Since the first European elections in 1979, the European Parliament has done what parliaments everywhere tend to do: fight for more power. Each treaty revision has seen an increase in its responsibilities and has strengthened its ability to check the power of the Commission and EU governments.
As the only directly elected institution in the European Union, MEPs argue that this increase in powers has strengthened democracy. But now that the European Parliament is able to override national governments and choose the President of the European Commission, has this process gone too far?
In our previous post, Martin left us a comment along these lines:
I am extremely pro-European and support the idea of an integrated Europe. However I question whether the union has moved too far, too quickly. The evidence of this can be seen in the emergence of an extremely anti-EU element across Europe during the last elections.
Earlier today, Martin Schulz was re-elected President of the European Parliament. This marks the first time anybody has held the post for two consecutive terms. However, the appointment was controversial because it again represents a “backroom deal” between the centre-right and the centre-left groups in the Parliament, who have a long-standing agreement to carve up each five year term between themselves. Can the European Parliament convince citizens it is truly democratic if it continues with such “traditions”?
Schulz vowed to continue the fight for more powers, arguing that: “A parliament must fight for more rights. Always. Because more parliamentarianism is never bad. And this is my guideline.”
Has the European Parliament gained too many powers, too quickly? Or should it always fight for more rights because parliamentarianism is never bad? As the only directly elected EU institution, does a stronger European Parliament mean stronger democracy? Let us know your thoughts and comments in the form below, and we’ll take them to policy-makers and experts for their reactions.
71 comments Post a commentcomment
The power of the EU is with the unelected commission , not the elected European parliament .. Until the commission is abolished and parliament , the peoples representatives , set the agenda the EU will never have a democratic mandate .
Yes! Too much power AND too little democracy.
Too much unelected by the European citizen power, yes. However, not enough power to get rid of the unwanted yanks crawling all over it or the financial lobby that goes counter to the needs and wishes of the electorate. Time for revolutionary thinking by the people of this continent.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4ewGvLKgQY
And to return to our system of government and banking, remember Juncker is a corrupt banker who had to resign in Luxemburg. He is not going to be the saviour of Europe and its citizens. Cannot be.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zlzC_XMQzI
However, this move to put us back on course for stability does not suit banking leeches who love their annual bonuses at our cost. And those people are hand in glove with our politicians who look for the yearly payoffs. And it’s going to get worse not better.
As a footnote to the above post, it has worked for Iceland up to and including today. And it could work for the rest of the Western World, If, the objective was to free us from the suffocating financial grip of the billionaire class who pay little or no tax and fund our politicians at a rate that would make your head come off.
http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/01/15/after-crisis-iceland-holds-a-tight-grip-on-its-banks/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0
The only elected body of E.U. must have all the power.Untl now is a decorative body.
The only elected body of E.U. must have all the power.Untl now is a decorative body.
The *questions* that you keep asking are ridiculous…..EP has no real power,laws are drafted by lobbies or buerocrats and are given to the EP to vote a plain yes or no….and that could be fine,if the members of the EP were voting without taking orders from the political group or party they are representing or werent controled by the same lobbies that are drafting the laws.
It has no power, clowns in a theatre. Who are the faces of the produsers of this idiotism?
Socialist Schulz’ attempt to remove a paragraph of the EP budget report critical of his activities as president, and the fact he abused funds for an own P.R. campaign and succeeding in having 40 persons working for him paid by the European taxpayer, indicates enough that the leader of the EP is a crook first class. In this respect, the EP is lead by a fraudulous guy, and is able to block important decisions as he can change adopted texts before they go public. This is not democracy. And me personally, I did not vote for this crook. In fact, no one did, apart from the political tit for tat in the back offices. Disgusting.
And further more, when will the EP adopt a law that REMOVES all lobby offices around Schuman square and FORBIDS any interference by outsiders in what a politician should do: fighting for the good of all people in the EU. The EU/EP/EC is becoming a joke by itself due to its inefficiencies, lack of budget control, massive salaries (over 800 million euros in total!!!!!!) and lack of proof (in fact they do not have to provide proof in many cases) to justify expenses.
You really ask stupid questions!
democracy ? not from us the dutch people its pushed up on us not voted for it or we would never be in it.
a strong parliament means weak democracy, in a strong democracy you don’t need a strong parliament
I must be issuing something , What power did the EU parliament gain ?
For the first time the European People had a real choice at this level of the debate. It was not all precooked and packaged by whichever heads of state got a narrow majority in their respective country.
What is the EU doing about the bloodbath being committed by Kiev ?? Total disgrace, the EU is loosing its legitimacy fast.
Minne Wiersma, you are NOT talking for us the Dutch people. I am glad we are getting a stronger parliament, the only democratical institution of our Union.
Dream on lovely daydreams!
Oh yeah for internal market to fcking all up.
I don’t agree with the Treaty of Lisboa, as it deleted the write of Member States to a veto in the Council. But noone has asked me about this as it was general in Europe. And they speak about deficit of democracy… I don’t want the EU become a United States of Europe. I want a Europe of independent nation states, a loose confederaTION
Yes, cooperating but not a new country!
If you don’t like what the parliament does then vote for different MEPs next time. You can make a difference. You are more in control of the EU if the Paliament is stronger.
No it has too little
You quastion is provocative! THE EUROPEAN PARLAMENT HAS FAR TOO LITTLE POWERS AND HAS NO VOICE IN VERY RELEVANT ISSUES, SUCH AS MONETARY POLICIES, REFINANCING BANKS, ETC. It is unaccetable that the European Central Bank (which is not a democratically elected institution, controlled by an oligarghy of bankers) is totaly free to decide whether and how to distribute newly-printed money withing the economy. THE EUROPEAN METHOD AND THE EUROPEAN INSTITUTION ARE POORLY DEMOCRATIC AND THERE IS NO SUFFICIENT DEMOCRATIC CONTROL ON RELAVANT ECONOMIC ISSUES.
The UK government has too much power. I’d feel safer if it was in Europe’s hands instead of the Tories.
At least you can vote the Tories out; you can’t vote the Commission, which has all the power, out – they are there as long as they want to be.
power suppose to be given to the nations and their people, not to bureaucrats, who don’t have a clue about people needs.
Agree!
Power should mainly vest with communes and regions like in Switzerland as they are closest and most relevant to the people
Yes, not in an ever growing distant place who have no idea of our local needs.
CYPRUS PROBLEM FORGOTTEN!
VERY WEAK INFLUENCE.
ONLY AFTER MONEY NOT HUMAN RIGHTS.
E.U IS NOT REPRESENTING WHAT THEY SAY THEY PROMISED!
CYPRUS PROBLEM FORGOTTEN!
VERY WEAK INFLUENCE.
ONLY AFTER MONEY NOT HUMAN RIGHTS.
E.U IS NOT REPRESENTING WHAT THEY SAY THEY PROMISED!
The European Union has some powers it does not need, ie. in the business regulatory fields, but lacks powers in areas where pan-European strategies are long overdue, ie: Immigration, foreign policy, minority protection, defence. On the other hand too much power vests with nation states while communes and regions have generally too little say. Switzerland shows how “bottom up” grass root democracy works by giving the majority of competencies to local and regional government.
Less EU commision
more eu parliament
more nations
European Soviet Union
So, Europe is in fact a dictatorial system lead by the Comission and Lobbies… and you are asking if EP is gainning power too quickly because it has some decorative power? Questions here are always type of “what color do you like more deep gray or black?”
The problem i think is not that it has “too much” power, but it involves itself in idiotic regulations and laws instead of addressing big issues so people see that it CARES and ACTS responsibly.
All we see is ‘regulations on cap size for bottles of soda’ or such other nonsense.
Meanwhile the whole of Europe is shaking due to fascists, nazis and other lunatics.
As nice as it is , the majority of Europe does NOT look like Brussels.
They should GET OUT of Brussels from time to time to get in touch with the people on the ground. Visit countries, visit areas.
SHOW you are leaders on the GROUND.
This is what makes great leaders, they get INVOLVED.
It doesn’t have too much power, it doesn’t USE the power it efficiently. If that it has TOO LITTLE power.
UNITED EUROPE! It needs stronger institutions!
You cannot FORCE people together.
The United States of Europe! The more Europe, the better! Common energy sector policy!
You cannot compare the United States of America with Europe, simple because of one coin. The billions of marketmanupilation to survive, show it.
#EU no, the parliament is not strong enough. The not democratic legitimate EU Commission should be removed completely instead.
nope it does not! it should have more
Parlament represents people. Too much power? Which kind of little dictator could even think in that question?
no. unfortunately we all know it has NO power at all
“Schulz vowed to continue the fight for more powers, arguing that……… more parliamentarianism is never bad. And this is my guideline.” ………so he says!
Of course, an expected answer from another apparatchik & conceived within a club of cronies- drinking or not- but a wrong approach for a different EU! Where is EU’s final blueprint & its final Constitution? What did all the constitutional experts’ & politicians contribute so far? A patchwork! An injustice & overlooked foul on most active voters/members! Deservedly an overdue yellow card! 2 yellows make a red one!
Mr. Schulz is part of a flawed political design, trapped and needs to be liberated! Brussels is the seat of a wasteful duplication of our home parliaments and unnecessary! Why not consider:
Repatriate Brussels function back to our home parliaments & install the most modern central electronic “EU oracle”- in the cool cellars of Brussels- doing all the receiving, voting, proposals, number crunching & send the completed results back home for final considerations.
Any of the present EU parties manifestos- or part of- could be chosen, adopted and incorporated to form part of every local political party’s own manifesto. That way, the direction of the EU could be streamlined and determined at everyone’s home turf- without the presently lacking representations- requiring horse trading, compromises and shady deal making in the far removed, unsupervised corridors of an expensive Brussels/Strasbourg set up.
Sorry, but no more jobs for all Brussels/EU bureaucrats- just a one way train ticket home & a taste what the Unemployment Fund has on offer! Also, no EU pension etc- since already above such “need threshold” & enriched enough by now. Borderline & tough cases may apply for exemption at their home parliament!
The present EU parliament buildings & other assets be advertised for rental or be auctioned- to the benefit of all members/taxpayers. Maybe interested parties like the global banks, all lobbyists and sanction busters- together with the entourage of secrete arms- wheelers & horse dealers- would be suitable customers? At least everyone would know their locality and could hold demonstration if & when required- and…………… better ideas are always welcome!
@Proactive:
Interesting and inviting post. Like it.
No, the lobbies have too much power, try and change that first.
No! All power comes from the people
Strong parliament means PARLIAMENT, weak parliament means HOUSE FULL OF PUPPETS PRETENDING THEY’RE PARLIAMENT. So stronger the parliament the better. Commission now have at least president who’s “elected” and Council’s role is slowly getting weaker > therefore it means more democracy and that’s always good. Long live EU!
@Michal Gill:
The election you write of in respect of the EU, is equivalent to voting for Caligula. God help us all.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/caligula.shtml
no, the European right must be stronger…
In my opinion mr Renzi doesent begin properly. He started say so much from the very time beinning. Europe is not boring, is a pioneering union for all the world. The matter is still did not managed act as really union. But she approved she has soul in the sort term of inancial crisis. If he belives he can push reforms to the EU’s “fiscal compact” he is living on Mars. He cant do this by his own. I support his vision for federal union but also believe Mr Camerons ideas for devolved from Brussels and handed back to national governments, but as part of federalisation. Of course EU needs changes. Firs of all must pay attention in fiscal rules. Is something that threatens Europe constanly. Also must pay attention to for her people, not only the finance. In Hellas for example we need lower taxes to achieve growth. Austerity must be gone with the wind. We must strogly fight poverty, by giving attention to growth, we have to create more growth more empoyees. And yes by override national governments and choose the President of the European Commission, this process gone too far. I believe a stronger European Parliament is not bad for stronger democracy. The opposite i would say. We have το compeat great economies such as Asian market.
As concern mr Schulz election i dont think this is undemocratic.
Empowering more powers on the EP is the only way to go through the irony of the democracy in the EU. Even though one of the most important and underlined virtue of the EU is improving democracy, it started to justify the European lack of democracy with the term like ‘double democracy’ and ‘indirect democracy’ and etc.
Means stronger democracy if that power is used for the benefit of the people of all member states equally, instead of being used to favor specific states, politicians, companies, banks.
EP with power?
What power?
Stronger ,more power over local government and more democracy
The EP has power, check the Lisboa treaty and compare how the EU institutions worked before and after the implementation of that treaty… I think that the parliament needs more power in some areas and in those that it has it needs to learn how to use it. The EU in this current form is quite young and judging by the economic, political and social contexts we are all passing through it hasn’t had the opportunity to develop it’s capabilities to their maximum potential, and I am not talking about the parliament, but the other EU institutions as well. We are responsible for the people we elect and we have to bear in mind that we cannot keep destroying the foundations they are laying for us to develop, starting from scratch over and over again is not progress.
Does the European Parliament have too much power?
Are you kidding ? EU Parliament is Europe, good or bad it doesn’t mater. The Commission in the other hand is a supranational executive (real power) politically negotiated organization, as well the Council the national governments foreign affaires, so I would have to answer NO at your question. European Parliament doesn’t have too much power.
No!
The Parliament must have more powers as it is he only institution fully ACCOUNTABLE TO THE PEOPLE. Pietro De Matteis, co-President, European Federalist Party
No. The problem is that they have nothing to do, so they spend their time writing stupid laws.
Yes for the small ones its have powers.Anti Democracy.
the problem is that the EP the only elected body od the EU doesnt have enough power.
Economic union yes, but political, no. no centralized Federal European government. National Sovereignty guarantees national identity. freedom to do business and transport goods from country to country should be what is being organized. Then maybe a joint military defense force, and human rights legislation etc.
I think: true daily life shows too often that EP is developing in a different univers, which serve mostly just some group of interests.
i hope stronger and espacially ”nicer” democracy
The EP still has limited legislative powers. The right to chose the president of the commission is far from accurate, though the LT did go some way to balancing the law making weight in some jurisdictions.
The EP is still a puppet in most area’s, and the committees, ran by the lobbyists are the true decision makers in the EU. The main lobbyists are nation states, with Germany and France being the most powerful and influential. They of course are influenced by the multinationals, meaning the billionaires are the real policy makers.
This may be the reason for some EU skepticism, but not the main one, that goes back to the establishments fear of a rising from the working class, so they continue with the divide and rule politics that is synonymous with neo liberal ideologies. The race divide is the main player on the agenda currently, but one of many.
The rise of the anti EU vote is down to
No, The other 6 institutions in the EU are the ones with to much power, and the ones that abuse the power that non elected officials abuse constantly.
Czech-born Madeleine Albright, US Secretary of State, 1997 to 2001, once said “To understand Europe you have to be a genius or French.”. That is the fundamental problem of the EU. In this Brexit era, senior UK politicians have been accused of not understanding how the EU works. However, as the Albright comment shows, the UK is not alone in that.
When politicians do not understand how the EU works, then how can electorates even begin to do so? As few as one in 10 knows who their Region’s MEPs are. If you do not understand and institution and you do not have a real real sense of connection with its representatives, how can you cherish it in your heart and mind?
Increasingly, the EU is alienating the electorates in member states. In Sep 17, one in 8 Germans voted AfD. Today, the Austrian election results indicate its Government will be right wing and Eurosceptic. The Czech elections are due on 20-21 Oct 17 and it looks like a Trump-like billionaire with similar views will take power.
Austria may join the Visegrad Group of Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic and Slovakia, making at least 5 countries that want less, not more centralization. Yet, without centralization – full economic, monetary, fiscal, financial and political union by June 2025 proposed in the 5 Presidents’ Report in June 2015 – the Euro remains at risk of serious instability. Indeed, Nobel Economics Laureate, Joseph Stiglitz said in August 2016 that the Euro is an utter failure, which is incapable of absorbing major economic shocks like 2008.
In April 2016, Lord Owen – previously a Europhile that was part of the Gang of 4 that split from the Labour Party to form the Social Democrat Party (SDP – now absorbed into the Liberal Democrats) – warned that the Euro would fail and, as Angela Merkel acknowledges, with it the EU. With the UK leaving, the EU is only really interested in getting as much money as it can from the UK. If it presses the UK too hard, a No Deal exit on WTO Terms with no money could result and that might even destabilise the EU.