natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
This progress is accompanied by similar advances regarding the adoption of the international agreements concluded by the Union, thanks to the extension of the application of the qualified majority voting procedure in the Council and the requirement that the consent of the European Parliament should be obtained (for example on agreements implementing the common commercial policy).
This progress is accompanied by similar advances regarding the adoption of the international agreements concluded by the Union, thanks to the extension of the application of the qualified majority voting procedure in the Council and the requirement that the consent of the European Parliament should be obtained (for example on agreements implementing the common commercial policy).
The Union's finances
The Union 's finances
One of the questions which gave rise to most debate, both at the Convention and at the 2004 Intergovernmental Conference, was reform of the Union's system of finance, particularly the budgetary procedure.
One of the questions which gave rise to most debate, both at the Convention and at the 2004 Intergovernmental Conference, was reform of the Union's system of finance, particularly the budgetary procedure.
It was a matter of institutionalising a system which in future would make it possible to finance the Union adequately, transparently and democratically, and particularly for the European Parliament to consolidate its powers as an arm of the budgetary authority by giving it a decisive say on the whole of the EU budget, including expenditure hitherto classified as 'compulsory', such as expenditure on the common agricultural policy and the common fisheries policy.
It was a matter of institutionalising a system which in future would make it possible to finance the Union adequately, transparently and democratically, and particularly for the European Parliament to consolidate its powers as an arm of the budgetary authority by giving it a decisive say on the whole of the EU budget, including expenditure hitherto classified as 'compulsory', such as expenditure on the common agricultural policy and the common fisheries policy.
The final result, although positive overall, to some extent represented a change of emphasis by the 2004 Intergovernmental Conference, which did not entirely accept the Convention's proposals.
The final result, although positive overall, to some extent represented a change of emphasis by the 2004 Intergovernmental Conference, which did not entirely accept the Convention's proposals.
By contrast, this subject was never discussed during the 2007 negotiations.
By contrast, this subject was never discussed during the 2007 negotiations.
The Convention had proposed a three-stage model which was simple and balanced:
The Convention had proposed a three-stage model which was simple and balanced:
- the Council would continue to decide unanimously (with the subsequent approval of the Member States in accordance with their respective constitutional rules) on the essential features and on the own-resources ceiling
- the Council would continue to decide unanimously (with the subsequent approval of the Member States in accordance with their respective constitutional rules) on the essential features and on the own-resources ceiling
The Convention, on the other hand, proposed that the measures for the implementation of the own-resources system should be adopted by a Council law adopted by a qualified majority, with the approval of Parliament. ; the EP would only have the power to deliver an opinion;
The Convention, on the other hand, proposed that the measures for the implementation of the own-resources system should be adopted by a Council law adopted by a qualified majority, with the approval of Parliament. ; the EP would only have the power to deliver an opinion;
- the European Parliament and the Council would decide jointly on the Financial Perspective, which would be constitutionalised under the name 'multiannual financial framework' (the Council would decide by a qualified majority as from the first financial framework after the entry into force of the Constitution);
- the European Parliament and the Council would decide jointly on the Financial Perspective, which would be constitutionalised under the name 'multiannual financial framework' (the Council would decide by a qualified majority as from the first financial framework after the entry into force of the Constitution);
- the two institutions would decide jointly on the annual budget: after a first reading in each institution, which could lead to the convening of a conciliation committee, Parliament would have the last word in the event of disagreement, provided that it could muster a very large majority in favour of its position; otherwise, the Council's position would prevail.
- the two institutions would decide jointly on the annual budget: after a first reading in each institution, which could lead to the convening of a conciliation committee, Parliament would have the last word in the event of disagreement, provided that it could muster a very large majority in favour of its position; otherwise, the Council's position would prevail.
This meant that the Member States would continue to hold the key to determining the amount and nature of the Union's revenue, that the two arms of the budgetary authority would have to agree on the programming of expenditure and that, in the event of disagreement on the annual budget, the European Parliament could have the last word on overall expenditure (the distinction between compulsory and non-compulsory expenditure being dropped), albeit within the limits of the ceilings imposed by the financial framework.
This meant that the Member States would continue to hold the key to determining the amount and nature of the Union's revenue, that the two arms of the budgetary authority would have to agree on the programming of expenditure and that, in the event of disagreement on the annual budget, the European Parliament could have the last word on overall expenditure (the distinction between compulsory and non-compulsory expenditure being dropped), albeit within the limits of the ceilings imposed by the financial framework.
In practice, the two institutions would thus have been strongly encouraged to reconcile their views.
In practice, the two institutions would thus have been strongly encouraged to reconcile their views.
A large number of the Member States were unhappy with this balanced system, and throughout the 2004 Intergovernmental Conference proposals were submitted which in some cases even represented a serious assault on the European Parliament's existing powers in this field and ran the risk of destroying the idea of financial democracy in the Union.
A large number of the Member States were unhappy with this balanced system, and throughout the 2004 Intergovernmental Conference proposals were submitted which in some cases even represented a serious assault on the European Parliament's existing powers in this field and ran the risk of destroying the idea of financial democracy in the Union.
Thanks particularly to the efforts of the representatives of the European Parliament and the Italian and Irish Presidencies, a compromise was found which preserves Parliament's key rights in this field.
Thanks particularly to the efforts of the representatives of the European Parliament and the Italian and Irish Presidencies, a compromise was found which preserves Parliament's key rights in this field.
This compromise was not called into question in 2007.
This compromise was not called into question in 2007.
The only changes made to this chapter stem from the regrettable decision to abandon the terminology for legislative acts provided for in the Constitution
The only changes made to this chapter stem from the regrettable decision to abandon the terminology for legislative acts provided for in the Constitution
The law establishing the system of and ceilings for own resources thus becomes a regulation, just like the law laying down implementing measures for that system; the law establishing the multiannual financial framework also becomes a regulation, whilst the budget, which was to be adopted by means of a law, now becomes simply 'the budget’, with the form of the legislative act which is to adopt it not specified.
The law establishing the system of and ceilings for own resources thus becomes a regulation, just like the law laying down implementing measures for that system; the law establishing the multiannual financial framework also becomes a regulation, whilst the budget, which was to be adopted by means of a law, now becomes simply 'the budget’, with the form of the legislative act which is to adopt it not specified.
However, Article 314 of the TFEU states that it is adopted by means of a special legislative procedure, which makes it a legislative act pursuant to Article 289(3) TFEU. :
However, Article 314 of the TFEU states that it is adopted by means of a special legislative procedure, which makes it a legislative act pursuant to Article 289(3) TFEU. :
- the Convention's proposals on own resources were accepted;
- the Convention's proposals on own resources were accepted;
- the financial framework must always be adopted by the two institutions, but the Council will take decisions unanimously until the European Council, also acting unanimously, rules that the Council may decide by a qualified majority;
- the financial framework must always be adopted by the two institutions, but the Council will take decisions unanimously until the European Council, also acting unanimously, rules that the Council may decide by a qualified majority;
- the annual budget is also adopted jointly by the European Parliament and the Council, but in the event of disagreement between the two institutions the procedure must begin again with the submission by the Commission of a new draft budget
- the annual budget is also adopted jointly by the European Parliament and the Council, but in the event of disagreement between the two institutions the procedure must begin again with the submission by the Commission of a new draft budget
This is the general rule.
This is the general rule.
In one specific case Parliament can continue to impose its standpoint, through a very large majority.
In one specific case Parliament can continue to impose its standpoint, through a very large majority.
But this is a fairly theoretical possibility. .
But this is a fairly theoretical possibility. .
As has already been said, this solution preserves the European Parliament's most important budgetary powers: Parliament is given a decisive voice on the whole of budget, in view of the abolition of the distinction between compulsory and non-compulsory expenditure.
As has already been said, this solution preserves the European Parliament's most important budgetary powers: Parliament is given a decisive voice on the whole of budget, in view of the abolition of the distinction between compulsory and non-compulsory expenditure.
But the retention of the unanimity requirement for the adoption of the multiannual financial framework will seriously complicate future negotiations on the subject and provide less encouragement for the budgetary conciliation between the institutions which was the rationale underlying the Convention's proposal.
But the retention of the unanimity requirement for the adoption of the multiannual financial framework will seriously complicate future negotiations on the subject and provide less encouragement for the budgetary conciliation between the institutions which was the rationale underlying the Convention's proposal.
Progress on sectoral policies
Progress on sectoral policies
The provisions dealing with changes to Union policies are, with the exception of the general rules governing external action and the provisions on the CFSP, which form part of the TEU, contained in the TFEU.
The provisions dealing with changes to Union policies are, with the exception of the general rules governing external action and the provisions on the CFSP, which form part of the TEU, contained in the TFEU.
Part III incorporates the provisions dealing with the 'Internal policies and actions of the Union', Part IV those dealing with 'The association of the overseas countries and territories', and Part V those dealing with 'The external action of the Union'.
Part III incorporates the provisions dealing with the 'Internal policies and actions of the Union', Part IV those dealing with 'The association of the overseas countries and territories', and Part V those dealing with 'The external action of the Union'.
The new Treaty essentially confines itself to incorporating procedural changes into the provisions of the current Treaties concerning the definition and implementation of sectoral policies, particularly the legal bases for the Union's action in each field.
The new Treaty essentially confines itself to incorporating procedural changes into the provisions of the current Treaties concerning the definition and implementation of sectoral policies, particularly the legal bases for the Union's action in each field.
The view might perhaps be taken that many of these provisions could have been simplified or adjusted in the light of the changes which have occurred since they were drafted.
The view might perhaps be taken that many of these provisions could have been simplified or adjusted in the light of the changes which have occurred since they were drafted.
But the fact is that the mandate which the European Council conferred on the Convention at the time did not empower it to revise these provisions in depth, the 2004 IGC did not undertake any such revision, and, when negotiations were resumed in 2007, the political climate was not conducive to any fresh consideration of this very complex issue.
But the fact is that the mandate which the European Council conferred on the Convention at the time did not empower it to revise these provisions in depth, the 2004 IGC did not undertake any such revision, and, when negotiations were resumed in 2007, the political climate was not conducive to any fresh consideration of this very complex issue.
Accordingly, the changes made to the provisions governing Union policies are essentially the result of the structural, institutional and procedural revisions introduced by the new Treaty, concerning, for example, the abolition of the 'pillars', the definition of the Union's competences, the institutions, the decision-making procedures and legal instruments.
Accordingly, the changes made to the provisions governing Union policies are essentially the result of the structural, institutional and procedural revisions introduced by the new Treaty, concerning, for example, the abolition of the 'pillars', the definition of the Union's competences, the institutions, the decision-making procedures and legal instruments.
As regards the substance of the policies per se, there are few new developments, the area of freedom, security and justice (essentially the former third pillar) and external relations, particularly the common foreign and security policy, being the fields where the changes are most sensitive.
As regards the substance of the policies per se, there are few new developments, the area of freedom, security and justice (essentially the former third pillar) and external relations, particularly the common foreign and security policy, being the fields where the changes are most sensitive.
As regards the other sectoral policies, the changes mainly concern the procedures applicable and the breakdown of legal bases between legislative and non-legislative acts, which in itself may already constitute a guarantee of greater efficiency, democratic legitimacy and transparency of the Union's action in view of the positive nature of the changes which we have analysed above.
As regards the other sectoral policies, the changes mainly concern the procedures applicable and the breakdown of legal bases between legislative and non-legislative acts, which in itself may already constitute a guarantee of greater efficiency, democratic legitimacy and transparency of the Union's action in view of the positive nature of the changes which we have analysed above.
It is true that, in the Constitution, some new legal bases seemed to recognise what were apparently new competencies, but these were essentially areas in which the Union was already taking action through the use of other articles, including Article 308.
It is true that, in the Constitution, some new legal bases seemed to recognise what were apparently new competencies, but these were essentially areas in which the Union was already taking action through the use of other articles, including Article 308.
The main purpose of the new legal bases, therefore, was to clarify the way in which the Union exercises those competences (for example in the areas of energy, health, space, sport, tourism, etc.).
The main purpose of the new legal bases, therefore, was to clarify the way in which the Union exercises those competences (for example in the areas of energy, health, space, sport, tourism, etc.).
These new provisions have been retained with some changes.
These new provisions have been retained with some changes.
In addition, two important innovations have been incorporated concerning the fight against climate change and energy solidarity, two areas which have a very direct bearing on the lives of European citizens and in which Union action can have a clear added value.
In addition, two important innovations have been incorporated concerning the fight against climate change and energy solidarity, two areas which have a very direct bearing on the lives of European citizens and in which Union action can have a clear added value.
But these are new objectives, rather than new competences.
But these are new objectives, rather than new competences.
It should also be noted that an initial chapter has been introduced which lists the horizontal or cross-cutting clauses which apply across the board to all policies.
It should also be noted that an initial chapter has been introduced which lists the horizontal or cross-cutting clauses which apply across the board to all policies.
We shall review the main aspects of these changes, with the aim of determining whether they enable the Union to act more efficiently and democratically in the field in question.
We shall review the main aspects of these changes, with the aim of determining whether they enable the Union to act more efficiently and democratically in the field in question.
Area of freedom, security and justice
Area of freedom, security and justice
(1) In the internal policy sphere, the provisions dealing with the area of freedom, security and justice are those where the greatest changes are to be found, with, in particular, the pillar structure being discontinued and judicial cooperation in criminal matters and police cooperation (which, up to now, have come under the third pillar) being brought under the 'Community' method through the extension of the ordinary legislative procedure and qualified majority voting.
(1) In the internal policy sphere, the provisions dealing with the area of freedom, security and justice are those where the greatest changes are to be found, with, in particular, the pillar structure being discontinued and judicial cooperation in criminal matters and police cooperation (which, up to now, have come under the third pillar) being brought under the 'Community' method through the extension of the ordinary legislative procedure and qualified majority voting.
This was already the case under the Constitutional Treaty, but the Treaty of Lisbon has made further substantial changes in an area which is now central to the European integration process.
This was already the case under the Constitutional Treaty, but the Treaty of Lisbon has made further substantial changes in an area which is now central to the European integration process.
Despite the ‘Communitisation’ of the former third pillar, specific institutional arrangements nonetheless continue to apply: the strategic guidelines for legislative and operational planning are defined by the European Council (by consensus), without Parliament being involved in any way; the right of legislative initiative in connection with judicial cooperation in criminal matters and police cooperation is shared between the Commission and one-quarter of the Member States (rather than a single Member State as is currently the case); and the national parliaments are given a larger role, particularly as regards monitoring compliance with the subsidiarity principle (one-quarter of national parliaments required to trigger the early warning procedure, rather than one-third), the assessment of the implementation of Union policies in this area and scrutiny of the work of Eurojust and Europol.
Despite the ‘Communitisation’ of the former third pillar, specific institutional arrangements nonetheless continue to apply: the strategic guidelines for legislative and operational planning are defined by the European Council (by consensus), without Parliament being involved in any way; the right of legislative initiative in connection with judicial cooperation in criminal matters and police cooperation is shared between the Commission and one-quarter of the Member States (rather than a single Member State as is currently the case); and the national parliaments are given a larger role, particularly as regards monitoring compliance with the subsidiarity principle (one-quarter of national parliaments required to trigger the early warning procedure, rather than one-third), the assessment of the implementation of Union policies in this area and scrutiny of the work of Eurojust and Europol.
(2) The policy objectives in this area are clarified and defined more precisely.
(2) The policy objectives in this area are clarified and defined more precisely.
Union action is the area is explicitly made subject to respect for fundamental rights.
Union action is the area is explicitly made subject to respect for fundamental rights.
Access to justice is enshrined as a general objective.
Access to justice is enshrined as a general objective.
Mutual recognition of the various systems and the approximation of laws are recognised as two parallel means of implementing policies.
Mutual recognition of the various systems and the approximation of laws are recognised as two parallel means of implementing policies.
Policies on border checks, asylum and immigration are recognised as common policies of the Union, governed by the principles of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility among Member States.
Policies on border checks, asylum and immigration are recognised as common policies of the Union, governed by the principles of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility among Member States.
The new Treaty also marks a major step forward in the areas of judicial cooperation in both civil and criminal matters and of police cooperation, mainly through the application of the ordinary legislative procedure.
The new Treaty also marks a major step forward in the areas of judicial cooperation in both civil and criminal matters and of police cooperation, mainly through the application of the ordinary legislative procedure.
(3) Judicial cooperation in civil matters is extended to all matters having cross-border implications and is based on the principle of mutual recognition of judgments and decisions in extrajudicial cases, with the ordinary legislative procedure applying to any measures for the approximation of laws, with the exception of measures concerning family law, in which case unanimity is the rule (Council regulation, with Parliament merely being consulted).
(3) Judicial cooperation in civil matters is extended to all matters having cross-border implications and is based on the principle of mutual recognition of judgments and decisions in extrajudicial cases, with the ordinary legislative procedure applying to any measures for the approximation of laws, with the exception of measures concerning family law, in which case unanimity is the rule (Council regulation, with Parliament merely being consulted).