EUU, Alm.del - 2009-10 - Bilag 277: COSAC gennem 20 år

a) Establishment of COSAC1The idea of periodically bringing together the Committees ofnational parliaments specialized in European affairs was first mooted atthe Conference of the Speakers of the Parliaments of the EuropeanUnion held in Madrid in May 1989.Using the conclusions of this conference of Speakers as a basis,the first meeting of these Committees took place in Paris in November1989. It was entitled the ‘Inter-parliamentary Conference of Bodiesspecialized in European Affairs’.Since then, a conference of this type has been held every sixmonths in the country holding the Presidency of the European Union.The establishment of COSAC2must therefore be situated withinthe historical context of the early 1990s. On the one hand, theimplosion of the Communist system in central and eastern Europeprompted debate on the development of European integration. On theother hand, the new geo-political situation instilled in Europeanpolitical leaders an ambition to set up a genuine political union. Aninter-governmental conference (IGC) was accordingly called in 1990,which led to the Treaty of Maastricht (1993). At the same time, nationalparliaments were becoming aware of the European democratic deficitFor a comprehensive description of the evolution of COSAC, see Knudsen, M and Carl Y,COSAC – its role to dateand its potential in the future,in Barett, G (ed.),National Parliaments and the European Union,Clarus Press, 2008,pp. 455-483.2The French acronym of the Conférence des organes spécialisés dans les affaires communautaires, known in Englishas the Conference of Committees of Parliaments of the European Union.1

triggered by the absence of parliamentary control, with numerousdecisions taken at a European level evading the control of the EuropeanParliament and of national parliaments. As a consequence a form ofinter-parliamentary cooperation – this cooperation would turn intoCOSAC in 1991 – was put in place with a view to strengtheningparliamentary control of the process of European decision-making. TheConference adopted its Rules of Procedure and was named COSAC inLuxembourg in 1991. Discussion on the role of COSAC and of nationalparliaments has always taken place in parallel with the debate oninstitutional changes to the EU; for example, COSAC and the role ofnational parliaments has been on the agenda of each IGC (fourmeetings to date). COSAC has been given an increasingly importantrole by each amended Treaty and in 1997, it was incorporated in theUnion’s primary law by a Protocol annexed to the Treaty ofAmsterdam.Protocol n�13on the role of the national parliaments in the European Union(extracts)(…)“II. The Conference of European Affairs Committees4. The Conference of European Affairs Committees, hereinafter referred toas COSAC, established in Paris on 16-17 November 1989, may make any contributionit deems appropriate for the attention of the EU institutions, in particular on the basisof draft legal texts which Representatives of Governments of the Member States maydecide by common accord to forward to it, in view of the nature of its subject matter.5. COSAC may examine any legislative proposal or initiative in relation tothe establishment of an area of freedom, security and justice which might have a directbearing on the rights and freedoms of individuals. The European Parliament, theCouncil and the Commission shall be informed of any contribution made by COSACunder this paragraph.6. COSAC may address to the European Parliament, the Council and theCommission any contribution which it deems appropriate on the legislative activitiesof the Union, notably in relation to the application of the principle of subsidiarity, thearea of freedom, security and justice as well as questions regarding fundamentalrights.7. Contributions made by COSAC shall in no way bind national parliamentsor prejudge their position.”

COSAC gathers six representatives of each national parliamentand six Members of the European Parliament. In this way, the MemberStates are placed on an equal footing. Three observers from theparliaments of each candidate country are also invited to meetings.b) Report on the period 1989-2008During the period 1989-2002, COSAC took a restrictive viewof its role and slowly came to be a forum for dialogue betweenrepresentatives of parliaments and the Presidency of the Union(national Ministers). The European Commission has also taken part oncertain issues.Furthermore, COSAC has helped to develop the reciprocalexchange of information between parliaments on the means to controlgovernments’ actions on European issues (best practices).The prevailing position within COSAC is that each parliamentmust control its own government in respect of European matters.However, it has only marginally permitted the expression ofany collective views by national parliaments. Even thoughopportunities to do so are set out in the Treaty of Amsterdam, anyprogress on this point has been blocked by the consensus rulegoverning all COSAC decisions.Moreover, many delegations expressed reservations aboutCOSAC's enhanced role, with some fearing that it would compete withnational parliaments, and others afraid that it would compete with theEuropean Parliament.As COSAC was not established on a representative basis, itnever succeeded in acting as a political forum.c) The 2003 turning-pointThe change in attitudes brought about by the collective working withinthe Convention on the Future of Europe – together with theperseverance of the Danish Parliament, which succeeded both inbringing together parliaments that were in favour of a more effectiveCOSAC and in persuading the others – led to the adoption of a reformto COSAC Rules of Procedure in 2003; these put an end to the generalapplication of the consensus rule. It may still be used when amendingthe Rules of Procedure, but it no longer applies to COSAC’scontributions.

The rule now states that‘In general COSAC shall seek to adoptcontributions by broad consensus. If this is not possible, contributionsshall be adopted with a qualified majority of at least 3/4 of the votescast. The majority of 3/4 of the votes cast must at the same timeconstitute at least half of all votes. Each delegation has two votes. Afteradoption, the contribution is published in theOfficial Journal of theEuropean Union’.This ability to adopt contributions has turned COSAC into apolitical forum that can articulate views and formulate opinions as adecision-making body.In practice, the possibility of moving to a majority vote has notyet been used, but it has changed the climate in which meetings takeplace: there is now an overwhelming majority of parliaments that wantto see COSAC play a more active role. This was not the case during the1990s.Generally speaking, COSAC meetings over the last few yearshave produced more significant results : they include the adoption of acode of conduct on relations between parliaments and governments whenexamining European issues; the establishment, at our insistence, of apermanent secretariat (Athens, 2003) designed to improve the way thatmeetings are prepared, to facilitate the exchange of information betweenparticipating parliaments, and to present a report every six months on‘developments in European Union procedures and practices relevant toparliamentary scrutiny’;and the scrutiny of draft legislation (selectedfrom the European Commission’s legislative programme) with regard tothe principle of subsidiarity by all national parliaments.Although the scope of inter-parliamentary cooperationorganised within COSAC remains limited, it has still managed to breakfree from the stagnation that had previously characterised it, and hasgradually managed to focus on missions where it can be particularlyhelpful. It is worth noting in this connection that in the Conference’smeetings, the theme of subsidiarity has played a growing role in its workresponding to the need for inter-parliamentary concertation in this field.The Protocol on the Application of the Principles ofSubsidiarity and Proportionality, which is annexed to the Treaty ofLisbon, and the 2006 ‘Barroso initiative’ (i.e. the informal dialoguebetween the European Commission and national parliaments thatanticipated the implementation of the Protocol – this dialogue will becontinued alongside rigorous scrutiny of subsidiarity according to the

protocol) were decisive steps in interparliamentary cooperation, and gaveCOSAC a substantive function.d) PerspectivesProtocol No 1 of the Treaty of Lisbon amends the provisions onCOSAC. These are covered in Article 10 of the Protocol as follows:‘A conference of Parliamentary Committees for Union Affairsmay submit any contribution it deems appropriate for the attention of theEuropean Parliament, the Council and the Commission. That conferenceshall in addition promote the exchange of information and best practicebetween national Parliaments and the European Parliament, includingtheir special committees. It may also organise interparliamentaryconferences on specific topics, in particular to debate matters of commonforeign and security policy, including common security and defencepolicy. Contributions from the conference shall not bind nationalParliaments and shall not prejudge their positions.’The new Protocol gives COSAC a more generalist role: whereasthe old Protocol urged the Conference to focus on certain areas (the issuesof freedom, security and justice; fundamental rights; and the applicationof the principle of subsidiarity), there is no such indication in the new one.There is no mention of the Council’s ability to ‘transmit’ draftlegislation to COSAC. This right has never been used.The new Protocol gives COSAC’s role an official status withregard to the exchange of information and good practices betweenparliaments. It is important to note that this role has been extended to the“specialized committees” of national parliaments. The door is thereforeopen for conferences that bring together delegates from these specializedcommittees to take place under the aegis of COSAC.The new Protocol also leaves open the possibility for COSACto organise conferences on particular issues in addition to its ordinarymeetings. This suggests that COSAC’s composition will have to adapt asa result. One issue in particular is referred to that relating to matters offoreign policy, security and defence. This factor will need to be taken intoaccount when consideration is given to the future of inter-parliamentarycontrol at European level in this field.Lastly, it should be borne in mind that, unlike the previousProtocol, the new one leaves open the question of COSAC’s name, and

thereby provides an opportunity to come up with one that the publicopinion will be able to understand more easily.Over the last 20 years, COSAC efforts were made towards agreater involvement of national parliaments in European construction, andthis greater involvement meant introducing an inter-parliamentarydimension at the European level. National parliaments that work inisolation would indeed not be able to control the European actions ofgovernments that work together on the Council.The Treaty of Lisbon acknowledges this need: Article 12 of theTreaty on European Union states that,‘National Parliaments contributeactively to the good functioning of the Union… by taking part in theinter-parliamentary cooperation between national Parliaments and withthe European Parliament, in accordance with the Protocol on the role ofnational Parliaments in the European Union.’Inter-parliamentary cooperation within the Union has grownenormously over the last 20 years, and now takes a wide variety of forms:– the Conference of the Speakers of the Parliaments of theEuropean Union ;– COSAC, including a plenary meeting and a meeting at thechairperson’s level every six months;– the Assembly of WEU (the European inter-parliamentaryassembly on security and defence);– Conventions tasked with drafting amendments to Treaties;– meetings of the Chairpersons of competent committees innational parliaments focusing on specific issues under the aegis of theparliament of the Member State holding the Presidency of the EuropeanUnion ;– meetings of committees of the European Parliament that areopen to national parliamentarians ;– inter-parliamentary meetings organised jointly by theEuropean Parliament and the parliament of the Member State holding thePresidency of the European Union.However, these uncoordinated – and often hardly visible –forms of cooperation fall far short of having any real influence on the way

that the EU functions. Only COSAC, by virtue of the fact that it isrecognised in the Treaties, has succeeded in playing some sort of part overthe years. Rationalisation of inter-parliamentary cooperation basedspecifically on COSAC (this is what the new Protocol on NationalParliaments suggests) would genuinely enable national parliaments tomake a greater impact collectively.The history of COSAC over the last 20 years interestinglyillustrates how difficult the emergence of new political institutions is.During the first ten years of its existence, COSAC was mainlyconcerned with defining its own position and its identity in relation toother institutions: one only has to think of its initial rivalry with theEuropean Parliament, the resistance of the latter, and a fear that this kindof cooperation could be institutionalised and turn into a European Senate.As early as 1993, proposals were made to provide COSAC witha small permanent secretariat, but it was not until 2003 at the Athensmeeting that the secretariat was finally set up. From then COSAC hasbeen able to concentrate on European issues that were central to theConvention aimed at establishing a European Constitution.The subsidiarity and proportionality procedures introduced bythe European Convention constitute a prerogative for national parliamentsand have furnished COSAC with an important dynamic. The concreteimplementation of the procedure was largely determined within COSACthrough comparative studies and the exchange of good practices.Both at European level and in national parliaments, there issometimes evidence of a degree of contempt for COSAC, even for thosewho are aware of its existence.Nonetheless, COSAC has made a substantial contribution to thecreation of a parliamentary community and space within the EU, and thishas led to the parliamentarisation of the European decision-makingprocess, and therefore to democratisation.COSAC’s contribution has been threefold: dialogue betweennational parliaments and European institutions has become a reality,whereas European institutions used to closet themselves in a classicTriaspolitica;COSAC has become the expression of deliberative democracy,and national parliaments have been recognised by European institutions askey actors in a multi-level system of governance – which, after all, is whatthe European Union is; and national parliaments have gained direct access

to European documents over time: whereas parliaments were initiallyinformed about European affairs by their respective governments (theDeclaration in the Treaty of Maastricht), they are now directly informedabout all legislative proposals by the European institutions (Treaty ofLisbon). This can only foster the autonomy of parliaments vis-à-vis theirgovernment in such a way that independent parliamentary control may benow possible. But has that not produced a new paradox? As Europeanintegration has progressed, there has been a substantial transfer ofcompetences towards the European Union, but this has also opened upnew perspectives for national parliaments in the way they organiseinternally.During this period of crisis currently gripping our countries,there is an even greater need for an ambitious conception of the role ofparliaments and of inter-parliamentary cooperation. It is one of the routesat our disposal for establishing the concept of Europe more deeply,making it more legitimate, and bringing it closer to citizens.