A Not So Technocratic Executive? Everyday Interaction between the European Parliament and the Commission

Abstract

The European Commission, although generally portrayed as a technocratic, non-majoritarian institution, or as an agent of EU member governments, has become increasingly linked to the European Parliament (EP) through a range of semi-parliamentary measures intended to increase the executive’s legitimacy and accountability. In this article we argue that in addition to several highly visible and often treaty-based control instruments, an almost symbiotic, less visible, routine relationship can be observed between the two institutions. Based on an online survey of EP staff, as well as on minutes from EP committee meetings, this article examines the daily interaction taking place between the Commission and the EP, particularly at the level of officials. Although mutual interdependence in the legislative process may trigger daily interaction, the theoretical argument proposed is that the latter is facilitated and reinforced under two particular conditions: (i) if the two institutions share similar organisational patterns, and (ii) if they share similar behavioural patterns. Three such patterns are emphasised: sectoral, ideological and supranational.

View correction statement:

Erratum

Acknowledgements

We gratefully acknowledge the financial support of EUROTRANS (‘Transformation and Sustainability of European Political Order’, The Norwegian Research Council). We would like to thank Christopher Lord and Michael Shackleton for comments on draft questionnaires, Knut A. Christophersen for advice on method, the respondents for giving their scarce time to this project, and two anonymous referees for most helpful comments. Previous versions of this article were presented at the ARENA Workshop ‘The Transformation of the Executive Branch of Government in Europe’, Oslo, June 2012, and at the European Group for Public Administration (EGPA) Conference, Bergen, September 2012. Valuable comments from the participants at both conferences as well as from anonymous referees are highly appreciated.

Notes

This article was originally published with errors to Tables 2 and 5. This version has been corrected. Please see Erratum (http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2014.850799).

1. The right to put questions to the Commission was incorporated into the Treaty of Rome.

2. Proksch and Slapin (2011) argue that the extensive use of written questions to the Commission is an inexpensive method of executive scrutiny by MEPs from opposition parties. Questions to commissioners become a means for monitoring the Commission and reduce information deficits over European affairs for opposition parties in what they refer to as the second chain of delegation.