*** FREDERIC EGGERMONT: The Changing Role of the European Council in the Institutional Framework of the European Union. Consequences for the European Integration Process. Intersentia Publishing (31 Groenstraat, BE-2640 Mortsel. Tel: (32-3) 6801550 - Fax: 6587121 - email: mail@intersentia.be - Internet: http://www.intersentia.com ). "Ius Commune Europaeum" series, No. 102. 2012, 430 pp, €89. ISBN 978-1-78068-061-3.
The European Council (European Summit) comes under the media spotlight more than any other European Union institution. Whenever it meets, even press bodies loathe to cover the European dimension (on the ridiculous grounds that it's boring) spend some of their news slots or their newspaper columns covering the European Summit. After all, their country's head of state is attending and it makes sense to see how he or she is defending the national interest. Conversely, the European Summit is the poor relation when its comes to academic literature. Unlike for the European Commission or the European Parliament, few books have been written by scientific researchers about the European Council, although it was made a proper EU institution by the Lisbon Treaty and comprises the top political authorities of the EU and its Member States alike. Whence the utility of this doctoral thesis by a lawyer at the Vrije Universiteit Brussel, the Flemish-language university in Brussels.
Two key questions form the backbone of this very enlightening work. Firstly, what is the relationship between the European Council and the other EU institutions? Secondly, what are the various roles of the European Council in the EU decision making process? To answer them, the author consulted and analysed a multitude of documents and archives about the European Council, and made a detailed study of European Council conclusions documents which, before the Lisbon Treaty were 'simply' conclusions documents of the Council Presidency, in order to determine the extent to which they have been used as reference documents for the other institutions in the decision-making process. In this legal study, he is careful to measure the influence of the European Council itself, rather than the influence of specific heads of state in that not all measures set out in the conclusions document were actually discussed by the heads of state. In order to understand exactly how the European Council operates (behind closed doors), the author has taken advantage of information provided by Belgians familiar with its ins and outs, such as former Belgian prime ministers Leo Tindemans and Jean-Luc Dehaene, former Belgian foreign ministers Willy Claes and Erik Derycke and former Belgian Permanent Representatives Philippe de Schoutheete and Jan De Bock, not to mention former European Commissioners Karel De Gucht and Koen Lenaerts, the latter now a judge at the European Court of Justice. He has made use of these various sources for the three sections of the book. In the first, he retraces the history of the European Council from the days of the summits to recognition of it as a full EU institution, before analysing in detail its composition and functioning over the years and under the various EU treaties. In the second part, he looks methodically at the relationship between the European Council and the other institutions and players, ranging from the Council of Ministers to the Court of Justice via the Commission and European Parliament, not to mention Member States' governments and Intergovernmental Conferences. In the third part, he makes a detailed, scientific unravelling of the conclusions documents, in which he draws up a typology of the roles of the European Council in the light of its influence on specific policies.
It goes without saying that the results of this research is too wide-ranging to all be mentioned in a few lines, for example, and only covering relations between the European Council and the European Commission, Frederic Eggermont shows that the irresistible rise of the 'head of states' club' is not necessarily a slashing of the monopoly of initiative granted to the College of EU Commissioners. As long as the stimulus given in the European Council's conclusions documents do not go beyond 'what is reasonable and politically achievable,'(as happened with 'the unrealistic goal of the ERU of becoming the most competitive and knowledge-based economy in the world by 2010'), the Commission can take advantage of it and make use of it in its relations with the Council of Ministers or even the European Parliament, with its political influence growing as an offshoot of this, especially when the European Council approves or some ideas set out in any of the Commission reports. This is particularly the case because 'most of the time the European Council shares the same priorities with the Commission,' the latter preserving full freedom 'not let its ambition depend on European Council conclusions' if it greatly disagrees with them. In terms of the second question underlying its role as an often 'political initiator' and 'interpreter of the Treaties, the author concludes that its role must be to avoid at all costs becoming an 'appeals council' as this would seriously undermine its credibility, as was shown so incisively by the fate allotted after much controversy and movement on the part of politicians and trade unions, to the idea of 'country of origin' in the services directive. The book comes complete with very pertinent recommendations, such as the idea that 'for reasons of clarity,' a new Treaty 'should foresee the possibility that the President of the European Commission is elected President of the European Council.' Who could disagree?
Michel Theys
*** STEPHEN CLARK, JULIAN PRIESTLEY: Europe's Parliament. People, Places, Politics. John Harper Publishing Ltd (27 Palace Gate Road, London N22 7BW, UK. Tel: (44-20) 88814774 - email: jhpublish@aol.com - Internet: http://www.johnharperpublishing.co.uk ). 2012, 432 pp, €35, £29. ISBN 978-0-9571501-0-2.
Is the European Parliament really what the authors say in the introduction, namely the most extraordinary European Union institution? Some people would reply that it would be more appropriate to view the European Commission as the most extraordinary EU body because it took over from the High Authority and ensures the common interest over and above the Member States, without which the European project and the European Parliament itself would probably not even exist. Readers must make allowanced for the authors, whom Jacques Delors describes in the preface as 'activists who have taken the European ideal to heart.' They are above all indefatigable servants of the European Parliament, which Sir Julian Priestley left in 2007 after ten years as the administrative boss in his role as the General Secretary. Backed by the man who is currently head of internet communications at the EP, it goes without saying that he could not describe his home away from home in anything but glowing colours and enthusiasm in order that readers can discover that the EP is to an extent their home too. The authors aim was essentially 'to describe what it feels like to be inside the 'bubble,' and provide not so much a technical snapshot as an 'impressionist's canvas, with the aspirations, conflicts and contradictions of a continent'. Initially, the authors describe the physical environment in which MEPs work, outlining the battles over the location of the EP's headquarters and the way it is located in three separate cities. They go on to describe the 'main actors in the daily drama of parliamentary life,' in other words the MEPs themselves, their assistants, political parties and the EP administration. The different types of MEPs are described, with high-flyers responsible for legislation, the budget, institutional matters, and so on. The way they work in practice and the way they get promoted is described in detail and in a very user-friendly manner. Enriched and enlivened by a large number of photographs and illustrations, the book addresses questions like how nationality influences (or fails to influence) decisions, the problem of multilingualism and how the European Parliament communicates with the world outside, particularly with voters. Far from propaganda, this is an honest educational book about a key institution. Jacques Delors urges it to create closer links with national parliaments, explaining: 'I know that progress has been made, but in light of the attacks of the Eurosceptics and the temptations of populism or isolationism, it is vital that the European Parliament make these contacts a top priority.' Who knows, if people listen to Delors (former head of the European Commission), then perhaps the European Parliament will really become the most extraordinary EU institution one day, the one that re-connects Europe with its citizens …
(MT)
*** Shift Mag. Tipik Communication (270 av. de Tervuren, B-1150 Brussels. Tel: (32-2) 2355619 - Fax: 2355699 - email: hello@shiftmag.eu - Internet: http://www.shiftmag.eu ). 2012, No. 21, 44 pp. Annual subscription: €5.
This issue of Shift Mag includes a comprehensive special report on Croatia and an interview with Amelia Andersdotter, Swedish Pirate Party politician and the youngest member of the European Parliament.
(MT)
*** JOOP HAZENBERG: De Machteloze Staat. Hoe globalisering en indidualisering de overheid uithollen. Uitgeverij De Geus (Postbus 1878, NL-4801 BW Breda. Tel: (31-76) 5228151 - Fax: 5222599 - email: email@degeus.nl - Internet: http://www.degeus.nl ). 2012, 254 pp, €19.99. ISBN 978-90-445-1935-8.
“The logical reaction when following the euro crisis, the recession or other subjects in the press is to ask why our leaders never manage to take action? It is quite simply and ridiculously because they cannot…” This is the no holds barred response provided by Joop Hazenberg, the founder of the “Prospect” reflection group. This group brings together young people under the age of 35 and already has 1500 members. This question is increasingly being asked by citizens throughout Europe and across the world. In this pamphlet, he not only provides an analysis of the impotence of the state but also displays both conviction and flair (illustrative of his journalistic training) in the tools he provides for organising the Public and the Political, in an effort to make them more responsive to the major emerging trends he identifies in Europe, such as globalisation, the development of Information and Communication Technology and a horizontal society based on networks. His agenda for the Netherlands includes a priority strategy for the East and another one for Europe, which he would like to see develop on the continent and subsequently throughout the rest of the world. As a convinced European, he attacks the lack of knowledge displayed by his country's ministers, as well as the machinations of the European Union. In this connection it calls on the latter to use the way in which ministers operate in Denmark as a benchmark, which helps the country maintain a close proximity to its citizens. The most radical conjecture in his thesis is that the nation state and state are no longer at one. The nation, which he argues consists of a community based on language, history, norms and values, still ultimately ends at the country in question's national borders. On the other hand, the state as an authority, under pressure from Europe and globalisation, finds itself largely watered down at a structural level and at supranational and international decision-making levels. The author is therefore quite convinced that a new form has to be found, which is more adapted and, above all, that decisive efforts and steps are taken towards creating the United States of Europe. To summarise, he argues that national governments should now act more like a junction, platform or hub and no longer as the guiding centre. The state remains necessary for concluding agreements, forming intelligent coalitions and creating what may be deemed as possible or even impossible accomplishments. Network management must, in the author's point of view, remain within the remit of the public authority because it cannot be exercised by any single actor operating on the market. This effectively means adopting the position of a facilitator and not that of a guiding authority, which would mean that the variety of problems that arise are tackled by the appropriate actors and not by the state itself, which would spare it from sinking. This book contains a wealth of commentary on the encroachments suffered by the law, the loss of judges' legitimacy and the rule of law, the paralysis at the Dutch Economic and Social Council, the fiefdom of corporatism, the collapse of the “Polders model” and the “dirtiness” of the country. It provides an insight into the Dutch nation, which is very different from that which is most often “sold” to us by the traditional media.
(LT)
*** Confrontations Europe (227 bld. Saint-Germain, F-75007 Paris. Tel: (33-1) 43173283 - fax: 45561886 - Email: confrontations@wanadoo.fr - Internet: http://www.confrontations.org ). April-June 2012, No. 98, 52 pp. €7.
The main thrust of this issue celebrates the 20th anniversary of the organisation set up by Philippe Herzog. The former MEP modestly announces that, “Europe has consisted of an extremely long marathon for the past 2000 years but which we have only been participating in for the last 20”. Professor Jan Sokol states that a few of the columns the furthest away in the race are proving the most difficult of all, “the classic marathon runner had… a clearly defined goal, namely Athens, across a clearly defined circuit. This is exactly what we Europeans do not have and it appears to me that we have to run faster and faster but without knowing in what direction…” Providing a sense and a direction to the European project is now more than ever the ambition of Confrontations Europe, which its president Claude Fischer is determined to achieve by continuing, “its work to invent a new culture of political action and bring societies and people together so that they can if they want, to participate… in the elaboration of the economic, social and cultural project and subsequently help a Europe of solidarity live, which is open to the world and able to meet the challenge of its civilisation”. Philippe Herzog again hits the nail on the head by asserting that it is necessary to locate a new kind of federalism, which will federalise people rather than states and which requires, “European democracy based on effective and permanent participation”. In the same perspective, Jan Sokol calls for a European policy of multilingualism to be developed because the European Union is not a top-down federation and it is necessary, “to sew its diversity together, far from the linguistic borders that divides it”. Other figures that push forward ideas for preventing a possible “disintegration” of the Union include Alain Lamassoure MEP, Jean Lapeyre, the former Deputy Secretary General of the European Trade Union Confederation, business leaders Jean Gandois and Francis Mer, in addition to Edgar Morin, who calls on “Brussels” to abandon the idea of building a Europe “through homogenisation”.
(MT)