REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION ANNUAL REPORT 2011 ON RELATIONS BETWEEN THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION AND NATIONAL PARLIAMENTS
Date: 2012-07-10
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: COSAC, European Commission, economic recession, exchange of information, interinstitutional relations (EU), job creation

EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 10.7.2012  
COM(2012) 375 final 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION 

ANNUAL REPORT 2011 
ON RELATIONS BETWEEN THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION AND NATIONAL 
PARLIAMENTS 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
  
 
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION 

ANNUAL REPORT 2011 
ON RELATIONS BETWEEN THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION AND NATIONAL 
PARLIAMENTS 

1. 

INTRODUCTION 

This  seventh  annual  report  on  relations  between  the  Commission  and  national  Parliaments 
focuses on the political dialogue with national Parliaments in a broad sense. It encompasses 
all relevant interactions and exchanges of information and opinion between the Commission 
and  national  Parliaments.  Specific  aspects  relating  to  the  subsidiarity  control  mechanism 
(through which national Parliaments scrutinise whether draft legislative acts comply with the 
principle  of  subsidiarity)  are  dealt  with  in  the  Annual  Report  on  Subsidiarity  and 
Proportionality, which is published in parallel1 and should thus be seen as complementary to 
this report. 

The  political  dialogue  between  the  Commission  and  national  Parliaments  is  a  continuous 
debate  on  the  Commission  Work  Programme  (CWP)  and  the  EU’s  political  priorities;  a 
written exchange of views on specific Commission documents (legislative or otherwise); and 
discussions on a wide range of policy issues in the COSAC, in joint parliamentary meetings, 
inter-parliamentary  committee  meetings  and  joint  committee  meetings.  It  also  covers  a 
growing number of bilateral contacts, at administrative or political level, including numerous 
visits by Commissioners to national Parliaments. The fact that, as of 2011, almost all national 
Parliaments have sent permanent representatives to Brussels has been instrumental in stepping 
up this particular aspect of the political dialogue. 

In  2010,  the  Commission’s  relations  with  national  Parliaments  were  still  predominantly 
framed by the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon. The focus was on the implementation 
of  the  new  Treaty  provisions,  in  particular  of  the  new  subsidiarity  control  mechanism. 
National Parliaments adapted their scrutiny processes and political focus.  

In 2011, there was an environment of growing economic, social and political instability. As 
the  global  economic  crisis  hit  the  Euro  zone,  national  political  debates  increasingly  focused 
on  the  substance  of  European  policies.  The  overall  message  emerging  from  the  political 
dialogue with national Parliaments in 2011 has been that a lot is expected of the Commission. 

The political dialogue in its broader sense naturally covers a wide range of topics and policy 
domains.  However,  in  2011  two  major  issues  of  common  interest  emerged.  Apart  from 
opinions  and  exchanges  on  a  vast  array  of  legislative  measures  proposed  in  response  to  the 
economic  and  financial  crisis  (for  instance,  in  relation  to  financial  regulation,  the  single 
market  and  economic  governance),  national  Parliaments  were  also  involved  in  the  debate 
concerning the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) for 2014 – 2020 in general, and the 
sectoral proposals in particular. 

1 

COM(2012) 373. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
                                                 
2. 

BUILDING A COMMON UNDERSTANDING OF THE CHALLENGES 

In 2011, it became increasingly clear that, over and above the regular parliamentary scrutiny 
of European affairs in 40 national Chambers, there is a case for creating a structured exchange 
of views, between and with national Parliaments, with a view to shaping a shared perspective 
on major European issues and challenges. 

Over  and  above  the  various  inter-parliamentary  configurations,  steered  by  the  European 
Parliament and the Parliament of the Member State holding the EU Council Presidency, the 
method  used  so  far  within  COSAC  was  to  concentrate  on  subsidiarity  vetting,  based  on  a 
coordinated  examination  of  the  CWP.  However,  in  2010  the  focus  started  to  shift.  In  May 
2010, the Madrid COSAC suggested that the Commission President should present the CWP 
for  the  current  year  at  the  first  six-monthly  COSAC  meeting,  while  at  the  second  such 
meeting,  he  should  be  invited  to  present  an  overview  of  how  the  CWP  was  being 
implemented. 

Building  on  these  reflections,  President  Barroso  addressed  the  Brussels  COSAC  in  October 
2010  and  reiterated  the  Commission’s  conviction  that  individual  opinions  of  national 
Parliaments or collective contributions via the COSAC should be submitted to feed into the 
preparation  of  the  CWP,  complementing  the  Commission’s  formal  structured  dialogue  with 
the European Parliament.  National Parliaments could thus  help to build a real consensus on 
where the EU should focus its policy and resources for the coming years. 

During the first half of 2011, the Hungarian COSAC Presidency shared this perspective and 
focused  discussions  accordingly.  The  Budapest  COSAC  in  May  2011  concluded  that  the 
Commission  should,  in  the  second  half  of  each  year,  present  its  work  programme  for  the 
following year and in principle agreed with the idea of a general policy debate feeding into 
the strategic planning process — even though several Parliaments still had doubts about the 
feasibility  of  such  an  ex  ante  discussion  within  the  COSAC,  in  the  absence  of  a  document 
which might serve as a basis for discussion. 

Already on that occasion, Vice-President Šefčovič reiterated the Commission’s belief that, as 
a first step in this direction, national Parliaments could focus on the major issue of economic 
governance. Through collective involvement in the European Semester, national Parliaments 
and  the  European  Parliament  could  be  encouraged  to  debate  jointly  the  main  lines  of  EU 
policy,  as  formulated  in  the  Europe  2020  strategy  and  reflected  in  the  National  Reform 
Programmes and the country-specific recommendations, or the Annual Growth Survey for the 
given year. 

The  Vice-President  also  identified  the  budget  as  another  clear  case  where  a  collective 
assessment  could  help  to  paint  a  broader  picture.  In  this  way,  the  added  value  of  inter-
parliamentary cooperation, i.e. getting an overview of what happens in other Member States, 
exchanging best practices, and increasing the peer pressure needed to deliver, could be best 
harnessed. 

During the second half of 2011, the Polish COSAC Presidency focused national Parliaments’ 
attention on the Commission’s MFF 2014 – 2020 proposal. As a follow-up, in October 2011, 
a  first  High-level  Conference  dedicated  to  the  post-2013  MFF  was  organised  jointly  by  the 
Polish  Presidency  of  the  Council,  the  European  Parliament  and  the  Commission.  It 
specifically targeted national Parliaments, which took an active part. One of the most debated 
issues was the question of own resources. 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
The efforts made by national Parliaments, the European Parliament and the Commission over 
the  past  two  years  to  coordinate  priorities  at  European  level  are  expected  to  continue. 
Economic governance and the next MFF are likely to remain two of the main common policy 
challenges (see chapter 5). 

3. 

OPINIONS FROM NATIONAL PARLIAMENTS (POLITICAL DIALOGUE) 

Participation 

Launched by President Barroso in 2006, the written exchange of opinions and replies between 
national  Parliaments  and  the  Commission  has  been  steadily  intensifying  over  the  past  six 
years.  The  total  number  of  opinions  received  from  national  Parliaments  in  2011,  including 
reasoned opinions under the subsidiarity control mechanism, reached 622. This represents an 
increase of some 60 % compared to 2010 (387), which had already seen a 55 % increase over 
2009 (250). This upward trend has continued into 2012, with more than 400 opinions received 
by June 2012. 

The great majority of the 622 opinions received in 2011 contained substantive comments and 
questions on the content of Commission proposals and initiatives. As in previous years, only a 
comparatively small number (64) of opinions were reasoned opinions within the meaning of 
Protocol No 2, notifying a breach of the principle of subsidiarity. 

There  was  a  particularly  notable  increase  in  the  number  of  opinions  received  from  the 
Portuguese  Parliament,  from  both  Romanian  chambers,  the  Swedish  Parliament,  the  Czech 
Senate and the Bulgarian Parliament2. Only four chambers took no part at all in the political 
dialogue in 2011 (compared to ten in 2010). 

Since its inception, the political dialogue has helped to make European decision-making more 
transparent and to bring European policies closer to the public debate in Member States, thus 
raising  public  awareness  on  some  of  the  key  European  policy  issues.  The  Commission 
continues to encourage those Parliaments which, for different reasons, have so far chosen not 
to  participate  actively  in  a  direct  exchange  with  the  Commission  on  the  substance  of  its 
proposals and strategic initiatives, to engage in this political dialogue. 

This  includes  exchanges  during  the  pre-legislative  phase,  e.g.  in  the  context  of  public 
consultations,  and  in  terms  of  targeted  contacts  and  discussions  at  both  political  and  expert 
levels.  These  are  a  particularly  effective  way  for  national  Parliaments  to  contribute 
constructively  to  the  shaping  of  future  EU  initiatives  and  legislation,  as  several  concrete 
examples have shown. The Commission has indicated its openness to examine the possibility 
of systematically alerting national Parliaments to all public consultations as and when they are 
launched,  and  of  highlighting  more  specifically  national  Parliaments’  contributions. 
Following  up  on  its  Communication  on  "Smart  Regulation  in  the  European  Union" 
{COM(2010)543},  the  Commission  is  now  carrying  out  a  review  of  its  consultation  policy. 
Among  other  things,  the  review  will  look  at  the  need  and  ways  to  increase  the  reach  of  its 
consultations and strengthen the quality and transparency of the information on the results of 
consultations. 

Scope 

2 

See table in Annex 1. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
The  focus  of  national  Parliaments’  opinions  remains  diverse.  The  622  opinions  received  in 
2011  addressed  a  large  number  of  Commission  documents,  predominantly  legislative  ones, 
with the majority of proposals and initiatives eliciting only between one and three opinions. 
However,  the  number  of  Commission  documents  receiving  comments  from  more  than  four 
chambers (67) has increased significantly compared to 2010 (25). 

The  proposals  which  attracted  most  comments  in  20113  were  also  those  which  elicited  the 
highest  number  of  reasoned  opinions  under  the  subsidiarity  control  mechanism,  such  as  the 
Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base4 (17 opinions, including nine reasoned opinions); 
temporary reintroduction of border controls at internal borders in exceptional circumstances5 
(11 opinions in 2011, of which six were reasoned opinions); jurisdiction, applicable law and 
the  recognition  and  enforcement  of  decisions  regarding  the  property  consequences  of 
registered  partnerships6  (eight  opinions,  four  of  them  reasoned  opinions);  and  Common 
European Sales Law7 (seven opinions in 2011, including five reasoned opinions). 

In 2011, five policy fields accounted for more than half of the opinions received in the context 
of  the  political  dialogue  -  Internal  Market  and  Services,  Justice,  Agriculture,  Home  Affairs 
and Taxation. 

Despite the fact that the Commission has encouraged national Parliaments to see the CWP as 
a strategic tool in helping to build a consensus on where the EU should focus its policy for the 
coming year(s), very few national Parliaments expressed their views on the CWP 2011 in the 
context of the political dialogue. 

The political dialogue on key topics 

Apart  from  the  numerous  economic  governance  and  MFF-related  files,  the  following 
initiatives  and  proposals  are  among  those  which  attracted  particular  attention  from  national 
Parliaments’ in 2011: 

• 

Energy efficiency directive8 

In  the  ten  opinions  submitted  in  2011  (four  more  in  early  2012),  parliamentary  chambers 
expressed  somewhat  similar  positions.  On  the  one  hand,  they  were  concerned  about  the 
financial and administrative burden; on the other they called for a more specific country-based 
approach with more discretion for national and local authorities. Their fear was that EU action 
at  administrative  level  would  not  leave  room  for  solutions  adapted  to  national  and  regional 
conditions.  Two  national  Parliaments  issued  a  reasoned  opinion  in  this  respect,  claiming  a 
breach of the subsidiarity principle. However, national Parliaments agreed that achieving the 
20 % primary energy saving target was a key objective under the Europe 2020 Strategy. 

• 

Taxation of energy products and electricity9 

3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 

See Annex 2. 
COM(2011) 121. 
COM(2011) 560. 
COM(2011) 127. 
COM(2011) 635. 
COM(2011) 370. 
COM(2011) 169. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Of ten opinions received in 2011, half argued that the impact assessment accompanying the 
proposal  was  not  thorough  enough  and  did  not  provide  enough  qualitative  and  quantitative 
indicators  to  back  the  proposal’s  compliance  with  the  principle  of  subsidiarity.  Several 
opinions underlined that the provisions of the proposal could jeopardise the competitiveness 
of the EU economy. Potential administrative, financial and fiscal burdens and the potentially 
negative social impact were also matters of concern. 

• 

Communication  on  procedures  for  the  scrutiny  of  Europol’s  activities  by  the 
European Parliament, together with national Parliaments10 

The  Commission  received  nine  opinions,  welcoming  the  Commission's  communication.  A 
large  majority  of  the  Chambers  were  in  favour  of  using  the  existing  inter-parliamentary 
committee meetings to ensure a proper scrutiny of Europol rather than setting up new forums 
or conferences. They advocated more efficiency and flexibility and proposed using the same 
structures  for  the  parliamentary  scrutiny  of  Eurojust.  National  Parliaments  also  called  for  a 
balanced approach when defining the size of parliamentary delegations to the new supervisory 
body, though the understanding of such a balance varies. 

4. 

CONTACTS AND VISITS 

As  in  previous  years,  a  wide  range  of  personal  contacts  and  meetings,  at  both  political  and 
administrative  level,  have  complemented  the  exchange  of  written  opinions  and  replies 
between national Parliaments and the Commission. 

The  Vice-President  for  inter-institutional  relations,  Mr  Šefčovič,  continued  to  make  regular 
visits  to  national  Parliaments  in  line  with  his  objective  of  meeting  all  of  them  at  least  once 
during  his  term  of  office.  During  2011,  members  of  the  Commission  visited  24  out  of  27 
national Parliaments. 

The Commission was represented at political level at all major inter-parliamentary meetings 
held during 2011, including the meetings of the COSAC and the joint parliamentary meetings. 
The  High  Representative  for  Foreign  Affairs  and  Security  Policy/  Vice-President  of  the 
Commission, Baroness Ashton, attended or was represented at the meetings of the COFACC 
and the CODACC11. 

The  conference  on  the  Common  Fisheries  Policy  reform,  organised  by  the  Commission  in 
October 2011, and the first High-level Conference on the Multiannual Financial Framework 
for 2014 -2020, organised jointly by the Council Presidency, the European Parliament and the 
European  Commission  on  20-21  October  2011,  were  specifically  targeted  at  national 
Parliaments, whose members took an active part. 

Commission  officials  also  continued  to  give  evidence  before  national  Parliaments’ 
committees, when requested, and to have regular meetings with the permanent representatives 
of  national  Parliaments  based  in  Brussels  to  discuss  a  variety  of  upcoming  initiatives  or 
ongoing files. 

10 
11 

COM(2010) 776. 
Conference of Chairpersons of Foreign Affairs Committee and Conference of Chairpersons of Defence 
Affairs Committees. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
In  2011,  permanent  representatives  of  national  Parliaments  met  twice  with  Vice-President 
Šefčovič, and once each with Vice-President Kallas and with Commissioner Georgieva. 2011 
also saw an intensification of contacts between the Commission and national Parliaments as 
part of the preparations for a new regulation on the democratic scrutiny of Europol. A meeting 
of stakeholders, including representatives of national Parliaments, provided an occasion for a 
first exchange of views on the topic in January 2011. 

5. 

OUTLOOK: COMMON POLICY CHALLENGES 

Tackling  the  consequences  of  the  economic  crisis,  promoting  growth  and  job  creation, 
especially  for  young  people,  and  further  strengthening  European  economic  governance  will 
remain  at  the  top  of  Europe’s  political  agenda  in  2012.  The  inter-parliamentary  committee 
meeting  on  economic  governance  in  Brussels  in  February  2012  confirmed  that  there  is  a 
strong interest on the part of both national Parliaments and the Commission in an intensified 
exchange  of  views,  not  least  because  the  European  Semester  is  still  a  relatively  new  and 
evolving mechanism. 

The  financial,  economic,  and  sovereign  debt  crises  have  shown  why  closer  coordination 
among Member States is needed. These efforts must however recognise that many aspects of 
economic  policy  remain  a  national  competence.  National  stakeholders,  and  in  particular 
national Parliaments, need to have a full understanding of the EU-level and euro area context 
if they are to make fully informed economic policy decisions. 

The  introduction  of  the  European  Semester  in  2011  was  an  important  step  forward  in  this 
regard.  The  Commission’s  Annual  Growth  Survey,  which  launches  the  Semester  each  year, 
sets out cross-cutting policy guidance with an EU-level and euro-area dimension that Member 
States are required to take into account when formulating national policies. The success of the 
European  Semester  is  measured  by  how  far  the  country-specific  recommendations  are 
reflected in national policy-making during the second half of the year - the national semester - 
which  sees  budgets  and  reform  programmes  proposed  by  governments  and  adopted  by 
Parliaments. 

The role of national Parliaments in explaining often difficult policy choices having an impact 
beyond national borders is vitally important, while strong national ownership is necessary to 
create the political conditions under which reforms can succeed. Against this background, and 
as it stressed throughout 2011, the Commission is fully committed to stepping up its political 
dialogue with national Parliaments, particularly in terms of economic governance. 

More  concretely,  and  as  it  said  at  the  Copenhagen  COSAC  meeting  in  April  2012,  the 
Commission sees two particular moments during the European Semester when an intensified 
dialogue  with  national  Parliaments  could  provide  real  added  value:  first,  following  the 
publication of the Commission’s Annual Growth Survey, which sets out broad priorities for 
the EU as a whole for the coming year; and second, once the Commission has presented and 
the  European  Council  has  endorsed  country-specific  guidance  on  the  basis  of  the  Member 
States’  National  Reform  Programmes  and  Stability  and  Convergence  Programmes.  At  these 
key  stages,  the  Commission  is  ready  and  willing  to  discuss  with  national  Parliaments  both 
cross-cutting  and  country-specific  questions  related  to  economic  governance  and  to  provide 
further clarification.  

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
On 30 May 2012, under the 2012 European Semester, the Commission transmitted country-
specific  recommendations  to  the  Council,  taking  account  of  the  situation  of  each  Member 
State. The Commission has also issued recommendations for the euro area as a whole, and set 
out its vision for the EU-level policy action needed to complement the national measures to 
deliver an ambitious, two-tiered EU growth initiative12.  

In  addition  to  the  issue  of  economic  governance,  discussions  and  negotiations  on  the  MFF 
2014  –  2020  will  reach  an  advanced  stage  in  2012.  The  second  MFF  Conference  in  March 
2012 confirmed the need for close and effective communication between the Commission and 
national Parliaments on the shape of the next multiannual financial framework and thus on the 
future scope and impact of EU policies. 

And finally, preparations for the upcoming legislative proposal on the democratic scrutiny of 
Europol based on Article 88 of the TFEU will intensify throughout 2012. Following national 
Parliaments’  reactions  to  the  Commission’s  communication  of  November  2010  (see  chapter 
3), there was a constructive high-level meeting between the Commission, national Parliaments 
and the European Parliament in April 2012, and the Commission will continue to involve both 
closely in ongoing reflections and pre-legislative discussions. 

As  decision-making  at  European  level  becomes  more  and  more  complex,  and  as  public 
support is needed for the profound and often difficult reforms ahead, the Commission remains 
committed to encouraging any initiatives which will help to boost the democratic scrutiny of 
EU policy processes and enhance national ownership of our common policy choices. 

12 

Communication on Action for Stability, Growth and Jobs {COM(2012)299} 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Annex 1 

Overall number of opinions received per country/chamber (political dialogue and 
subsidiarity control mechanism) 

National Parliament 

Chamber 

Total number 
of opinions 
(political 
dialogue)  

Reasoned 
opinions 
(Protocol 2) 

Portugal 

Assembleia da República 

184 

Italy 

Senato della Repubblica 

Czech Republic 

Sweden 

Romania 

Romania 

Germany 

Italy 

Bulgaria 

Senát 

Riksdag 

Camera Deputaţilor 

Senatul 

Bundesrat 

Camera dei Deputati 

Narodno Sabranie 

United Kingdom 

House of Lords 

Denmark 

Folketing 

Luxembourg 

Chambre des Députés 

United Kingdom 

House of Commons 

Austria 

Germany 

Nationalrat 

Bundestag 

The Netherlands 

Eerste Kamer 

Poland 

Sejm 

Czech Republic 

Poslanecká sněmovna 

Poland 

Lithuania 

EN 

Senat 

Seimas 

9 

76 

43 

42 

40 

33 

33 

28 

19 

16 

14 

14 

8 

7 

6 

6 

5 

5 

4 

4 

1 

3 

0 

11 

2 

2 

1 

2 

2 

1 

1 

7 

3 

0 

1 

0 

5 

0 

4 

0 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
National Parliament 

Chamber 

Belgium 

Chambre des Représentants 

France 

Greece 

Austria 

Sénat 

Vouli ton Ellnion 

Bundesrat 

Netherlands 

Both Chambers 

Spain 

Finland 

Belgium 

France 

Malta 

Slovakia 

Ireland 

Romania 

Both Chambers 

Eduskunta 

Sénat 

Assemblée nationale 

Kamra tad-Deputati 

Národná Rada 

Dail Eireann 

Both Chambers 

Netherlands 

Tweede Kamer 

Cyprus 

Latvia 

Estonia 

Slovenia 

Slovenia 

Hungary 

Vouli ton Antiprosopon 

Saeima 

Riikikogu 

Državni svet  

Državni zbor 

Országgyülés 

Total number 
of opinions 
(political 
dialogue)  

Reasoned 
opinions 
(Protocol 2) 

4 

4 

4 

3 

3 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

0 

0 

0 

0 

1 

1 

0 

1 

2 

2 

1 

1 

1 

2 

2 

1 

/ 

1 

1 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

Total 

622 

64 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
 
Annex 2 

Commission proposals and initiatives generating the highest number of opinions 
in the context of the political dialogue (2011) 

Commission 
document 

Title  

Reasoned 
opinions 
(Protocol 2) 

Total 
number of 
opinions 
(political 
dialogue)  

COM(2011) 121 

Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base 
(CCCTB)  

COM(2011) 560  Temporary reintroduction of border control 
exceptional 

internal 

borders 

in 

at 
circumstances  

COM(2011) 370  Energy efficiency 

COM(2011) 169 

Community  framework  for  the  taxation  of 
energy products and electricity  

COM(2011) 32  Passenger Name Records  

COM(2010) 776 

Scrutiny  of  Europol’s  activities  by  the 
European Parliament, together with national 
Parliaments  

COM(2011) 127 

applicable 

Jurisdiction, 
the 
recognition  and  enforcement  of  decisions 
regarding  the  property  consequences  of 
registered partnerships 

law 

and 

COM(2010) 608 

Towards  a  Single  Market  Act  for  a  highly 
competitive social market economy 

COM(2011) 608  Globalisation Adjustment Fund 

COM(2011) 635  Common European Sales Law  

COM(2011) 594  Financial Transaction Tax 

17 

1113 

1014 

10 

915 

9 

8 

8 

716 

717  

718 

9 

6 

2 

2 

/ 

/ 

4 

/ 

3 

5 

3 

13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 

By mid-May 2012, the Commission had received a total of 12 opinions on this proposal. 
By mid-May 2012, the Commission had received a total of 12 opinions on this proposal. 
By mid-May 2012, the Commission had received a total of 10 opinions on this proposal. 
By mid-May 2012, the Commission had received a total of 9 opinions on this proposal. 
By mid-May 2012, the Commission had received a total of 11 opinions on this proposal. 
By mid-May 2012, the Commission had received a total of 11 opinions on this proposal. 

EN 

11 

   EN