Why is the European Assembly so reliant on national Parliaments and not on the European Parliament alone? Is this not a challenge to the supra-national aim?

In the proposal set out in the TDEM we suggest that the European Assembly be constituted by elected members of national parliaments (80% of the members) (at the prorata of the groups which constitute the national parliament) and that a fifth, or 20% be elected members of the European Parliament (also at the prorata of the groups which it comprises).

The first reason for which we wish to see a majority of members from national parliaments is in the first instance a question of the legitimacy concerning fiscal measures: one of the main obstacles to fiscal unification is the refusal of national Parliaments to lose the monopoly of this prerogative.

Moreover, and above all, it seems to us essential that national, parliamentary elections become de facto European elections: the national political project must be part of a European project if we wish to restore meaning to the European narrative. National campaigns cannot use Europe as a scapegoat; this may well sustain populism. The representation of national elected members in the European Assembly would imply that the candidates in national, parliamentary elections would no longer be able to avoid responsibility by blaming Brussels.
They will have to explain to voters the projects and budgets which they intend to defend within the European Assembly. By uniting national elected members in the same European Assembly, habits of co-governance will be created which today only exist between Heads of States and Ministers for Finance.

Categorised in:

This post was written by admTDEM