Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

The European Commission and Europe's Democratic Process pp 43–67Cite as

Institutional Pressures: The Commission After Lisbon

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 581 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter assesses a second set of pressures: challenges to the Commission’s authority stemming from institutional reforms at the EU level. Building on the impact of progressive delegations of power to the European Parliament, two key developments in the late 2000s—the Lisbon Treaty and the Eurozone crisis—have further impacted on the Commission’s position. Focusing on the first of these developments, this chapter argues that Lisbon’s strengthening of the European Council and Parliament, together with the creation of new institutional rivals in the shape of the President of the European Council, High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, and EEAS have contributed to the general trend of shifting influence and power away from the Commission.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Batory, A., & Puetter, U. (2013). Consistency and diversity? The EU’s rotating trio Council Presidency after the Lisbon Treaty. Journal of European Public Policy, 20(1), 95–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bocquillon, P, & Dobbels, M. (2014). An elephant on the 13th floor of Berlaymont? European Council and Commission relations in legislative agenda setting. Journal of European Public Policy, 21(1), 20–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burns, B. (2004). Codecision and the European Commission: A study of declining influence? Journal of European Public Policy, 11(1), 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burns, C. (2013). Consensus and compromise become ordinary—But at what cost? A critical analysis of the impact of the changing norms of codecision upon European Parliament committees. Journal of European Public Policy, 20(7), 988–1005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang, M. (2013). Fiscal policy coordination and the future of the community method. Journal of European Integration, 35(3), 255–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christiansen, T., Högenauer, A., & Neuhold, C. (2014). The Europeanisation of national parliaments post-Lisbon: Bureaucratisation and transnationalisation rather than more democracy in the European Union? Comparative European Politics, 12(2), 121–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, I. (2012). A ‘virtual third chamber’ for the European Union? National parliaments after the Treaty of Lisbon. West European Politics, 35(3), 441–465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, I. (2015). A yellow card for the striker: National parliaments and the defeat of EU legislation on the right to strike. Journal of European Public Policy, 22(10), 1406–1425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, R. (2015, February 6). Five minutes with Sir Robert Cooper: “The Brussels Agreement between Serbia and Kosovo was based on conversation, not EU pressure”. EUROPP—European Politics and Policy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corona, D., Heramanin, C. & Ponzano, P. (2012). The power of initiative of the European Commission: a progressive erosion. Studies and Research - Notre Europe, 89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Costa, O., Dehousse, R., & Trakalova, A. (2011). Codecision and “early agreements”: An improvement or a subversion of the legislative procedure? Studies of the Foundation Notre Europe, 84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Council Decision of 26 July 2010 establishing the organisation and functioning of the European External Action Service (2010/427/EU), OJ 2010 L 201/30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Council of the European Union. (2013, June 14). Council approves launch of trade and investment negotiations with the United States. Press release.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cram, L. (2001). Whither the Commission? Reform, renewal and the issue-attention cycle. Journal of European Public Policy, 8(5), 770–786.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dewost, J.L. (1984). La Présidence dans le cadre institutionnel des Communautés Européennes’. Revue du Marché Commun, 273, 31–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dijkstra, H. (2009). Commission versus Council Secretariat: An analysis of bureaucratic rivalry in European foreign policy. European Foreign Affairs Review, 14(3), 431–450.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dinan, D. (2011). Governance and institutions: Implementing the Lisbon Treaty in the shadow of the Euro crisis. Journal of Common Market Studies, 49(1), 103–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duke, S. (2008). The Lisbon Treaty and external relations. Eipascope, 1, 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Earnshaw, D., & Judge, D. (1995). Early days: The European Parliament, co‐decision and the European Union legislative process post‐Maastricht. Journal of European Public Policy, 2(4), 624–649.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elgström, O. (2003). European Union Council Presidencies: A comparative perspective. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • European Council. (2010, March 25–26). Conclusions.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Parliament. (2014). Activity report on codecision and conciliation, 14 July 2009–30 June 2014, 7th parliamentary term. DV\1031024EN.doc. Brussels: European Parliament.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Union. (2010, December 21). A new step in the setting-up of the EEAS: Transfer of staff on 1 January 2011. Press release IP/10/1769. Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hobolt, S. (2014). A vote for the President? The role of Spitzenkandidaten in the 2014 European Parliament elections. Journal of European Public Policy, 21(10), 1528–1540.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Högenauer, A., & Neuhold, C. (2015). National Parliaments after Lisbon: Administrations on the rise? West European Politics, 38(2), 335–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howorth, J. (2011). The ‘new faces’ of Lisbon: Assessing the performance of Catherine Ashton and Herman van Rompuy on the global stage. European Foreign Affairs Review, 16(3), 303–323.

    Google Scholar 

  • Juncos, A. E., & Pomorska, K. (2013). In the face of adversity: Explaining the attitudes of EEAS officials vis-à-vis the new service. Journal of European Public Policy, 20(9), 1332–1349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kassim, H., & Menon, A. (2010). Bringing the member states back in: The supranational orthodoxy, member state resurgence and the decline of the European Commission since the 1990s. Paper presented at Conference of Europeanists of the Council for European Studies, Montreal, Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kassim, H., Peterson, J., Bauer, M. W., Connolly, S., Dehousse, R., Hooghe, L., et al. (2013). The European Commission of the twenty-first century. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kerr. (2014, November 17). Five minutes with Lord Kerr of Kinlochard: “The Constitutional Treaty was clearly ahead of its time”. EUROPP—European Politics and Policy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kietz, D., & Maurer, A. (2007). The European Parliament in treaty reform: Predefining IGCs through interinstitutional agreements. European Law Journal, 13(1), 20–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kollman, K. (2003). The rotating presidency of the European Council as a search for good policies. European Union Politics, 4(1), 51–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kurpas, S., et al. (2007, November). The treaty of Lisbon: Implementing the institutional innovations. CEPS Special Reports.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maurer, A. (2003). The legislative powers and impact of the European Parliament. Journal of Common Market Studies, 41(2), 227–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nugent, N., & Rhinard, M. (2011, March 3–5). The European Commission and the European Union’s external relations after the Lisbon Treaty. Paper presented at the twelfth biennial conference of the European Union Studies Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nugent, N., & Saurugger, S. (2002). Organizational structuring: The case of the European Commission and its external policy responsibilities. Journal of European Public Policy, 9(3), 345–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollak, J., & Slominski, P. (2015). The European Parliament: Adversary or accomplice of the new intergovernmentalism? In C. J. Bickerton, D. Hodson, & U. Puetter (Eds.), The new intergovernmentalism: States and supranational actors in the post-Maastricht era. Cary, NC: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Puetter, U. (2014a). The rotating Council presidency and the new intergovernmentalism. The International Spectator, 49(4), 18–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roederer-Rynning, C., & Schimmelfennig, F. (2012). Bringing codecision to agriculture: A hard case of parliamentarization. Journal of European Public Policy, 19(7), 951–968.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schalk, J., Torenvlied, R., Weesie, J., & Stokman, F. (2007). The power of the Presidency in EU Council decision-making. European Union Politics, 8(2), 229–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M. E. (2013). The European External Action Service and the security–development nexus: Organizing for effectiveness or incoherence? Journal of European Public Policy, 20(9), 1299–1315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomson, R. (2008). The Council Presidency in the European Union: Responsibility with power. Journal of Common Market Studies, 46(3), 593–617.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomson, R., Stokman, F. N., Achen, C. H., & König, T. (Eds.). (2006). The European Union decides. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tusk, D. (2014, December 1). Remarks by President of the European Council Donald Tusk at the handover ceremony with the outgoing President Herman Van Rompuy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warntjen, A. (2008). The Council Presidency power broker or burden? An empirical analysis. European Union Politics, 9(3), 315–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warntjen, A. (2013, December 11). The rotating Council presidency hinders legislative continuity in the Council of the European Union. EUROPP—European Politics and Policy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waterfield, B. (2009, October 2). If Tony Blair is made President of Europe, the EU will never be the same again. The Telegraph.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waterfield, B. (2010, January 11). Baroness Ashton ‘has lost control of EU foreign policy’. The Telegraph.

    Google Scholar 

  • Werts, J. (2008). The European Council. London: John Harper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westlake, M. (1995). The Council of the European Union. London: Catermill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westlake, M. (2016). Chronicle of an election foretold: The longer-term trends leading to the ‘Spitzenkandidaten’ procedure and the Election of Jean-Claude Juncker as European Commission President. LSE Europe in Question Discussion Paper Series (LEQS Paper No. 102/2016).

    Google Scholar 

  • Wouters, J., & Ramopoulos, T. (2014). Revisiting the Lisbon Treaty’s constitutional design of EU external relations. In L. S. Rossi & F. Casolari (Eds.), The EU after Lisbon. Cham: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. London School of Economics, London, UK

    Stuart A. Brown

Authors
  1. Stuart A. Brown
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Copyright information

© 2016 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Brown, S.A. (2016). Institutional Pressures: The Commission After Lisbon. In: The European Commission and Europe's Democratic Process. Palgrave Pivot, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-50560-6_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation