Selective EU Scrutinyin the Tweede Kamer

13 November 2013 | Dublin

Mr. René LeegteVice-chair EU-affairs Committee Dutch House of Representatives

• Selective scrutiny in the sectoral committees

• Early involvement (before ‘Council’-phase)

• Before every Council: debates with Ministers

• Growing involvement over the past 5 years

Characteristics of EU scrutiny in the Tweede Kamer

Selection of priorities

Selection of priorities

Selection of priorities

Standard scrutiny (all EU-proposals)

• Government appreciation (6 wks)• Debated before Council meetings on

the basis of Annotated Agenda• Implementation in national law

Priority scrutiny(priority EU-proposals)

+ Proposal on committee-agenda+ Technical briefings+ Hearings/roundtables+ Working visits+ Thematic debates with government

+ Subsidiarity check+ Parliamentary Reserve + Government appreciation (3 wks)

1. Publication Work Programme European Commission -> Programme is subdivided per theme/committee

2. Debate with stakeholders (network-meeting): 21 Nov3. Debate with European Commission

a. WP 2013 - Sefcovic b. WP 2012 - Kroesc. WP 2011 - Sefcovic

4. Debate with Government 5. House decides on priorities, intended sub-checks and

parlementary scrutiny reserves6. Translate in English – distribution and publication on

www.IPEX.eu

Steps in selective scrutiny:

Tweede Kamer der Staten-Generaal

• Exchanging and comparing selections of EU priorities

• Identifying coalitions for yellow/orange card

• Identifying ‘likeminded’ for information exchange

• Increasing coordination between parliaments

• Selective = more effective!

Added Value of adopting similar systems

• Including proposals outside Work Programme– (European) Council, EP

• Improving quality of Reasoned Opinions– Learning from each other– Input for revision of the system (extended deadline) – Common demand for better/timelier response from

European Commission

• Earlier information exchange between parliaments

What can be improved?

Ergo: increase that cooperation!