Issuing reasoned opinions: The effect of public attitudes towards the European Union on the usage of the 'Early Warning System'
| Published date | 01 September 2016 |
| Author | Christopher J Williams |
| Date | 01 September 2016 |
| DOI | 10.1177/1465116516633301 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Article
European Union Politics
2016, Vol. 17(3) 504–521
! The Author(s) 2016
Issuing reasoned opinions:
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
The effect of public
DOI: 10.1177/1465116516633301
eup.sagepub.com
attitudes towards the
European Union on the
usage of the ‘Early
Warning System’
Christopher J Williams
Mannheim Center for European Social Research & SFB884,
Political Economy of Reforms, University of Mannheim,
Mannheim, Germany; Department of Political Science, University
of Arkansas at Little Rock, Little Rock, AR, USA
Abstract
This study examines those factors that influence the issuance of reasoned opinions
within the European Union’s ‘Early Warning System’. It is posited that greater aggregate
public Euroskepticism results in the issuance of more reasoned opinions. This expect-
ation is tested using data derived from the European Parliament, the Commission’s
platform for European Union Interparliamentary Exchange, and longitudinal data
from the Eurobarometer survey series. It is found that greater aggregate public
Euroskepticism is associated with the issuance of more reasoned opinions. This study
has important implications for our understandings of policy processes, political respon-
siveness, and democratic governance in the European Union and its member states.
Keywords
Early Warning System, Euroskepticism, responsiveness, representation
Introduction
With the introduction of the ‘Early Warning System’ (EWS) in 2010 as part of the
Lisbon Treaty, European Union (EU) member state parliaments were officially
Corresponding author:
Christopher J Williams, Mannheim Center for European Social Research & SFB884, Political Economy of
Reforms, University of Mannheim, A5 6, MZES Building A, D-68131 Mannheim, Germany.
Email: Christopher.williams@uni-mannheim.de
Williams
505
brought into European policy processes. The EWS is a novel approach to address-
ing member state concerns surrounding the principle of subsidiarity in the EU.
In essence, each chamber of each national parliament,1 through the issuing of a
reasoned opinion concerning a European draft legislative act within the EWS, has a
partial veto of European policies (see Leifeld and Malang, 2014). When the number
of reasoned opinions issued concerning a particular draft legislative act reaches a
certain level, a ‘yellow card’ (or in some cases an ‘orange card’) is triggered, requir-
ing review of the draft legislative act by the institutions of the EU. This study
quantitatively examines the factors that influence the issuance of reasoned opinions
by national parliamentary chambers. Specifically, it seeks to understand the role of
public attitudes towards the EU as a determinant of the issuance of reasoned
opinions by member state parliamentary chambers.
The triggering of the EWS twice in the first three years of its existence, leading to
the EU abandoning one of these proposals, indicates that it has had a decided, if
limited, direct influence on European policy.2 However, the EWS has also had an
indirect effect on European policy with much of the substance of reasoned opin-
ions, regardless of whether a ‘yellow’ or ‘orange’ card has been triggered, being
adopted into the language of European legislation (Cooper, 2012). Therefore, it is
clear that the issuing of reasoned opinions within the EWS has affected European
policy and has the capacity to continue to influence it. Thus, developing a clearer
understanding of the determinants of the EWS’ usage by member state parliamen-
tary chambers, and in particular the relationship between public opinion and the
issuance of reasoned opinions within the EWS, has important implications for the
study of European policy processes and integration.
Understanding the effect of public opinion on the issuance of reasoned opinions
also has implications beyond European policy processes and integration.
It addresses the issues of policy responsiveness, political representation, and dem-
ocracy in Europe. Democracy is predicated on the assumption that the provisions
of public policy are related to the wishes of the citizens and that policy changes are
linked to the changing preferences of citizens (Dahl, 1971; Pitkin, 1967; Powell,
2000). The EWS was put in place, partially, to increase democratic legitimacy in
European policy processes. If public attitudes affect the usage of the EWS, this
indicates that member state governments are responding to the public on issues
concerning European policy and integration. This further implies that the EWS
may be increasing democratic legitimacy in Europe as it was intended to and,
therefore, that it has served to reduce the European democratic deficit (for more
on the democratic deficit, see Føllesdal and Hix, 2006).
Studies have suggested a number of factors that may influence national parlia-
mentary engagement in European policy processes and the EWS. The overwhelm-
ing majority of this research has focused on the role of parliamentary capacity,
finding that parliamentary resources (Fraga, 2005; Paskalev, 2009), the existence of
sectoral committees (Neuhold, 2011), short time periods to issue reasoned opinions
within the EWS (Knutelska´, 2011; Neuhold, 2011), and difficulties with inter-
chamber coordination (Neuhold, 2011; Cooper, 2012, 2013) are important factors
506
European Union Politics 17(3)
determining national parliamentary engagement in European policy processes and
the EWS.
Leifeld and Malang (2014) extended existing research on member state parlia-
mentary usage of the EWS, examining how member state parliamentary homophily
influences engagement with and activation of the EWS. Using a network approach,
they find that similarities between parliamentary chambers regarding the party
family of parliamentary ruling parties, the year that the countries in which cham-
bers exist joined the EU, and the political system of the countries in which cham-
bers exist (i.e. bicameralism and presidentialism) do in fact influence the likelihood
that a chamber communicates with the EU through the EWS. Leifeld and Malang
further find that member state parliamentary chambers’ communications with the
EU through the EWS cluster around policies in similar dimensions. Importantly, it
should be noted that Leifeld and Malang did not restrict their sample to only
reasoned opinions objecting to draft legislative proposals, but rather examined
all parliamentary communications with the EU through the EWS.
More recent research (Gatterman and Hefftler, 2015) has moved beyond these
previous studies and has begun to examine how economic and political factors
within member states and parliamentary chambers influence the issuance of rea-
soned opinions within the EWS by national parliamentary chambers. Gatterman
and Hefftler (2015) argued that, beyond issues of institutional capacity, members of
national parliaments are motivated to issue reasoned opinions by their interest in
influencing policy and ultimately achieving re-election. They found that political
party contestation in a national parliamentary chamber over issues of both
EU integration and the left–right dimension, the salience and urgency of draft
legislative acts, and in some instances economic recession influence the issuance
of reasoned opinions by national parliamentary chambers.
These findings indicate that the issuance of reasoned opinions is not simply a
matter of chamber capacity or bureaucratic development, but that it is a political
decision made by the members of national parliamentary chambers. As Gatterman
and Hefftler (2015: 323) write, ‘it is MPs’ incentives and awareness which encour-
age proactive scrutiny in the EWS’. This, of course, begs the question, what add-
itional political factors influence the issuance of reasoned opinions within the
EWS? It is contended in this study that public attitudes towards the EU are an
important factor influencing the decision of member state parliamentary chambers
to issue a reasoned opinion.
Building on this recent research concerning the EWS (see Gatterman and
Hefftler, 2015; Leifeld and Malang, 2014), as well as research that has found
responsiveness to public attitudes concerning the EU in member state governance
(Williams, 2015), European governance (Bølstad, 2015; Toshkov, 2011), and pol-
itical party positions (Arnold et al., 2012; Steenbergen and Scott, 2004; Williams
and Spoon, 2015), this study tests the relationship between aggregate public atti-
tudes towards the EU and national parliamentary chamber participation in the
EWS. By utilizing data concerning the issuance of reasoned opinions by national
parliaments from the EWS’ inception in 2010 through 2014, the results of this study
Williams
507
suggest that public opinion concerning the EU is taken into account by national
parliamentary chambers when issuing reasoned opinions within the EWS.
Specifically, when aggregate public opposition to the EU (Euroskepticism) is
higher, more reasoned opinions are issued by national parliamentary chambers.
These findings support Gatterman and Hefftler’s (2015) study, indicating that
national parliamentary chamber usage of the EWS is, at least partially, a political
decision. Moreover, the findings of this study suggest that there is a degree of
democratic responsiveness to public attitudes in member states regarding
European policies and integration. This indicates that the EWS may be achieving
its original goal of increasing democratic legitimacy in the EU and further implies
that the European democratic deficit may not be as pronounced...
To continue reading
Request your trial