This 1997 paper reviewed the proposals on national parliaments in the EU being made in the context of the 1996-97 Inter-Governmental Conference. It said that the proposals should be supported by the UK government, suggested further elements that might be included, and made proposals for significant reforms of the UK Parliament's European scrutiny system.
In the context of concerns about an EU 'democratic deficit' following the Maastricht Treaty debates and referendums, the role of national parliaments in the European Union was a key topic in the EU Inter-Governmental Conference (IGC) launched in 1996. The IGC process led to the 1997 Treaty of Amsterdam.
In this paper, Graham Leicester, Director of the Scottish Council Foundation for Public Policy and a former UK diplomat, reviewed the proposals for national parliaments that were before the IGC and considered the position that the UK government should adopt towards them.
The paper was based on two seminars held jointly in 1996 by the Hansard Society and the European Poicy Forum, with the support of the UK office of the European Parliament.
The paper concluded that:
The UK should continue to press for the inclusion in a revised EU Treaty of the Irish presidency's draft protocol on the role of national parliaments, even though it goes further than some might wish. The protocol will make sure that Union procedures provide both the time and the information that governments need to allow national parliaments to conduct adequate scrutiny. If adopted in its present form, the protocol will also formally establish a Treaty-based forum to help national parliaments ensure that the sum of their individual efforts is harnessed (through COSAC, the Conference of European Affairs Committees) for maximum effect on the Union's processes and policies. Both elements should be welcomed. The UK should make common cause with France to see that they are adopted.
There are additional modifications and other elements which might be included either in the protocol or elsewhere in the Treaty to improve national parliaments' effectiveness. A definition of the "scope" of a Commission proposal to control the range of possible amendments would be a significant improvement. A detailed urgency procedure for legislation to ensure speed does not become a routine excuse for avoiding scrutiny should also be included.
In order to make best use of the Treaty provision and to increase Westminster's - and the British people's - confidence in EU decision-making, the scrutiny procedures of the House of Commons should be improved, notably to extend scrutiny to the Inter-Governmental pillars. National parliamentary scrutiny should be an integral part of Inter-Governmental cooperatlon.
Parliament also needs to find new ways of scrutinising the EU budget. In preparing for the negotiation of the new medium-term financial perspective to run from 2000, the UK government should give special consideration with other member states to improving the involvement of national parliaments in that crucial decision.
Banner image: 'Debate and vote on Jean-Claude Juncker for President of the European Commission', By European Parliament
The UK Spending Review outlines how Government funds will be allocated over several years. Unlike the Budget, which raises revenue, the Review decides how it is spent. But how is it approved? What role does Parliament play if it doesn’t vote on the Review itself? This blog explores how the Spending Review works, how it differs from the Budget, and how Parliament holds the Government to account through the Estimates process.
On Friday 13 June, the House of Commons will once again debate the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, which would legalise assisted dying in England and Wales. Specifically, it will hold a second day of Report Stage, during which the whole House will debate and vote on amendments. This briefing explains the structure of Report Stage, what happened on the first day of Report Stage, how amendments are selected and grouped, on which amendments a decision can still be taken, and the likely sequence of events this Friday, including whether a final vote will take place.
The Chancellor, Rachel Reeves MP, will deliver a statement on the Spending Review. MPs will resume Report Stage of the assisted dying bill and debate key legislation on football governance, mental health, and planning and infrastructure. Peers and MPs are expected to resolve their standoff over AI and copyright in the Data (Use and Access) Bill. The Commons Defence Committee will hear from the lead reviewers of the Strategic Defence Review, while a Lords Committee will examine the Chagos Archipelago sovereignty issue. The Hansard Society’s Director will give evidence to the Modernisation Committee about access to the House of Commons and its procedures.
In this episode, we explore why ministers keep bypassing Parliament to make major announcements to the media — and whether returning to the Despatch Box might help clarify their message. We unpack the Lords' uphill battle to protect creators’ rights in the Data Use and Access Bill, challenge claims that the Assisted Dying Bill lacks scrutiny, and examine early findings from a Speaker’s Conference on improving security for MPs, as threats and intimidation against politicians continue to rise. Please help us by completing our Listener Survey. It will only take a few minutes.
Our evidence on treaty scrutiny has been published by the House of Lords International Agreements Committee. Our submission outlines the problems with the existing framework for treaty scrutiny and why legislative and cultural change are needed to improve Parliament's scrutiny role. Our evidence joins calls for a parliamentary consent vote for the most significant agreements, a stronger role for Parliament in shaping negotiating mandates and monitoring progress, and a sifting committee tasked with determining which agreements warrant the greatest scrutiny.
