European Parliament

Strengthening the European Parliament

The concern of integrating the European countries has met a lot of opposition from the citizens of the respective nations. The European Union is the major acting union in the world stage. It has really changed the lives of the people. It has also improved on the relations of the European citizens with the rest of the world (McCormick, 2011). The experts involved in this critical assignment believe that if the process is supported by the public, it will result to diverse benefits to the people. However, the citizens vary in their support for European integration. This is a process that demands a more critical approach especially due to the complexity behind the whole process.

The attitudes of the public through their political behavior tend to influence the way they handle the issue of European integration. This influence is mostly evident during the national referendum activities on integration. Public attitudes provide the political foundation for the integration. (Gabel, 1998).  This means that public support is an important component of European integration.

 The members of the European parliament are at the best position of influencing public support. For example, they are elected directly by the public, meaning that it is easier for the public to have confidence in them than other officials in the European Union. With these regards therefore, I agree that strengthening of the European parliament will enhance public support for the European integration project.

The European parliament is comprised of 736 elected members. They represent the citizens and they are elected every five years across the 27 member states of the European Union. They represent 500 million citizens (Gabel, 1998).    The decisions made by these representatives are vital in making policies, making and endorsing new European laws. It works jointly with the council of ministers that represent the member states. The parliament therefore plays an active role in the drafting of legislation which acts to influence the daily lives of the citizens. Examples of such laws include the environmental laws, equal opportunities, fiscal laws, consumer rights among others.  The parliament also has an influence together with the council on the European Union’s annual budget (Nugent, 2003).

 There has been widespread analysis of public support for the integration. The process of integration ought to be smooth. However, there still remains a huge room for doubts. There are many basic queries concerning the dynamics of the integration process and the support that it has among the European citizens. There are differing measures of support. The concerns of the integration process are whether there are special preferences given priority in the integration. Although the scope of the integration has grown both in size and popularity, there are fears that the integration has not expanded in its structure. Structuring of the preferences would be significant in people’s lives (Hecht, 2009).

The treaty of Lisbon has proposed to strengthen the powers of the European parliament in order to enhance public popularity of the whole project (Corbett et.al, 2007). Some of the changes that are expected to be effected include; strengthening of the budgetary powers. This entails placing the parliament on an equal level with the council. In doing this, the parliament will be at a position of adopting the European Union’s annual budget. It will also be bestowed with greater roles especially at the international level. International agreements will pass through the parliament for approval. In addition, their legislative capacities will be extended to new policy areas (Anderson, 2009).

These changes will ultimately enhance the duties played by the European parliament. The parliament will also be at a position of defending the views of the citizens within the European Union.  For instance, the parliament can effectively ensure that the principle of subsidiary is properly upheld and carried out in the right way. (Anderson, 2009).  

The bureaucratization of the parliament will ensure efficient and effective operation. They will be able to react swiftly to the policy events. This will ensure that the will of the citizens are considered and acted upon within the minimal time possible (Corbett et.al, 2007).    However, the developments being initiated have a drawback in that they will act to undercut the parliament’s role of debate and a centre for public forum. Skepticism about the integration process continues also to escalate especially among the citizens. This means that the process is detrimental to both the parliament and to the integration process.

The voting behavior of the incoming members was anticipated to ruin the functioning of the parliament.  What was anticipated was that the new members would practice the bloc system of voting. This did not materialize.  The European protocol continues to be steadfast in its way of functioning. The parties are formed along ideological rather than their national lines especially bearing in mind that there is increasing diversity in the political standing represented in the chamber (Anderson et. al, 2001).This means that the citizens can continue to exercise trust with the European parliamentary system due to its non-partisan nature.

The goals of the European Union are to dismiss the complex procedures and structures applied. This will ensure that the citizens can be able to understand the functioning of the European Union. The transparency of work will also be improved within the European Union. The greater transparency will ensure that the citizens get better information and content of the legislative proceedings (Anderson et. al, 2001). This can be done effectively if the European parliament is going to be strengthened. A rapport therefore needs to be established between the European Union governing council and the citizens. This is only possible if service delivery can be brought close to the citizens. The parliament members are at the best position of ensuring that the citizens continue to gain confidence with the integration process by ensuring that they are maintaining a close link with them.  The European parliament offers a direct link to the citizens. They are the direct representatives of the citizens and are at the best position of convincing them on the significance of the integration.

The European parliament is elected through direct elections. They therefore serve as direct representatives of the people. They are also seen to provide democratic legitimacy.  There is a contention that it is difficult to understand the European Union without understanding the parliament (Corbett et.al, 2007).  However, they do not have powers as those ones of typical parliamentarians. For example, they cannot be able to make new legislation. This creates a false impression to the citizens with most of them unclear about the role of the parliament (Nelsen et al, 2003). With regards to this, the citizens lose confidence with the system. The elections have also recorded a decrease in the number of people that turn out to vote.  This can be averted by ensuring that the parliament is not only given the mandate to reject or accept new amendments but also be given powers to propose new ones. This strengthening of the parliament will ensure that the public will regain more confidence with the integration process.

            The citizens are always concerned with the members of the European parliament that they elect. The direct participation that they play in voting them in ensures that the democratic deficit is avoided at all costs (McCormick, 2002). This means also that the citizens have trust in the members that they themselves elect to represent them. It is therefore easy for the European parliament to win popular support from the citizens than other top officials can. In comparison with the preceding times, the democratic deficit was far much greater during the time the parliament had a consultative role in the legislative matters than the times when it has been strengthened to play an active role in proposing legislative changes. As a consequence the democratic deficit is higher at the national level than that at the European integration. The members are elected directly by the citizens after every five years.

The parliament also has set up a committee to allow examining of the petitions or the complaints of the citizens (Gabel, 1998).   For instance, if the complaints are concerning the delivery of services in the society, the citizen is allowed to address the complaint to one of the members appointed by the European parliament. This further enhances the bonding between the parliament and the citizens.

            There are regularly commission surveys conducted by the European parliament aimed at gathering public opinion from the member states. This is an effective means through which the parliament keeps in touch with the people’s opinions and expectations. This places them at a better platform of influencing the public on the benefits of the European integration. Furthermore the surveys are normally useful in the processes of making important decisions, evaluation among others (McCormick, 2002).  This ensures that the public continues to have confidence with the parliament. Therefore, the public can trust the parliament on almost all the issues that they intend to implement concerning their own welfare.  The other top officials in the European Union may not be at the best position also of getting the expectations that the public may be anticipating from the integration.

 The members of parliament are well placed to enquire from the public whatever may be their expectations from the integration process. This will ensure that they involve the views of the public as they make the necessary changes in the integration to ensure that it meets the expectations of the people. From this point of approach, the strengthening of the members of European parliament, who are the direct representatives of the people, will ultimately ensure that the public will view the process as a positive one. If the media also keeps on framing best news concerning what the members of the European parliament are doing, the public is likely to support most of their efforts (Vliegenthart et al, 2009).

            Another reason why the European parliament would be at the best position of influencing public support is that it has been involved in most of the activities taking place in the European Union.  The political influence of the European parliament cannot be taken for granted. It goes beyond the national level. It has also been considered as the most active body in the European Union that acts to ensure public participation (Corbett et.al, 2007).  This is done through considering the views of the public. From this perspective, the issues affecting the entire community are properly dealt with. Therefore, it has been seen as a viable means of integrating the community and the leadership of the European Union.

            In addition, the parliament also has a substantial influence on the development of the constitutional system in Europe (Corbett et.al, 2007). This is therefore part of the evidence that portrays the vast knowledge and scope that the parliament can use in perpetuating awareness among the people. In a nutshell, as Europe continues in its mission of integrating the nations to make one community, the parliament should be given a significant portion of the whole project. This is because it plays a pivotal role of maintaining the bond between the union and the public. (Corbett et.al, 2007).

                The integration process has to achieve popularity at the local levels. To achieve policy influence at the national level is also a crucial process to ensure further rights and support of the whole integration project (Lynch, 1996).  The most local representation within the European Union is the European parliament that represents the respective national citizens. It is therefore within the European parliament members that public opinion concerning European integration can be boosted (Anwen, 2008).

The European Union emerged and has even developed in very unique manner. It can be perceived to be more than an international organization that handles complex issues. It is therefore difficult for the union to be legitimized through the nation states as doing so will constitute challenges which may keep on recurring with time. With respect to this view, the solution to this dilemma would be to empower the European parliament so that it can act on behalf of the people each of its members represents. Their strengthening will also ensure that the weakened national parliaments are substituted (Rittberger, 2003).

The European Union has also evolved to be a political body over the time. It works to control and maintain the democratic attitudes required so as to focus on the goals it aspires to attain within the region. The European top elites however lack public control as well as interest. The policies that are designed by the commission prove to be difficult to some of the citizens because they are viewed as lacking representativeness. It becomes very much difficult to bring the public very close to the European Union. Though the European parliament has the power to elect and censure the commission on certain issues, they have no mandate of politically influencing the commission.

It has been evident that the commission has been politically impartial for a long time. However, the impartiality that it is supposed to uphold has been lost with time (Rittberger, 2003). The parliament though bestowed with roles to play in the legislation processes, they are very limited such that they cannot effect them. This requires the parliament to be empowered more to create trust among the citizens. The democratic life of the European Union will also be guaranteed if the parliament is strengthened.

The way the union also develops policies cannot be appreciated because most of the times they seem to lack national or international image. European Union being a type of a unique political structure must uphold all the responsibilities required to maintain the general public’s support (Rittberger, 2003). There must some elements which tend to represent the national goals of each of the nation. The elements must be given directly from the citizens and also empowered to make sure that the citizens will ultimately feel represented. With these regards, the members of the European parliament are the most effective in carrying out such duties. The group is also rightly placed to offer direct influence from the public to support the integration process.

The integration course that is ongoing among the European nations is one of the processes that are expected to bring a lot of benefits among the citizens of the respective nations. According to experts, the benefits are multifaceted in nature (Blair,2006). They constitute the social, political and economic benefits. For example, from the economic point of view, the integration process will make sure that the barriers to trade are broken to allow for free trade to take place within the region. The region will also uphold a similar currency. The integration process is also expected to improve the bargaining power of the region especially at the international arena (Bertrand, 1992).  

With the kind of benefits the integration is producing, it is largely expected that the respective nations are going to support the project. However, most of the citizens are still skeptical on the outcomes of the project. Moreover, the permissive consensus that was earlier on introduced to allow voting by the citizens has made the process even more complex (Franklin et al, 1994).  This has made the popularizing of the project to be one of the main challenges facing the European Union. A better understanding of the dynamics of the public opinion and the impacts it has on the attitudes of the citizens is the key factor to be able to deal with the dilemma affecting the European Union (George et.al, 2001).

A paradoxical challenge arises where the European parliament continues to gain more legislative powers while at the same time it takes the form of a normal parliamentary session. This will definitely compromise its duties to the citizens. (Anderson, 2009). Most of the decisions are now left to the European parliament instead of being passed on to the plenary session. Furthermore, the making of decisions after a single reading in the parliament would also compromise the quality of services it delivers. This is because, there would be little time left to debate and scrutinize the issues being debated on.

The complexity of the issue can be dealt with by increasing the powers of the European parliament. This is because they are elected by the citizens directly hence the citizens will feel that they are part of the integration process. Secondly, the way the affairs of the parliament are run may be appeasing to the public. For example, they have designed different ways of handling the issues of the citizens. This gives the citizens positive impression as they are assured of being served in the most efficient way possible. It is therefore easier for the parliament to convince the citizens on the importance of the union (Franklin et al, 1994).   The fact that they also keep in touch with the public by conducting surveys aimed at ensuring that the grievances of the citizens are heard means that the public will ultimately give support to their aspirations. The conducted surveys are normally vital in the decision making of the parliament.

References

Anderson James With Eberhard Bort. The Frontiers Of The European Union. New York:

Palgrave, 2001.

Anderson, Christopher J. And Hecht, Jason D. (2009).  The Nature And Evolution Of Public

Support For European Integration Over The Long Run Apsa 2009 Toronto Meeting Paper. Available At Ssrn: Http://Ssrn.Com/Abstract=1450365

Bertrand, Maurice. "European Integration In A World Perspective." International Social Science

Journal. 44, 131 (1992): 69-78.

 Blair, Alasdair (2006) .Companion to the European Union. Abingdon: Routledge

Corbett, Richard and Jacobs, Francis and Shackleton, Michael (2007, 7th edition) .The European

Parliament. London: John Harper Publishing

Elias, A. (2009) Minority Nationalist Parties and European Integration. London: Routledge.

Franklin, mark, Michael marsh, and lauren mclaren 1994. “uncorking the bottle: popular opposition to European unification in the wake of Maastricht.” Journal of the common market studies 32:455-472.

George, Stephen And Ian Bache. 2001. Politics In The European Union. Oxford: Oxford

University Press. The Journal Of Politics Vol. 60, No. 2 (May, 1998), Pp. 333-354

Lynch, Peter (1996) Minority Nations and European Integration. Cardiff: University of Wales

Press.

Matthew Gabel.( 2011). Public Support For European Integration: An Empirical Test Of Five Theories

McCormick, John (, 5th edition) .Understanding the European Union. A Concise

Introduction. Basingstoke: Palgrave.

Mccormick, John. 2002. Understanding The European Union. A Concise Introduction. Second

Edition. Basingstoke: Palgrave

Nelsen, Brent F. And Alexander Stubb Eds. 2003. The European Union. Readings On The

Theory And Practice Of European Integration. Third Edition. Boulder, Co:Lynne Rienner.

Nugent, Neill. 2003. The Government And Politics Of The European Union. Fifth Edition.

Basingstoke: Palgrave.

Rittberger .B. ( 2003).The Creation And Empowerment Of The European Parliament, pp.203-

            227, journal of common market studies,vol 41, No.2, special issue: the European

            parliament at fifty,p.208.

Vliegenthart, R., Schuck, A., Boomgaarden, H. G., & de Vreese, C. H. (2009). News coverage

and support for European integration 1990-2006. International Journal of Public Opinion

Research, 20(4), 415-439