Proposed contribution by COSAC to the Convention on the Future of Europe on the role of national parliaments

The European Scrutiny Committee of the House of Commons would like COSAC to emphasise the following points in a contribution to the Convention:

� ���� National parliaments could play an important role in bridging the gap between EU institutions and citizens, given that they have a closer relationship with citizens than any EU institution, and could thereby increase the EU�s legitimacy, but they can only do so if they acquire real influence in EU decision-making;

� ���� National parliaments� main role is to monitor and influence the activities of their own Ministers in the Council, but their ability to do so is determined partly by the way in which the EU itself conducts business (e.g. the Council normally meeting in private and proposals being agreed without sufficient time for parliamentary scrutiny);

� ���� While a new EU institution involving national parliaments would be undesirable, national parliaments would be assisted in the tasks they carry out individually if there were greater co-operation and sharing of information between parliaments, and this could be achieved (at least in part) through COSAC if it is reformed.

The Committee would like COSAC to emphasise the importance of the Convention agreeing specific proposals in the following areas:

� ���� The Council to meet in public when legislating;

� ���� New procedures in the Council to prevent Presidencies rushing through proposals without allowing time for scrutiny, including giving national parliament scrutiny reserves a more formal status in the Council and adopting COSAC�s proposal of a two-week period between COREPER and the Council agreeing a text;

� ���� A procedure for early warnings on subsidiarity which, if a certain proportion of national parliaments or Chambers are objecting, have more serious consequences than merely re-examination of a proposal by the Commission;

� ���� Arrangements for members of EU parliaments to meet, share views and question those responsible for devising and implementing EU policies, such as the Commission, in order to inform the examination of EU matters in national parliaments but not to involve national parliaments in decision-making at EU level; how this is done (e.g. through COSAC, the existing co-operation organised by the EP or a Congress) is less important than that the opportunity is available;

� ���� New procedures for co-decision and conciliation which would make the process more open and increase the ability of national parliaments to scrutinise proposals.

16 January 2003

����������� Comments by the House of Lords European Union Committee

We endorse the views of our colleagues in the Commons.� In addition we make the following points following our own recent review of scrutiny (which is available at www.parliament.uk and which is being circulated in hard copy to COSAC chairmen):

� ���� National parliaments need to consider carefully how best to monitor the implementation of EU law.� In many cases, including that of the House of Lords, this may be better left to a separate specialist committee rather than being performed by the European Scrutiny Committee if the function of that committee is to consider EU proposals during their passage through the EU legislative process

� ���� National parliaments also need to take seriously their duty of scrutinising EU activity at a strategic level, in particular by way of scrutiny of the Commission's Annual Work Programme, the Council's strategic agenda and the EC budget.