COREPER: Linking Capitals and Brussels

Abstract

It is now a generally accepted point that the EU permanent representations are a central hub of information flows between national capitals on the one hand and the ongoing negotiations in Brussels on the other. De Zwaan describes the permanent representations function ‘as a channel for the transmission of information. In principle this covers all forms of communication’ (de Zwaan 1995, 31). As such they serve both ‘upstream’ and ‘downstream’ transmissions (Kassim 2001, 34–36). Examples of the former include, for example, defending national interests, collecting information, and sensitizing EU institutions to national policy stances. The latter include reporting back home, advising the capital, and even participating in domestic coordination meetings (ibid., 34–36). Residing at the heart of these information flows, the EU permanent representatives (deputies and ambassadors) have a unique structural position in the EU’s legislative process. As senior preparatory agents they are vertically placed between the expert specialists found in the working groups and the ministers who meet in the Council’s sectoral policy formations. To function as process managers for technico-political discussions at the working-group level and as all-around compromise brokers for the ministers, they hold generalized (cross-sectoral) policy responsibilities, and, as a result, are the only national agents with a broad, issue-intensive overview of the Council’s work.¹