SESSION 2
THE ROLE OF NATIONAL PARLIAMENTS IN THE
EUROPEAN DECISION-MAKING PROCESS
I. ADDRESS OF MR GÉRARD LARCHER, PRESIDENT OF THE FRENCH SENATE
Mr Chairman of the European affairs committee of the French Senate, Jean-François Rapin,
Senators, Colleagues,
University Professors and Researchers,
Ladies and Gentlemen, dear guest friends from abroad,
Since the beginning of your work this morning, you have been wondering about the role of national parliaments within the European Union.
The answer to this question is not so obvious.
The question is a nagging one when you look at the institutional system of the European Union. On the one hand, there is the Council, which brings together members of each government; on the other, there is the European Parliament, responsible for representing the citizens of the Union as a whole.
On the one hand, direct suffrage, via the European Parliament, and on the other, a form of indirect representation, via the Member States.
So what role should national parliaments play in this scheme?
The question is so acute because the citizens of Europe are making their voices heard insistently and repeatedly. For many of them, Europe seems far removed from their concerns, cold and technocratic. When approached by the Committee on European affairs, local elected representatives expressed the same feeling of remoteness.
The EU's "democratic deficit", so often described and commented on, is thus confirmed.
The turnout rate is a symptom of this democratic deficit: it has to be said that, whatever the country, with very rare exceptions, turnout is systematically higher in national parliamentary elections than in European elections.
What we expect of national parliaments in this context is that they should introduce more democracy and therefore legitimacy into European decision-making.
But how can this be achieved?
Of course, the idea that national parliaments have no role to play at European level is universally rejected.
Your first round table showed that, at the very least, national parliaments must exercise rigorous control over the European policies of their governments.
Only the national parliaments, each in relation to its own government, can truly control the European action of the members of the Council and therefore make the functioning of this institution more democratic. The European Parliament does not have this power: it can, on certain subjects, put questions to the Council; similarly, it hears the President of the European Council after each of its meetings. But this is primarily a matter of information rather than control.
While the role of national parliaments is recognised by the Treaties, we are still groping to define their precise place within the European institutional system. This role has yet to be established in practice.
The role of national parliaments does not depend solely on the Treaties. It is a question of national parliaments seizing the tools that exist and of the other institutions giving them the space to do so. What a challenge!
You mentioned the role of national parliaments in the European decision-making process. Subsidiarity control and political dialogue with the European Commission are indeed useful tools, but we can see that their scope remains limited.
Since 2007, only three "yellow cards" have been adopted, and two of the texts they dealt with have been able to prosper; as for the third, its withdrawal is not necessarily to the sole credit of the national parliaments.
It is therefore time to take stock of these tools and perhaps develop more agile, better coordinated and, in a word, more effective ways of monitoring subsidiarity. On November 29th, we discussed this issue with the President of the European Commission.
The context demands it, at both European and national level, so that the urgency or complexity of the decisions to be taken does not lead to democracy being pre-empted, particularly in the field of economic and monetary union, a favorite area for all parliaments, at the very origin of parliamentarianism.
In this respect, interparliamentary cooperation is crucial.
I am convinced that we can do much better not individually, chamber by chamber, but collectively, between national parliaments and with the European Parliament. We share the responsibility of controlling the executive and representing the people. We need to devise a new form of democratic control.
Let's face it, interparliamentary meetings don't always live up to these ambitions, but we need to think about how to make them real places for work and scrutiny.
The Senate's European affairs committee, and in conjunction with the National Assembly's European affairs committee, has taken the initiative of proposing to its counterparts a reform of the body that brings them together: Cosac. I am convinced that the French Presidency of the Council of the European Union can get things moving, by enhancing the value of the Conference of European affairs committees and making its conclusions more operational. Cosac meetings should not be an obligatory exercise, but a genuine shared exercise, enabling us to exercise control in depth and also to map out the future. I expect this objective to be achieved at the Cosac meeting scheduled for January, in the Senate.
Finally, our national political systems, in which national parliaments play a central role, are based on constitutions. They do more than lay down legal rules: they are the core of our democratic and institutional culture, our values and our fundamental rights.
The recent friction in several Member States between these rules and European law, which embodies our common values, is a matter of concern not only for the functioning of the Union and its unity, but also for our citizens.
In the midst of these tensions, the national parliaments, which are the foundations of the Constitutions and are close to the people, can become links of unity and drives for rapprochement. That is my ambition.
Ladies and Gentlemen, as you will have realized, at this time of the Conference on the Future of Europe, your debates and the issues they raise are at the heart of the European project.
Democracy, even within the European Union, can always be improved.
Deepening it must remain our compass. Our common horizon.