Suchergebnisse

The subject of the analysis in this paper is the analysis and assessment of the regulatory reach of the Six Pack in the monetary law of the European Union. In this respect, the emphasis of the research is on issues related to the need of coordination of the concepts of economic policy of the Member States at the supranational level as a prerequisite for the effective European monetary law and functions and tasks established by the European Semester as the new institutional mechanism of coordination created in the conditions of the global financial crisis. In the further text, the focus of research is on the objectives of the regulations and directive within the Six Pack, which have made the most serious changes to the monetary laws of the Member States and established new competencies of the European Commission and the European Court of Justice in the field of monetary stability, where the general conclusion is the need for their active role in applying the concept of a European semester in order to preserve legal security and ensure the acquest of the international monetary order.

AbstractEuropean leaders often seem to refer to the importance of social dialogue and the effectiveness of the European Semester as two sides of the same coin. This article wishes to contribute to a deeper understanding of the link between social dialogue at the national level and the effectiveness of the European Semester. It does so by comparing French and Dutch approaches to social dialogue engagement with respect to social policy coordination between 2011 and 2020. The findings indicate that meaningful engagement of social partners in this process does not lead to more effectiveness in terms of speed and number of the CSRs implemented. The article suggests to broaden the definition of effectiveness in order to better appreciate the progress made, and to contribute to a more comprehensive assessment of the European Semester.

Introduction -- The Economic and Monetary Union, the Crisis, and Political Accountability -- Studying Accountability at the European Parliament: A Legislative Oversight Approach -- Overseeing the European Central Bank in Banking Supervision -- Overseeing the European Commission in the European Semester -- The Economic Dialogues with the ECOFIN Council and the Eurogroup -- Conclusions: Comparative Evaluation and Necessary Reforms.

In recent years, decision-making on economic performance policies – macroeconomic stability and structural reforms – has evolved from a system based on Broad Economic Policy Guidelines into a full-fledged part of the European Semester, including the possibility to sanction Member States. This suggests an increased role for national parliaments to ensure the democratic legitimacy of EU decision-making. But this need for democratic legitimacy is qualified by the impacts of economic performance policies in and on the Member States. This contribution assesses these impacts by reviewing arguments derived from (a) the applicable legal framework and prior research that has been carried out and (b) by conducting a comparative analysis of the policy dialogues with Germany, France, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands in 2014 (based primarily on National Reform Programmes and Country Specific Recommendations). Next, an assessment is made of how parliaments in these countries have been involved concretely in economic performance policies.

Before the crisis, flexicurity was a leading European Union (EU) policy concept, which aimed to balance labor-market flexibility and security. The recent focus on austerity measures to reduce public deficits might be thought to have reduced attention to the 'security' component of flexicurity. Accordingly, a 'farewell to flexicurity' has been claimed to have occurred. This paper challenges that claim and explores the role of flexicurity within the European Semester. It analyses the European Semester's policy goals between 2007 and 2016, as well as the country-specific recommendations (CSRs) to member states between 2009 and 2015. The analysis shows that the EU flexicurity concept has been revitalized, while its definition changed to encompass more social concerns. Even at the peak of the crisis, CSRs continued to devote attention to elements of both flexibility and security, although the precise details differed across countries and have changed over time.

Economic governance in the EU has been undergoing substantial changes since the beginning of the sovereign debt crisis. The re-arrangements are affecting the convergence of European economies, budgetary control and emergency reactions. Some of them are still at proposal stage, such as the "sixpack" proposed by the Commission for a series of legislative measures on convergence and budgetary surveillance, which is still under scrutiny in Parliament and which is accompanied by activity of the European Council (Euro-Plus-Pact, European Semester). Emergency action is being undertaken since May 2010 (Greek package, EFSM, EFSF) and should lead to a newly inserted provision in the TFEU together with a new international financial institution (ESM). From a European constitutional lawyer's view, the soundness of the reforms already at proposal stage, as well as the emergency activity currently undertaken, may be called into question. European constitutionalism is at stake, as core rules of the Treaties are disrespected. Democratic governance is threatened, as most of the new structures are devoid of parliamentary backing. Stability and welfare are jeopardized as the policy of the Union deviates from successful ways of economic governance as enshrined in the Treaties. European legal scholarship must not be reluctant in pointing at such deficiencies and should participate in showing ways out of the crisis.

Data from member states' Stability and Convergence Programmes from 2011 to 2018 are used to assess the cyclicality of government consumption in the EU after the European Semester took effect. Econometric estimations, which address endogeneity issues, find the intended (ex-ante) fiscal policy to be pro-cyclical in nature. Government consumption is also found to be pro-cyclical ex-post but to a much lesser extent than ex-ante. This appears to be largely owing to a forecasting bias on the part of official forecasters occurring, despite the purported improvements to EU member states' surveillance and forecasting mechanisms that have been put in place in recent years to address such bias.

Published online: 29 August 2017 ; The paper analyses Latvian economic policy during the period 2008-2014 when the country was simultaneously subject to three European Union (EU) economic governance frameworks - the European Semester, the Balance-of-Payments programme and the Maastricht convergence criteria (for euro adoption). Through in-depth process tracing based on public policy documents, interviews with senior officials in Riga and Brussels and the press, the paper finds that the Latvian government cherry-picked and instrumentalized EU economic policy targets and overachieved in them. In contrast to the literature depicting the European Commission as a neoliberal actor which systematically undermines social protection, the paper shows that against the backdrop of fiscally austere national authorities, the Commission instead played the role of social policy advocate, repeatedly calling for stronger measures to help the poor. Shedding light on the limits of one-size-fits-all governance, the findings of the Latvian case have significant implications for EU economic governance more generally.

Chapter on the European Semester in the a book "The Uses of Social Investment", which provides the first study of the welfare state, under the new post-crisis austerity context and associated crisis management politics, to take stock of the limits and potential of social investment. It surveys the emergence, diffusion, limits, merits, and politics of social investment as the welfare policy paradigm for the 21st century, seen through the lens of the life-course contingencies of the competitive knowledge economy and modern family-hood.