- The sleeping beauty of the Lisbon treaty
- Lisbon Treaty: Disagree, and You’re Dead
While PESCO is founded on the Lisbon Treaty, EI2 is based solely on a Letter of Intent. While PESCO is open to all EU member states and “exceptionally” third countries (meaning the UK), EI2 is by invitation only. The UK is officially not signed up to PESCO, but our country is a founding member of EI2.
So what is it?
The House of Commons Library summarises EI2 as follows:
led initiative set out by President Macron in September 2017 as part of his vision for a “sovereign, united and democratic Europe”. In order to achieve that ambition he put forward proposals for a common European intervention force and a common doctrine for action, independent of the European Union. Ten European countries, including the UK, are involved in the initiative. Italy indicated its willingness to join in September 2019.
You might wonder why, if we are leaving the EU to be an independent nation once again, our military is signed up to a project to create a sovereign united Europe? You might also wonder at the quiet introduction of such a potentially far-reaching project. It is perhaps telling that Italy’s move towards joining has likewise been accompanied by “thunderous silence”.
The scope of the agreement brings a new highpoint in the history of the open-ended. The House of Commons Library continues:
The EII is European in focus but entirely independent of the European Union and NATO with respect to their decision-making structures.
Given that the EII is a defence initiative outside of the governance of the European Union, UK participation in it will not be affected in any way by Brexit. However, UK participation in an initiative that is so closely linked to EU defence projects, and PESCO in particular, has raised some concerns among pro-Brexit commentators who fear that the initiative could involve Britain in an embryonic European Army ‘by the back door’.
The Letter of Intent was signed on June 25th, 2018, and goes into further detail. It describes the four main fields the will constitute the focus of EI2, which are:
- Strategic foresight and Intelligence sharing
- Scenario development and planning
- Support to operations
- Lessons learned and doctrine
It also states that:
EI2 intends to contribute to ongoing efforts within the European Union to deepen defence cooperation, notably PESCO.
This document was signed by Earl Howe.
In fact, he was “very keen” to sign.
In a written statement to parliament on 21st June, four days before this document was signed, Sir Alan Duncan told the Parliament that:
My Noble Friend, the Minister of State for Defence (The Rt Hon Earl Howe) and I plan to attend the Joint Foreign Affairs Council (FAC) with EU Foreign Affairs and Defence Ministers on the morning of 25 June. I will attend a meeting of the FAC for Foreign Ministers only that afternoon. The FAC will be chaired by the High Representative and Vice President (HRVP) of the European Union (EU) for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Federica Mogherini. The meeting will be held in Luxembourg.
The joint FAC will discuss Security and Defence issues including EU-NATO cooperation. Foreign Ministers will then discuss current foreign policy issues including Yemen, the Red Sea and Horn of Africa, Jordan, and the EU Global Strategy.
He made no reference to EI2. Whyever not?
As is so often the case in European defence matters, the quietness of Her Majesty's Government is in stark contrast to the clamorous announcements from across the English Channel where French President Macron stated:
This is in the context of his broader speech which listed "A Europe that guarantees every aspect of security” as one of “the six keys to European sovereignty”.
In the UK, The Daily Express covered the story and Veterans for Britain raised the alarm. In reply, a Government spokesman said:
Regular viewers of UK Government correspondence will smile at the immediate reference to "NATO" to quell public concern whenever some aspect of European defence unification becomes luminous.
And today the EI2 programme remains in active operation and the UK remains a key participant and founding signatory. Recent reports give an overview of thinking on the continent, whilst our own Government maintains a discreet silence..
These reports include "Europe’s defence: between EI2 and PESCO" by Dimitra Koutouzi and published on 27th October this year, which concludes:
To sum up, developing a European strategic culture can lead the European countries to take more responsibility for their own security and to be more united. Europe does not need to develop defence in two different levels, but all the countries should be united as they face a rival Russia, “an increasingly powerful China and a Jacksonian US".
The Netherlands Institute of International Relations ‘Clingendael' report titled "The European Intervention Initiative Developing a shared strategic culture for European defence" of September 2019 gives a broad overview of the programme, its background and contradictions. Some of the Dutch Government statements are in stark contrast to the French.
Our summary is that EI2 was founded to overcome the slow pace of European Military Unification. Its aim is European sovereignty. The UK is at the centre of this project, despite what its people may believe or wish. The Baltic, the Sahel and the Caribbean (where The United Kingdom, France and the Netherlands all have overseas territories) seem to be the main areas of interest for now. Its future development pathway is unclear.
In short, like most European defence initiatives, EI2 makes statements about transparency and open communication, as it proceeds to an undeclared destination in thunderous silence.
____
Lisbon Treaty: Disagree, and You’re Dead
Professor Schachtschneider pointed out that the European Union reform treaty (aka the Lisbon Treaty) reintroduces the death penalty in Europe, which is very important, especially knowing that, for instance, Italy was recently trying to abandon the death penalty through the United Nations forever and everywhere.
The death penalty cause is not even in the treaty, but in a footnote, because with the European Union reform treaty, we accept also the European Union Charter, which says that there is no death penalty, but then, and also in a footnote, it says: “except in the case of war, riots, upheaval” — then the death penalty is possible.
Schachtschneider points to the fact that this is an outrage, because they put it in a “footnote of a footnote,” and you have to read it really like a super-expert to find out!
Parliamentary questions
2 June 2008
E-3106/0810 Apr 2019 12:09 am
2 June 2008
E-3106/0810 Apr 2019 12:09 am
WRITTEN QUESTION by Ashley Mote (NI) to the Commission
Can the Commission please clarify the confusion that has arisen over the inclusion, or not, of the death penalty in the Lisbon Treaty?
Professor Schachtschneider, Humanities Faculty, University of Nuremberg, has been quoted in a recent issue of Executive Intelligence Review saying that the Lisbon Treaty re-introduces the death penalty.
Since the Italian Government has been trying to have the death penalty abolished worldwide through the United Nations, were they aware of this fact when they signed the Lisbon Treaty?
And does the Commission agree that, depending on the answer to this question, the Italian Parliament might take an even more sceptical view of the Lisbon Treaty than it has already?
And does the Commission agree that, depending on the answer to this question, the Italian Parliament might take an even more sceptical view of the Lisbon Treaty than it has already?
Is the Commission aware that confusion over the re-introduction of the death penalty arises from the fact that the references are in footnotes to footnotes, the last one of which says that the death penalty would be available ‘in the case of war, riots, upheaval’?
Given the curious, almost clandestine, way in which the death penalty has featured, can the Commission please define ‘riots and upheaval’? Who will decide?
Would strikes, protests on the streets, even votes in national parliaments against continuing membership of the EU be categorised as ‘upheaval’?
Would strikes, protests on the streets, even votes in national parliaments against continuing membership of the EU be categorised as ‘upheaval’?
Is the Commission finally coming to fear the manner of its going?
If not, why slide the death penalty into the Lisbon Treaty in such an extraordinary and underhand way that it has taken academics many weeks to uncover?
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+WQ+E-2008-3106+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN
____
____
Lisbon Treaty allows for Death Penalty across EU - The 'Summer of Rage" could be Lethal
__
Lisbon Treaty and the Death Penalty
___
Treaty of Lisbon
The Treaty of Lisbon (initially known as the Reform Treaty) is an international agreement that amends the two treaties which form the constitutional basis of the European Union (EU). The Treaty of Lisbon was signed by the EU member states on 13 December 2007, and entered into force on 1 December 2009.[2] It amends the Maastricht Treaty (1992), known in updated form as the Treaty on European Union (2007) or TEU, and the Treaty of Rome (1957), known in updated form as the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (2007) or TFEU.[3] It also amends the attached treaty protocols as well as the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community (EURATOM).
Prominent changes included the move from unanimity to qualified majority voting in at least 45 policy areas in the Council of Ministers, a change in calculating such a majority to a new double majority, a more powerful European Parliament forming a bicameral legislature alongside the Council of Ministers under the ordinary legislative procedure, a consolidated legal personality for the EU and the creation of a long-term President of the European Council and a High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. The Treaty also made the Union's bill of rights, the Charter of Fundamental Rights, legally binding. The Treaty for the first time gave member states the explicit legal right to leave the EU, and established a procedure by which to do so.
The stated aim of the treaty was to "complete the process started by the Treaty of Amsterdam [1997] and by the Treaty of Nice [2001] with a view to enhancing the efficiency and democratic legitimacy of the Union and to improving the coherence of its action".[4] Opponents of the Treaty of Lisbon, such as former Danish Member of the European Parliament (MEP) Jens-Peter Bonde, argued that it would centralize the EU,[5] and weaken democracy by "moving power away" from national electorates.[6] Supporters argue that it brings more checks and balances into the EU system, with stronger powers for the European Parliament and a new role for national parliaments.
Negotiations to modify EU institutions began in 2001, resulting first in the proposed Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe, which would have repealed the existing European treaties and replaced them with a "constitution". Although ratified by a majority of member states, this was abandoned after being rejected by 55% of French voters on 29 May 2005[7][8] and then by 61% of Dutch voters on 1 June 2005.[9] After a "period of reflection", member states agreed instead to maintain the existing treaties and amend them, to bring into law a number of the reforms that had been envisaged in the abandoned constitution. An amending "reform" treaty was drawn up and signed in Lisbon in 2007. It was originally intended to have been ratified by all member states by the end of 2008. This timetable failed, primarily due to the initial rejection of the Treaty in June 2008 by the Irish electorate, a decision which was reversed in a second referendum in October 2009 after Ireland secured a number of concessions related to the treaty.[10][11]
Amendments
Summary
Summary
-
with a 2½ year term, reducing the
rotating Council Presidency's role.
-
created by merging the External
Relations Commissioner with the
CFSP High Representative.
-
from 2000 made legally binding.
- Pillars merged to 1 legal person
-
enabling the Union per se to
be party to treaties.
- European Council separated
-
officially from the Council of Ministers.
- More powerful Parliament
-
by means of extending the codecision
procedure to more policy areas.
-
to new areas of policy in the
European Council and the
Council of Ministers, from 2014 on.
- National parliaments engaged
-
by expanding scrutiny-time of
legislation and enabling them to
jointly compel the Commission
to review or withdraw legislation.
- Mutual solidarity obliged
-
if a member state is object of a
terrorist attack or the victim of a
natural or man-made disaster.
-
to be considered by the
Commission if signed by
1 million citizens.
-
extended to CSDP issues.
Foreseen initiatives, pending member states further implementation decision:
- with a 2½ year term, reducing the
rotating Council Presidency's role.
- created by merging the External
Relations Commissioner with the
CFSP High Representative.
- from 2000 made legally binding.
- Pillars merged to 1 legal person
- enabling the Union per se to
be party to treaties.
- European Council separated
- officially from the Council of Ministers.
- More powerful Parliament
- by means of extending the codecision
procedure to more policy areas.
- to new areas of policy in the
European Council and the
Council of Ministers, from 2014 on.
- National parliaments engaged
- by expanding scrutiny-time of
legislation and enabling them to
jointly compel the Commission
to review or withdraw legislation.
- Mutual solidarity obliged
- if a member state is object of a
terrorist attack or the victim of a
natural or man-made disaster.
- to be considered by the
Commission if signed by
1 million citizens.
- extended to CSDP issues.
Central Bank[edit]
The European Central Bank gained the official status of being an EU institution, and the European Council was given the right to appoint presidents of the European Central Bank through a qualified majority vote. On a related topic, the euro became the official currency of the Union (though not affecting opt-outs or the process of Eurozone enlargement).
The European Central Bank gained the official status of being an EU institution, and the European Council was given the right to appoint presidents of the European Central Bank through a qualified majority vote. On a related topic, the euro became the official currency of the Union (though not affecting opt-outs or the process of Eurozone enlargement).
Judiciary[edit]
Under the Treaty of Lisbon, the Court of First Instance has been renamed the General Court. The Civil Service Tribunal and the European Court of Justice (formerly named the Court of Justice of the European Communities, and formally called only Court of Justice after the Treaty of Lisbon), along with the General Court, were established as sub-courts of a new EU institution named the Court of Justice of the European Union.
The jurisdiction of the courts continued to be excluded from matters of foreign policy, though new jurisdiction to review foreign policy sanction measures, as well as certain 'Area of Freedom, Security and Justice' (AFSJ) matters not concerning policing and criminal cooperation, were added.[41][42]
Under the Treaty of Lisbon, the Court of First Instance has been renamed the General Court. The Civil Service Tribunal and the European Court of Justice (formerly named the Court of Justice of the European Communities, and formally called only Court of Justice after the Treaty of Lisbon), along with the General Court, were established as sub-courts of a new EU institution named the Court of Justice of the European Union.
The jurisdiction of the courts continued to be excluded from matters of foreign policy, though new jurisdiction to review foreign policy sanction measures, as well as certain 'Area of Freedom, Security and Justice' (AFSJ) matters not concerning policing and criminal cooperation, were added.[41][42]
Council of Ministers[edit]
Voting weights in both the
Council of Ministers and the European Council
member state Nice Lisbon votes % pop. in
millions % 
Germany29 8.4% 82 16.5% 
France29 8.4% 64 12.9% 
United Kingdom29 8.4% 62 12.4% 
Italy29 8.4% 60 12.0% 
Spain27 7.8% 46 9.0% 
Poland27 7.8% 38 7.6% 
Romania14 4.1% 21 4.3% 
Netherlands13 3.8% 17 3.3% 
Greece12 3.5% 11 2.2% 
Portugal12 3.5% 11 2.1% 
Belgium12 3.5% 11 2.1% 
Czech Republic12 3.5% 10 2.1% 
Hungary12 3.5% 10 2.0% 
Sweden10 2.9% 9.2 1.9% 
Austria10 2.9% 8.3 1.7% 
Bulgaria10 2.9% 7.6 1.5% 
Denmark7 2.0% 5.5 1.1% 
Slovakia7 2.0% 5.4 1.1% 
Finland7 2.0% 5.3 1.1% 
Ireland7 2.0% 4.5 0.9% 
Lithuania7 2.0% 3.3 0.7% 
Latvia4 1.2% 2.2 0.5% 
Slovenia4 1.2% 2.0 0.4% 
Estonia4 1.2% 1.3 0.3% 
Cyprus4 1.2% 0.87 0.2% 
Luxembourg4 1.2% 0.49 0.1% 
Malta3 0.9% 0.41 0.1% total 345 100% 498 100% required majority 255 74% 324 65%
The treaty has expanded the use of qualified majority voting (QMV) in the Council of Ministers by having it replace unanimity as the standard voting procedure in almost every policy area outside taxation and foreign policy. Moreover, taking effect in 2014, the definition of a qualified majority has changed: a qualified majority is reached when at least 55% of all member states, who comprise at least 65% of EU citizens, vote in favour of a proposal. When the Council of Ministers is acting neither on a proposal of the Commission nor on one of the High Representative, QMV requires 72% of the member states while the population requirement remains the same. However, the "blocking minority" that corresponds to these figures must comprise at least 4 countries. Hence, the voting powers of the member states are based on their population, and are no longer dependent on a negotiable system of voting points. The reform of qualified majority voting (QMV) in the Council was one of the main issues in the negotiation of the Lisbon Treaty.[43]
The earlier rules for QMV, set in the Treaty of Nice and applying until 2014, required a majority of countries (50% / 67%),[clarification needed] voting weights (74%), and population (62%). Between 2014 and 2017 a transitional phase is taking place where the new QMV rules apply, but where the old Nice treaty voting weights can be applied when a member state formally requests it. Moreover, from 2014 a new version of the 1994 "Ioannina compromise" allows small minorities of EU states to call for re-examination of EU decisions.[44]
The treaty instructs that Council deliberations on legislation (that include debate and voting) will be held in public (televised), as was already the case in the European Parliament.
The Presidency of the Council of Ministers, rotates among member states every six months, with a "Trio" formed by three consecutive Presidencies in order to provide more continuity to their conduct. However, the Foreign Affairs Council (one configuration of the Council of ministers), is no longer chaired by the representative of the member state holding the Presidency, but rather by the person holding the newly created post of High Representative.
| member state | Nice | Lisbon | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| votes | % | pop. in millions | % | |
| Germany | 29 | 8.4% | 82 | 16.5% |
| France | 29 | 8.4% | 64 | 12.9% |
| United Kingdom | 29 | 8.4% | 62 | 12.4% |
| Italy | 29 | 8.4% | 60 | 12.0% |
| Spain | 27 | 7.8% | 46 | 9.0% |
| Poland | 27 | 7.8% | 38 | 7.6% |
| Romania | 14 | 4.1% | 21 | 4.3% |
| Netherlands | 13 | 3.8% | 17 | 3.3% |
| Greece | 12 | 3.5% | 11 | 2.2% |
| Portugal | 12 | 3.5% | 11 | 2.1% |
| Belgium | 12 | 3.5% | 11 | 2.1% |
| Czech Republic | 12 | 3.5% | 10 | 2.1% |
| Hungary | 12 | 3.5% | 10 | 2.0% |
| Sweden | 10 | 2.9% | 9.2 | 1.9% |
| Austria | 10 | 2.9% | 8.3 | 1.7% |
| Bulgaria | 10 | 2.9% | 7.6 | 1.5% |
| Denmark | 7 | 2.0% | 5.5 | 1.1% |
| Slovakia | 7 | 2.0% | 5.4 | 1.1% |
| Finland | 7 | 2.0% | 5.3 | 1.1% |
| Ireland | 7 | 2.0% | 4.5 | 0.9% |
| Lithuania | 7 | 2.0% | 3.3 | 0.7% |
| Latvia | 4 | 1.2% | 2.2 | 0.5% |
| Slovenia | 4 | 1.2% | 2.0 | 0.4% |
| Estonia | 4 | 1.2% | 1.3 | 0.3% |
| Cyprus | 4 | 1.2% | 0.87 | 0.2% |
| Luxembourg | 4 | 1.2% | 0.49 | 0.1% |
| Malta | 3 | 0.9% | 0.41 | 0.1% |
| total | 345 | 100% | 498 | 100% |
| required majority | 255 | 74% | 324 | 65% |
The treaty has expanded the use of qualified majority voting (QMV) in the Council of Ministers by having it replace unanimity as the standard voting procedure in almost every policy area outside taxation and foreign policy. Moreover, taking effect in 2014, the definition of a qualified majority has changed: a qualified majority is reached when at least 55% of all member states, who comprise at least 65% of EU citizens, vote in favour of a proposal. When the Council of Ministers is acting neither on a proposal of the Commission nor on one of the High Representative, QMV requires 72% of the member states while the population requirement remains the same. However, the "blocking minority" that corresponds to these figures must comprise at least 4 countries. Hence, the voting powers of the member states are based on their population, and are no longer dependent on a negotiable system of voting points. The reform of qualified majority voting (QMV) in the Council was one of the main issues in the negotiation of the Lisbon Treaty.[43]
The earlier rules for QMV, set in the Treaty of Nice and applying until 2014, required a majority of countries (50% / 67%),[clarification needed] voting weights (74%), and population (62%). Between 2014 and 2017 a transitional phase is taking place where the new QMV rules apply, but where the old Nice treaty voting weights can be applied when a member state formally requests it. Moreover, from 2014 a new version of the 1994 "Ioannina compromise" allows small minorities of EU states to call for re-examination of EU decisions.[44]
The treaty instructs that Council deliberations on legislation (that include debate and voting) will be held in public (televised), as was already the case in the European Parliament.
The Presidency of the Council of Ministers, rotates among member states every six months, with a "Trio" formed by three consecutive Presidencies in order to provide more continuity to their conduct. However, the Foreign Affairs Council (one configuration of the Council of ministers), is no longer chaired by the representative of the member state holding the Presidency, but rather by the person holding the newly created post of High Representative.
European Council[edit]
The European Council officially gains the status of an EU institution, thus being separated from the Council of ministers. It continues to be composed of the heads of state or government of the Union's member states along with the (nonvoting) President of the European Commission and its own president.
The President of the European Council is appointed for a two and a half year term in a qualified majority vote of the European Council. A president can be reappointed once, and be removed by the same voting procedure. Unlike the post of President of the European Commission, the appointment of the President of the European Council does not have to reflect the composition of the European Parliament.[45] The president's work involves coordinating the work of the European Council, hosting its meetings and reporting its activities to the European Parliament after each meeting. This makes the president the lynchpin of negotiations to find agreement at European Council meetings, which has become a more onerous task with successive enlargement of the EU to 28 Member States. The president also chairs informal summits of the 19 Member States which use the euro as their currency. Additionally, the president provides external representation to the Union on foreign policy and security matters when such representation is required at the level of heads of state or government (bilateral summits and G8/G20).
Under the Treaty of Lisbon, the European Council is charged with setting the strategic priorities of the Union, and in practice with handling crises. It has a key role in appointments, including the Commission, the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and the members of the Board of the European Central Bank; the suspension of membership rights; changing the voting systems in the treaties bridging clauses. Under the emergency break procedure, a state may refer contentious legislation from the Council of ministers to the European Council if it is outvoted in the Council of ministers, notwithstanding that it may still be outvoted in the European Council.[45][46][47]
The European Council officially gains the status of an EU institution, thus being separated from the Council of ministers. It continues to be composed of the heads of state or government of the Union's member states along with the (nonvoting) President of the European Commission and its own president.
The President of the European Council is appointed for a two and a half year term in a qualified majority vote of the European Council. A president can be reappointed once, and be removed by the same voting procedure. Unlike the post of President of the European Commission, the appointment of the President of the European Council does not have to reflect the composition of the European Parliament.[45] The president's work involves coordinating the work of the European Council, hosting its meetings and reporting its activities to the European Parliament after each meeting. This makes the president the lynchpin of negotiations to find agreement at European Council meetings, which has become a more onerous task with successive enlargement of the EU to 28 Member States. The president also chairs informal summits of the 19 Member States which use the euro as their currency. Additionally, the president provides external representation to the Union on foreign policy and security matters when such representation is required at the level of heads of state or government (bilateral summits and G8/G20).
Under the Treaty of Lisbon, the European Council is charged with setting the strategic priorities of the Union, and in practice with handling crises. It has a key role in appointments, including the Commission, the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and the members of the Board of the European Central Bank; the suspension of membership rights; changing the voting systems in the treaties bridging clauses. Under the emergency break procedure, a state may refer contentious legislation from the Council of ministers to the European Council if it is outvoted in the Council of ministers, notwithstanding that it may still be outvoted in the European Council.[45][46][47]
Parliament[edit]
MEPs under the Lisbon Treaty
member state 2007 2009 Lisbon Germany 99 99 96 France 78 72 74 United Kingdom 78 72 73 Italy 78 72 73 Spain 54 50 54 Poland 54 50 51 Romania 35 33 33 Netherlands 27 25 26 Belgium 24 22 22 Czech Republic 24 22 22 Greece 24 22 22 
Hungary24 22 22 Portugal 24 22 22 Sweden 19 18 20 Austria 18 17 19 Bulgaria 18 17 18 Finland 14 13 13 Denmark 14 13 13 Slovakia 14 13 13 Ireland 13 12 12 Lithuania 13 12 12 Latvia 9 8 9 Slovenia 7 7 8 Cyprus 6 6 6 Estonia 6 6 6 Luxembourg 6 6 6 Malta 5 5 6 total 785 736 751
The legislative power of the European Parliament increases, as the codecision procedure with the Council of the EU is extended to almost all areas of policy. This procedure is slightly modified and renamed ordinary legislative procedure.
In the few remaining areas, called "special legislative procedures", Parliament now has either the right of consent to a Council of the EU measure, or vice versa, except in the few cases where the old Consultation procedure still applies, wherein the Council of the EU will only need to consult the European Parliament before voting on the Commission proposal. Council is then not bound by the Parliament's position but only by the obligation to consult it. Parliament would need to be consulted again if the Council of ministers deviated too far from the initial proposal.
The Commission will have to submit each proposed budget of the European Union directly to Parliament, which must approve the budget in its entirety.
The Treaty changes the way in which MEP seats are apportioned among member states. Rather than setting out a precise number (as it was the case in every previous treaty), the Treaty of Lisbon gives the power to the Council of the EU, acting unanimously on the initiative of the Parliament and with its consent, to adopt a decision fixing the number of MEPs for each member state. Moreover, the treaty provides for the number of MEPs to be degressively proportional to the number of citizens of each member state. A draft decision fixing the apportionment of MEPs was annexed to the treaty itself and had Lisbon been in force at the time of 2009 European Parliament elections the apportionment would have been:[48] In the meantime, Croatia's seats, when it joins, will be supernumerary.
The number of MEPs will be limited to 750, in addition to the President of the Parliament. Additionally, the Treaty of Lisbon will reduce the maximum number of MEPs from a member state from 99 to 96 (affects Germany) and increases the minimal number from 5 to 6 (affects Malta).
| member state | 2007 | 2009 | Lisbon |
|---|---|---|---|
| Germany | 99 | 99 | 96 |
| France | 78 | 72 | 74 |
| United Kingdom | 78 | 72 | 73 |
| Italy | 78 | 72 | 73 |
| Spain | 54 | 50 | 54 |
| Poland | 54 | 50 | 51 |
| Romania | 35 | 33 | 33 |
| Netherlands | 27 | 25 | 26 |
| Belgium | 24 | 22 | 22 |
| Czech Republic | 24 | 22 | 22 |
| Greece | 24 | 22 | 22 |
| Hungary | 24 | 22 | 22 |
| Portugal | 24 | 22 | 22 |
| Sweden | 19 | 18 | 20 |
| Austria | 18 | 17 | 19 |
| Bulgaria | 18 | 17 | 18 |
| Finland | 14 | 13 | 13 |
| Denmark | 14 | 13 | 13 |
| Slovakia | 14 | 13 | 13 |
| Ireland | 13 | 12 | 12 |
| Lithuania | 13 | 12 | 12 |
| Latvia | 9 | 8 | 9 |
| Slovenia | 7 | 7 | 8 |
| Cyprus | 6 | 6 | 6 |
| Estonia | 6 | 6 | 6 |
| Luxembourg | 6 | 6 | 6 |
| Malta | 5 | 5 | 6 |
| total | 785 | 736 | 751 |
The legislative power of the European Parliament increases, as the codecision procedure with the Council of the EU is extended to almost all areas of policy. This procedure is slightly modified and renamed ordinary legislative procedure.
In the few remaining areas, called "special legislative procedures", Parliament now has either the right of consent to a Council of the EU measure, or vice versa, except in the few cases where the old Consultation procedure still applies, wherein the Council of the EU will only need to consult the European Parliament before voting on the Commission proposal. Council is then not bound by the Parliament's position but only by the obligation to consult it. Parliament would need to be consulted again if the Council of ministers deviated too far from the initial proposal.
The Commission will have to submit each proposed budget of the European Union directly to Parliament, which must approve the budget in its entirety.
The Treaty changes the way in which MEP seats are apportioned among member states. Rather than setting out a precise number (as it was the case in every previous treaty), the Treaty of Lisbon gives the power to the Council of the EU, acting unanimously on the initiative of the Parliament and with its consent, to adopt a decision fixing the number of MEPs for each member state. Moreover, the treaty provides for the number of MEPs to be degressively proportional to the number of citizens of each member state. A draft decision fixing the apportionment of MEPs was annexed to the treaty itself and had Lisbon been in force at the time of 2009 European Parliament elections the apportionment would have been:[48] In the meantime, Croatia's seats, when it joins, will be supernumerary.
The number of MEPs will be limited to 750, in addition to the President of the Parliament. Additionally, the Treaty of Lisbon will reduce the maximum number of MEPs from a member state from 99 to 96 (affects Germany) and increases the minimal number from 5 to 6 (affects Malta).
National parliaments[edit]
The Treaty of Lisbon expanded the role of Member States' parliaments in the legislative processes of the EU by giving them a prior scrutiny of legislative proposals before the Council and the Parliament can take a position. The Treaty of Lisbon provides for national parliaments "to contribute to the good functioning of the Union" through receiving draft EU legislation, seeing to it that the principle of subsidiarity is respected, taking part in the evaluation mechanisms for the implementation of the Union policies in the area of freedom, security and justice, being involved in the political monitoring of Europol and the evaluation of Eurojust's activities, being notified of applications for EU accession, taking part in the inter-parliamentary cooperation between national parliaments and with the European Parliament.
The Treaty of Lisbon allows national parliaments eight weeks to study legislative proposals made by the European Commission and decide whether to send a reasoned opinion stating why the national parliament considers it to be incompatible with the principle of subsidiarity. National parliaments may vote to have the measure reviewed. If one third (or one quarter, where the proposed EU measure concerns freedom, justice and security) of national parliaments are in favour of a review, the Commission would have to review the measure and if it decides to maintain it, must give a reasoned opinion to the Union legislator as to why it considers the measure to be compatible with subsidiarity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Lisbon
_
eof
-
The Treaty of Lisbon expanded the role of Member States' parliaments in the legislative processes of the EU by giving them a prior scrutiny of legislative proposals before the Council and the Parliament can take a position. The Treaty of Lisbon provides for national parliaments "to contribute to the good functioning of the Union" through receiving draft EU legislation, seeing to it that the principle of subsidiarity is respected, taking part in the evaluation mechanisms for the implementation of the Union policies in the area of freedom, security and justice, being involved in the political monitoring of Europol and the evaluation of Eurojust's activities, being notified of applications for EU accession, taking part in the inter-parliamentary cooperation between national parliaments and with the European Parliament.
The Treaty of Lisbon allows national parliaments eight weeks to study legislative proposals made by the European Commission and decide whether to send a reasoned opinion stating why the national parliament considers it to be incompatible with the principle of subsidiarity. National parliaments may vote to have the measure reviewed. If one third (or one quarter, where the proposed EU measure concerns freedom, justice and security) of national parliaments are in favour of a review, the Commission would have to review the measure and if it decides to maintain it, must give a reasoned opinion to the Union legislator as to why it considers the measure to be compatible with subsidiarity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Lisbon
_
eof
-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Lisbon
_
eof
-
