EU countries have penned a joint letter denouncing as “problematic” a new attempt to improve relations between the European Parliament and the European Commission, warning it goes against its founding treaties.
The European Parliament’s long-awaited dream to gain the right to propose new laws has been met with a scathing rebuke from the 27 member states, who in a joint letter denounced the move for what they perceive to be power overreach.
“The Treaties exhaustively define the respective powers conferred on the institutions which may not be modified or supplemented by the institutions themselves, either unilaterally or by agreement between them,” the capitals said on Tuesday.
The letter came in response to a joint statement published last month by Roberta Metsola, president of the European Parliament, and Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, aimed at improving relations between the two institutions, which for the past five years have been plagued by tension and various accusations.
MEPs have often complained that the Commission favours the Council at the expense of the Parliament, leaving the lawmakers out of the loop for crucial decisions. The Commission’s lack of transparency and the absence of Commissioners in plenary sessions related to their portfolios have been a recurring point of contention.
In a bid to patch up their differences, Metsola and von der Leyen committed to “greater transparency and better dialogue” with a nine-point statement that aims to form the basis for an updated framework agreement between the two institutions.
Among the points is “the strengthening of Parliament’s right of initiative” under Article 225 of the Treaties, which allows MEPs to invite the executive to submit a new law.
For member states, this promise is unacceptable as it “constitutes an attempt to erode the right of initiative which the Treaties confer on the Commission.”
Under current rules, the Commission is the only institution entitled to design and present new legislation. After that, the Parliament and the Council negotiate new proposals until they reach an agreement. It is only at that point that the law is approved.
For years, the Parliament, the only EU institution directly elected by voters, has pushed to have its own “right of initiative” to craft legislation, which similar to how national parliaments operate. Member states have firmly resisted this campaign, fearing it would weaken their own powers.
These fears were laid bare in the joint letter, which harshly criticises many aspects of the Metsola-von der Leyen statement as “regrettable” and “problematic.”
Member states oppose the principle of “equal treatment” between the Parliament and the Council that Metsola and von der Leyen subscribe to. In their view, such a principle does not exist in the Treaties and therefore lacks validity.
Governments also decry von der Leyen’s commitment to “provide comprehensive justification and information” when the Commission tables emergency laws under Article 122, which bypass the Parliament and only require the Council’s approval. The article was widely used to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic and the energy crisis.
This commitment “appears to interfere with the Commission’s right of initiative and the Council’s decision-making autonomy,” member states said, noting the requirement to justify Article 122 proposals “risks hampering the speed and effectiveness” of the bloc’s common response to extraordinary events.
Countries conclude their letter warning against “any provision” that would upset “the institutional balance provided for by the Treaties.”
