest states. From a large states point of view, in order to prevent small states to have a weight, in terms of influence, bigger than their real one, in terms of population and economics.

40. Institutionalconsequences In fact, two opposite interests exist: larger states like to determine European policies; small states want not to be excluded from that determination; Both want to have the same thing: to control the future of Europe.

41. Institutionalconsequences The real weight of smallest states in the European decision-making process has been their number. This is because overwhelming majority of EU decisions in very different issues were taken - until Treaty of Nice (2001) - by a unanimity system of vote. Thus that number became relevant in order to adopt decision requiring unanimity, because every single member state (the smallest one too) could use right of veto to stop the communitarian will to be implemented. One head one vote? Cypruscould stop the whole EU policy?

42. Institutionalconsequences This is why the Intergovernmental Conference 2000 in Nice approved a Treaty reform, towards two directions: firstly, member states agreed about widening issues in which adopting decisions by qualified majority instead of unanimity; secondly, member states agreed about assigning to every single member state a different weight in European institutions depending on its size, its population, its capable contribution to the EU budget broadly speaking on its relevance in the EU

43. Institutionalconsequences There are three principal institutional fields where the contrast arose: • a) the distribution of seats in the European Parliament • b) the composition and status of the Commission • c) the weighting of votes in the Council

44. Institutionalconsequences: Parliament The number of seats in the Parliament has grown up to 732 (from 700) degressive proportionality over-representation of less populous members: • the larger the state, the more citizens that are represented per MEP (and thus, no “1 head,1 vote” principle) • therefore, Maltese and Luxembourgian voters have about 10 times more influence than citizens of one of the six largest Countries

45. Institutionalconsequences: Council Votes in the Council has been modified advantaging the most populous member states: largest states doubled their vote-power by three -passing from 10 to 29 while e.g. Luxembourg doubled it only by two -passing from 2 to 4 in order to adopt decisions, it has been set a so called “well-pondered double majority” requiring the agreement of the 50% or 75% of states (depending on the issue) but also the positive vote of states representing the 62% of European population

46. Institutionalconsequences

47. Institutionalconsequences: Commission and ECJ Every member should have -at least- one representative in the Commission and in the ECJ.

48. ConsequencesofConstitutionfailure It has been given a strong stop to the construction of EU as a bigger political subject Thus advocates of the pure market EU orientation prevailed ECJ and EU laws now place economic freedoms above social rights

49. Seeyoutomorrow!

50. PortugaiaConstruçoesLda, 2002: A construction company posted workers in Germany, paying less than the prevailing German wages The local employment office ordered the company to make payment to its workers for the difference between the two wages ECJ declared that national minimum wage provisions, which require foreign companies to pay their workers the national minimum wage, are not precluded by EU law