The report, published by CEPS (Centre for European Policy Studies) research fellows Julia De Clerck-Sachsse and Piotr Maciej Kaczyński, argues that the Parliament's crucial importance as a forum for public debate is on the wane.
Since the EU enlargement of five years ago, which saw ten Central and Eastern European countries introduce new MEPs and increase the number of official languages from 11 to 23, the work of the institution has, understandably, become more complex.
On the positive side, the authors note, enlargement has not destabilised the Parliament's output, nor has it affected the strength of left-right political alignments, which remain cohesive.
In fact, the Parliament's sixth legislature (2004-2009) has boosted the institution's assertiveness, particularly under the co-decision procedure, where Parliament and the European Council share decision-making powers.
The high cost of efficiency
However, this new assertiveness has come at a price. In its efforts to streamline decision-making and maintain efficiency, the enlarged EU assembly has moved more decisions to committees and cut down the amount of time for debate between MEPs in the plenary chamber.
In particular, the massive increase in first-reading agreements (when a legislative act is passed after only one reading in the chamber) gives the impression that "the bulk of political debate takes place behind closed doors, rather than publicly".
In other words, if Parliament "adopts a compromise that is pre-negotiated by the responsible committee, there is little chance of a politicised and controversial debate," which is "crucial to capturing public attention," say the experts. Worse still, it runs the risk of Parliament being perceived as "merely rubber-stamping the Council's decisions".
Furthermore, if participation rates at this year's European elections continue to fall, as seems highly likely (EurActiv 20/05/09), the justification for giving expanded powers to the Parliament rings increasingly hollow.
At present, the authors argue, extending the EU assembly's powers and presenting it as a more efficient legislative body has not paid off "in terms of how it is perceived as a political actor outside Brussels, most importantly by the public". If it fails to win political and public legitimacy while increasing its powers, the Parliament's institutional raison d'être will be in jeopardy, they conclude.
