The politicization of interparliamentary relations in the EU: Constructing and contesting the 'Article 13 Conference' on economic governance
The politicization of interparliamentary relations in the EU: Constructing and contesting the 'Article 13 Conference' on economic governance
复制标题
欧盟议会间关系的政治化：经济治理“第13条会议”的构建与争论
DOI：
10.1057/cep.2015.37
复制
发表时间：
2016
影响因子：
1.7
通讯作者：
Cooper I
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Cooper I
《财政条约》（2012年）第13条促成了议会间会议的成立，以讨论和监督欧盟的后危机经济治理制度。然而，2013年10月举行的“第13条会议”第一次会议受到冲突的困扰。令人惊讶的是，主要分歧并不是关于经济政策的左右之争（例如，赞成还是反对紧缩），而是关于会议本身的性质和目的的争论。这使得欧洲议会（EP）倾向于一个授权狭窄的弱会议，而一些国家议会则倾向于一个授权广泛的强会议。这种分歧在第13条会议设立过程中出现的一系列宪法、体制和程序分歧中显而易见，其中许多分歧甚至在2014年1月和9月第二次和第三次会议之后仍未得到解决。这场斗争的根源在于对欧盟议会监督的相互竞争的愿景：审查应该集中在欧洲议会，还是应该有一个新的欧洲议会和国家议会共同参与的联合审查制度？
Article 13 of the Fiscal Treaty (2012) prompted the creation of an interparliamentary conference to discuss and oversee the EU’s post-crisis regime of economic governance. However, the first meeting of the ‘Article 13 Conference’, in October 2013, was beset by conflict. Surprisingly, the main cleavage was not a left–right debate over economic policy (for example, pro- versus anti-austerity), but a debate about the nature and purpose of the conference itself. This pitted the European Parliament (EP), preferring a weak conference with a narrow mandate, against a number of national parliaments that preferred a strong conference with a broad mandate. This cleavage was apparent in a series of constitutional, institutional and procedural disagreements that arose over the course of the setting-up of the Article 13 Conference, many of which remained unresolved even after its second and third meetings, in January and September 2014. At the root of this struggle lay competing visions for the parliamentary oversight of the EU: Should scrutiny be centralized in the EP, or should there be a new system of joint scrutiny involving the EP and national parliaments together?