Inter-service consultation
Legislative proposals, proposals for delegated and implementing acts, and impact assessment go through Commission Inter-Service Consultation.
It is one the most important part of the whole legislative process. This is because whatever the Commission puts out the door, often gets adopted into the final legal text without substantive changes. Often 85%-95% of the Commission’s proposal goes through unaltered.
If you can make a difference, this is the best time to engage and to step in early.
Process Chart
What does the process look like?
Fortunately, the Commission spell out the mechanics of adopting proposals clearly. There is a helpful handbook from the Commission on their ‘Working Methods’ – the_working_methods_of_the_european_commission_2014-2019_november2014_en
The adoption procedure is in two distinct steps. First, there is consideration by the Services. The Services are consulted on the draft legal text, the impact assessment together with the opinions of the Regulatory Scrutiny Board.
The second step is the political scrutiny by the Commissioners. Here the College of Commissioners can adopt by written or oral procedure.
Adoption by written procedure requires all services to give a positive position during the ISC. Any negative opinions must be lifted via bilateral negotiation for adoption by written procedure to proceed.
Key Steps
The Commission use an electronic system called “CIS-Net”.
The lead department needs to consult the following:
- Departments with a legitimate interest in the proposal
The following department usually have to be consulted:
- Legal Service
- Sec-Gen
- Human Resources
- Budgets
- OLAF
- Communications
If the lead Department does not follow the correct procedures, the Sec-Gen can intervene and suspend the procedure until the errors are rectified.
The Departments can say:
- No Opinion/ No Answer
- Positive Opinion
- Positive Opinion with comments
- Negative Opinion
The lead department then works to incorporate the changes.
Who is involved
Not too many people are involved. Those engaged in the proposal come from:
- Inter-service Group
- Director Generals
- Chef de fiche – Cabinet Officials working on the file
- Heads of Cabinet
- Commissioners
In practice, you are dealing with around 20 people.
Finding out who follows the file in the Cabinet is easy enough. Their official portfolio are posted on-line. However, double-check that they are still there – there is a high turnover.
The Inter-Service Group is harder to find, but you need to find out who they are. They hold the power of the pen.
The rest are easy to find out. Their names are all public.
When an agreement is reached at the Service level the file is given over to political validation.
Most of the time the Commissioners agree with the proposal and there is now disagreement. Rarely there is a vote in the College, but it is very rare. For example, on 6 November 2013 then Commissioner Barnier voted against placing on the market for cultivation of a maize product Zea mays L.
If they can’t reach an agreement, the Commissioners will go several rounds looking to reach an agreement. After a few rounds, the President’s Cabinet will step in to reach an agreement. Back in August 2009, on Blue Fin Tuna CITES listing, the internal wrangling went on over the summer. The Fisheries and Environmental Commissioners could not agree. The Environmental Commissioner prevailed.
On sensitive files, there is a fast track process of 48 hours, where document circulation is limited to a few officials. For particularly sensitive proposals, there is a confidential reading room where officials visit to review the files.
You can find the agenda and minutes of the College meeting at
https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/index.cfm?fuseaction=gridyear
The minutes are at best opaque. The best sources on what really happens in the College is Politico, the FT, and Liberation’s Jean Quartremer.
Post 4