Is It Unlike This Time? The Commission’S 2015 Survive Programme

 

Steve Peers

Today the novel European Commission announced its start out annual work programme. Quite apart from the commons restructuring as well as renaming of policies, it promises to receive got a dissimilar approach to prior Commissions. In particular, this Commission manifestly plans to suggest fewer novel European Union measures as well as to remove many to a greater extent than pending proposals than usual.

But is the Juncker Commission’s approach truly dissimilar from the approach of previous Commissions? The best means to exam that is to compare today’s operate programme to the start out operate programme of previous Commissions.

The incoming Barroso Commission of 2005 suggested 32 pages of proposals, alongside no reference to withdrawal of pending measures. In 2010, the incoming ‘Barroso II’ Commission listed 25 pages of proposals, although entirely v pages concerned proposals that the Commission was definitely planning to brand inward 2010. The other xx pages listed those proposals which were planned for the residual of the five-year mandate, although inward the terminate some of those proposals – similar 2 Directives on labour migration – were tabled inward 2010 later on all. And the 2010 operate programme listed 58 proposed measures which were going to last withdrawn, although inward all but i example the withdrawals were due to obsolescence.

How does that compare to the 2015 operate programme? First of all, the listing of planned proposals is similar to that inward 2010: 4 pages, 23 proposals, compared to v pages as well as 34 proposals v years ago. Admittedly, the 2010 listing comprised entirely the Commission’s biggest priorities, spell the 2015 listing is supposedly exhaustive, according to press reports. So is the Commission truly planning to suggest less than i novel stair out per Commissioner adjacent year?

Of course of didactics not. Influenza A virus subtype H5N1 unopen hold off at the fine impress reveals that some of the 23 items on the listing volition truly contain to a greater extent than than i proposal. For instance, the review of immigration policy mentions both smuggling of migrants as well as the ‘Blue Card’ Directive on highly-skilled migrants. It would last technically possible to tabular array i legislative proposal addressing both issues – indeed, that would last unremarkable compared to how immigration legislation is drafted inward many countries. However, the EU’s tradition is to suggest as well as adopt dissimilar legal acts inward such cases. Similarly, the plans concerning labour mobility, the internal market, liberate energy as well as the digital unmarried marketplace volition necessarily entail proposing to a greater extent than than i item of legislation. This is peculiarly obvious every bit regards the digital unmarried market, where the operate programme refers to a ‘package’ of laws.

Secondly, the listing of withdrawn proposals for 2015 – already nicknamed the ‘kill list’ – is somewhat longer, totalling fourscore items. Two-thirds of these are obsolete, but unopen to 25 of them are withdrawn for to a greater extent than political reasons: either in that location is no reasonable prospect of agreement, or the Commission wants to redraft them itself inward low-cal of changed priorities.

The start out argue for withdrawal is hardly unheard of; inward most years, the Commission withdraws a yoke of proposals which receive got met alongside implacable opposition inward the European Parliament or (more often) the Council. The minute argue for removal is real rare indeed. The Commission justifies it inward low-cal of the regulation of ‘discontinuity’ – the practice, quite mutual (perhaps fifty-fifty ubiquitous) inward democratic systems, of retiring all legislative proposals when a novel legislature is elected.

To last frank, the Commission has rather botched its application of this principle. It’s commonly known precisely every bit the regulation of legislative discontinuity, as well as entails the automatic withdrawal of all legislative proposals on the tabular array when a parliamentary sleeping accommodation is dissolved earlier an election. The Commission is applying the dominion entirely partially, withdrawing entirely surely proposals that it disagrees with. In whatever event, the regulation is firmly rooted inward the electoral procedure that leads to a alter of (at to the lowest degree some) parliamentarians.

This distinction isn’t precisely pedantic, since it goes to the pump of the Commission’s legal as well as political legitimacy to remove these proposals. Legally speaking, the Treaties refer to the Commission’s powers to brand as well as amend proposals, but say aught virtually whatever ability to remove them. Should that ability non residual instead alongside the EU’s 2 legislative chambers, which receive got been respectively straight (the Parliament) as well as indirectly (the Council) elected? For many years, this has been a theoretical point, since the Commission’s supposition that it has untrammelled powers to remove its proposals has gone unchallenged. But this Thursday, a CJEU Advocate-General is due to compass his see on whether the Commission indeed has an unlimited ability to remove its proposals, inward a case brought past times the Council. (Remember that similar whatever such opinion, it won’t last binding; it volition last upwards to the judges of the CJEU to compass a in conclusion ruling, quondam adjacent year).

Politically speaking, the Commission could endeavour to claim some legitimacy to remove these proposals if they had mentioned during Jean-Claude Juncker’s drive for the Commission Presidency, either during the European Parliament elections or when he was call for for a bulk of the Parliament (and a qualified bulk inward the European Council) to approve him. Alternatively, these withdrawals mightiness last legitimate if the other Commissioners had stated their intention to remove them inward their hearings earlier the European Parliament. But it tin hardly last claimed that withdrawal of proposals on waste product or air pollution were a key characteristic of Juncker’s, or the Commission’s, drive to last appointed.

Some of today’s withdrawals are supposedly non permanent, because the Commission has announced its intention to suggest replacement measures adjacent year. But it’s non absolutely surely that the Commission volition perish on this promise. Others are contingent, because the Commission has given the legislators a deadline to utter over a possible deal, failing which it volition remove its proposal. It’s an interesting strategy, which volition empower the one-half of the legislature that is reluctant to visit these proposals (usually the Council), at the terms of the other one-half (usually the European Parliament).

In the example of the motherhood exit Directive, it raises the interesting enquiry of how many feminists are besides pragmatists. It’s politically impossible to obtain the lengthened motherhood exit on total pay that a bulk inward the European Parliament desire: thence should they settle for anything, every bit long every bit it’s an improvement on the condition quo? Unlike an actual babe (cf the judgment of Solomon), it is possible to obtain entirely one-half of one’s legislative objectives – or belike significantly less than that inward this case. This item legislative proposal has been gestating at nowadays for half dozen years; it mightiness even thence last born adjacent year, but there’ll belike last a lot of shouting first.

 

Barnard & Peers: chapter 3

Share this post