Environment Committee Scrutiny of Delegated Legislation 2015-2016
I have chosen the Environment Committee as it is the Committee I know best and it is still the, or one of the most, active legislative Committees in the European Parliament. It is, by some distance, still the most experienced legislative committee in the European Parliament in the last 20 years. It is also likely to be most experienced of all the Committees in exercising that vital Parliamentary power of control and oversight of the Commission in the exercise of delegated law making.
I have looked at the work of the Environment Committee, Public Health and Food Safety in their scrutiny of delegated legislation proposals from the European Commission from January 2015 to today.
Method.
I have reviewed the Committee’s excellent Newsletter to track challenges and followed their success or not in the Committee through the Committee Minutes and then the full Parliament through the invaluable EU Vote Watch. There may be gaps.
As votes in Committee are not systematically tracked at the individual level unless there is a roll call vote, which is exceptional – it is hard to know how individual MEPs voted. The only way to do so is by looking at the group co-sponsors and conversations with people more closely involved with specific votes.
Insights.
- The winning coalition in Committee tends to be: Social Democrats, Radical Left, Greens, and Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy, and all or part of ALDE. All groups refuse to work on joint objections with Europe of Nations and Freedom, but they normally support the winning coalition.
- The ECR and EPP often support the Commission, although sometimes they join the winning coalition.
- Individual groups bringing challenges tend not to be successful.
- The winning Committee coalition tends to be replicated the in the full Parliament.
- Reaching a simple majority in plenary is far easier to do than securing an absolute majority (376 MEPs) but that high hurdle not stopped resolutions in 2015 being adopted.
- The resolutions and the debates on them tend to be focus on compliance with spirit and letter of the enabling law, rather than the technical of scientific merits of the specific issue. Listening to and reading the Resolutions is like reading litigation pleads on procedural points. There may well be a political challenge going on, but sometimes it is hard to work out what that is. MEPs are often doing what Parliamentarians world over do, they are looking to preserve their hard fought powers.
- Since September 2015 there appears to be an increase in the challenges from the Environment Committee, and most of these challenges are successful.
- This increase in MEPs activity in the vital role of Parliamentary oversight of delegated law making could be because the Environment Committee now has less legislation to work on under the Juncker Commission, or the Commission Services have become even more pro-industry in their drafting of draft measures. I think it is a combination of both.
- There is not a long time for interests to organize from a successful vote in the Committee to the vote of the full Parliament. By the time many interests are organized, voting lists have been prepared in advance. Concerns about draft measures can usually be picked up from the floor of the Environment Committee way in advance.
Environment Committee 2015
- Subject: Exemption for cadmium in illumination and display lighting applications
Measure: Delegated act
Objectors: Bas Eickhout, Keith Taylor (Greens/ALE), Matthias Groote, Daciana Octavia Sârbu, Pavel Poc, Seb Dance, Susanne Melior, Jytte Guteland (S&D Group), Kateřina Konečná (GUE/NGL Group)
Plenary Committee Vote: 20 May 2015
Adopted by 618 for, 33 against, 28 abstentions
Majority needed: 376
EU Vote Watch link
- Subject: comitology objection on the removal of certain flavouring substances from the authorised Union list
Measure: RPS
Objectors: Sommer (EPP), Gardini (EPP)
Environment Committee 6 May 2015 (discuss), Vote 26 May 2015
Rejected: 28 for, 31 against, 0 abstention
- Subject: objection to the draft measure concerning the maximum residue level for the pesticide sulfoxaflor (bees).
Measure: Regulatory Procedure with Scrutiny (RPS )
Objection by: Sylvie Godin (ENF)
Committee vote: 13 October 2015
Rejected by: 18 for, 31 against
- Subject: Authourisation of the uses of DEHP
Measure: Implementing act
Objection by: Poc (S&D), Konečná (GUE), Eickhout (Greens/EFA)
Committee vote: 10 November 2015
Adopted by: 58 for, 5 against, 0 abstention
Plenary Vote: 25 November 2015
Adopted by 603 for, 86 against, 5 abstentions
Majority needed: simple majority 345
EU Vote Watch link
- Subject: list of invasive alien species
Measure: Implementing act
Objection by: Pock (S&D), Sommer (EPP)
Committee vote: 1 December 2015
Adopted by: 51 for, 16 against, 1 abstention
Plenary vote: 16 December 2015
Adopted by: Normal method – show of hands
2016
- Subject: Objection pursuant to Rule 105: processed cereal- based food and baby food
Measure: Delegated act
Objection by: Keith Taylor (Greens)
Committee vote: 14 January 2016
Adopted: 35 for, 28 against
Plenary vote: 20 January 2016
Adopted by: 393 votes for, 305 against, 12 abstentions
Majority needed: 376
Vote watch link
- Subject: Authorisation of GM maize NK603 x T25 and 2 others
Measure: Implementing act
Objection by: 1. Staes (Greens /EFA), Balas (S&D), (GUE/NGL), Evi (EFDD), 2.Goddyn (ENF)
Committee Vote: 1 December 2015
Adopted by 40 votes for, 26 against, 3 abstentions
Plenary vote: 16 December 2015
Adopted: 403 for, 238 against, 50 abstentions
Majority needed: 321
See vote watch link
- Subject: Infant follow on formula
Measure: Delegated act
Objection by: Keith Taylor (Greens/EFA)
Committee vote: 14 January 2016
Rejected by for: 17; against: 46; abstentions: 0
- Subject: Extension of the approval period of the active substance glyphosate
Measure: Implementing act
Objectors: Pavel Poc (S&D), Bas Eickhout (Verts/ALE), Piernicola Pedicini (EFDD),Mark Demesmaeker (ECR), Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE), Frédérique Ries (ALDE), Kateřina Konečná (GUE/NGL)
Committee vote: 22 March 2016
Committee adopted: 38 votes to 6 and 18 abstentions.
Plenary vote: 11-14 April
10. Subject: Mandatory indication of the country of origin or place of provenance for certain foods vote
Measure: Implementing act
Objection by: Glenis Willmott (S&D), Julie Girling (ECR),Anneli Jäätteenmäki (ALDE), Lynn Boylan (GUE/NGL), Michèle Rivasi (Verts/ALE), Piernicola Pedicini (EFDD), Matteo Salvini (ENF)
Environment Committee: 22 March 2016
Adopted: for 44 votes, against 18.
Plenary vote: April / May 2016