• What is the role of the European Parliament?
• How are decisions made in the Parliament?
• Can citizens influence what goes on in the Parliament?
• What is the role of an MEP?
• MEP Pay and Expenses

What is the role of the European Parliament?

The European Parliament is one of the 3 main institutions involved the creation of European law. The others are the European Commission and the European Council.

The 1997 Amsterdam Treaty gave the European Parliament an increased role in policy-making, although its influence is still relatively small compared to the Council and Commission. The links below give a good introduction to what the Parliament and the other two main institutions do.

• A general introduction to the different European Institutions and their roles
  
• Information about the European Parliament
• Information about the European Commission
• Information about the European Council

How are decisions made in the Parliament?

The processes by which decisions are reached in the Parliament often vary depending on the type of legislation or other decisions being made. It is important to note, also, that much of the work which influences the final decision taken by the Parliament on a piece of proposed legislation takes place at an informal level, outside the formal Committee meetings and plenary sessions. This includes, for example, lobbying by the public, businesses and other organisations, and meetings with representatives from the Commission, Council or Presidency and bodies such as the Economic and Social Committee. Within the Parliament, Rapporteurs will discuss their report with their colleagues and advisers within political groupings, and there is a considerable amount of negotiating which goes on with MEPs of other political groups in order to try and get as much support as possible for the report.

The Committees

Within the European Parliament there are 17 permanent Committees dealing with different subject areas. Each Committee has a number of MEPs who are full members, and others who are ’substitute’ members. There are also a number of temporary Committees which are formed as important matters arise - for example, on Echelon or genetic technology.

When a piece of draft legislation is sent to Parliament from the Commission, it is given to the relevant Committee to deal with. The Committee, by co-ordinating the political groups, allocates one of its members as ‘Rapporteur’. The Rapporteur is responsible for writing a Report on the Commission document on behalf of the Committee. A typical report would consist of a number of amendments, or changes to the text, where the Rapporteur thinks that improvements need to be made.

Normally, one or more other Committees produce an Opinion on the original proposal. For example, the Civil Liberties Committee is responsible for producing the Report on the proposal for a Community Immigration Policy. The Employment and Social Affairs Committee has been asked to write an Opinion on the proposal, in which they will ask the former Committee to include certain points in its report which cover the subject from the employment and social angle.

Once the Rapporteur has produced the report, other Committee members may also submit amendments to the text. The report then goes to vote in the Committee - the Committee votes on whether to accept each submitted amendment into the text, and finally whether to accept the report as a whole. The majority of reports are accepted, and go on to be voted on by the whole Parliament in the plenary session. This is when the whole Parliament meets together to discuss reports, amend them and put them to the vote, thus adopting its position on the matter. Amendments may therefore also be submitted prior to the plenary vote.

What happens to Parliament’s decision?

The report adopted by the Parliament then passes to the Council for their consideration. What happens at this stage depends on the procedure the proposal falls under. The number of times a piece of legislation in preparation goes back and forth between players, from the time of the initial proposal to its final adoption as a piece of EU legislation, varies according to the procedure. The legal base of each proposal, as set out in the Treaties, determines which procedure it falls under. The process can take years. Parliament often has to deal with the same proposal twice, as there is frequently a ‘Second Reading’ (if it is co-decision procedure - see below), after the Parliament’s decision the first time round has been considered by the Council and Commission. There are four different procedures.

How much influence the Parliament’s own decision on a particular proposal has on the final piece of legislation varies - it is just one of a number of institutions involved in forming legislation. A lot of bargaining and give and take goes on between the different institutions involved. On some matters the Parliament’s opinion must be taken into account, and the legislation cannot be passed without Parliament’s agreement (this is called the co-decision procedure (for a guide to the co-decision procedure in a PDF format, please click here). On others, however, the Parliament gives its opinion but this does not have to be taken into account by the Council, which has the final say. This is called the consultation procedure. There is also a cooperation procedure, which gives the Parliament more say than in consultation but less than in co-decision, but this is now rarely used, and an assent procedure, which is reserved solely for special measures.

It is in the Parliament’s interests that as much as possible is based on co-decision procedure, where its powers are strongest, and as little as possible is based on the consultation procedure, where its powers are weakest. The procedure a legislative proposal falls under depends, broadly speaking, on its subject area. Since 1997, more EU legislation is subject to co-decision procedure, but agricultural, justice and home affairs, trade, fiscal harmonisation and EMU issues are still not.

Can citizens influence what goes on in Parliament?

The role of lobbying

During the time when a proposed piece of legislation is with the Parliament, from receiving the proposal to the Parliament’s adopted report, there are many different influences acting on the path the Parliament takes with regard to the issue. Besides all the many people working on it inside the Parliament and in other EU institutions, MEPs are lobbied from all sides including:

• individuals, especially constituents
• businesses and firms with an interest in the outcome
• non-governmental organisations (NGOs) with an interest in the outcome
• professional lobbying organisations hired to lobby on behalf of organisations or firms

The amount of lobbying, and who does the lobbying, varies from one issue to the next. This depends on factors such as who the interest groups are and how controversial the issue is.

Sometimes all MEPs are lobbied on an issue. For example, before a vote on a proposal regarding copyright laws, Jean and most other MEPs received an inordinate number of emails and letters, mainly from authors, artists, and librarians. Sometimes the lobbying is more targeted, not extending beyond the Rapporteur and other MEPs who work particularly on that issue. This is likely for more specialised topics.

Most lobbying is in the form of letters and emails, but sometimes organisations arrange meetings with an MEP to explain their view-point and what they would like to see in the Report (particularly with the Rapporteur).

There is no way of measuring the real influence of lobbying, but there is no doubt it does have an effect. It does this by:·

• informing MEPs about the opinions of their constituents and European citizens in general
• pointing out new angles and arguments on a subject
• bringing a particular report or proposal to someone’s attention

Sometimes it is the sheer volume of lobbying on a particular issue that has an effect, while on other occasions just one letter can make a difference.

MEP Pay and Expenses

 There is rightly much concern about the system of expenses for MPs and MEPs.  The Green Group in the European Parliament has been in the forefront of efforts to make the expenses system fair, transparent, and protected against abuse.  Caroline is an active member of the cross-party Campaign for Parliamentary Reform (CPR), which campaigns for reforms including:

• introducing an efficient and transparent system for reimbursing members’ expenses
• abolishing the parliament’s monthly lock-stock-and-barrel move to Strasbourg, which causes huge expense and disruption (see the report on the carbon costs of this monthly commute under Publications)
• introducing transparent rules on the funding of political parties
• improving working conditions for parliamentary staff

The CPR has named Caroline Lucas the UK’s most pro-reform MEP, on the basis of analysis of voting behaviour in 40 votes on parliamentary reform since she was elected in 1999.

What are MEPs paid?

Each MEP is currently paid the same salary as a Member of their national Parliament: for a UK Member that is £61,820 and it is paid by the national treasury. They pay tax at national rates on that salary. Those from Spain are paid considerably less, those from Austria are paid more. From 2009, there will be a new Members’ Statute which will enable all Members to be paid the same (one third of the salary of a Judge in the European Court of Justice) and this will be paid from the budget of the European Parliament. MEPs are currently waiting for a decision from the UK Government as to whether those representing the UK will be able to join the new system.  Caroline donates 15% of her salary to the Green Party.

 Parliamentary allowances

The European Parliament’s total budget represents 1% of all EU expenditure. Some 21% of that 1% is allocated to MEPs expenditure at present. Each Member of the European Parliament is entitled to claim the following allowances, which are paid from the Parliament’s budget.

General Expenditure Allowance

This is currently £2896 (€4052) per month and is used to pay for such things as office rent, rates and running costs (postage, phone and internet bills, equipment rental costs etc); capital costs such as computer equipment; and helps pay for a Member’s travel within their constituency. The Parliament is currently discussing what rules should apply to demonstrating expenditure: at the moment there are no formal requirements. Members are expected to act within the rules. The allowance is halved if a Member fails to attend at least 50% of the Strasbourg plenary sessions without having permission from Parliament’s authorities, in case of illness for example.

Secretarial Allowance

The maximum payment at present is £12,000 (€16,914) per month. This has to be spent on “human resources”, people to assist Members in their work. This can cover staff employed on a long-term (the 5 years that a Parliament lasts) or temporary basis, and also covers other possibilities such as consultancy and research. It also covers all the related costs such as national insurance, tax, pension, training and staff expenses should they be asked to travel to Strasbourg, for example. MEPs can also use it to cover expenses for those on work experience with us. Members now have to demonstrate to Parliament’s authorities that their staff are covered for tax and social security payments.

Staff can be employed directly by Members and monies are paid directly to them via the Parliament; MEPs can use a paying agent to deal with payments or have a contract with a service provider which will then deal with employing staff. If they use a service provider, as Caroline does, MEPs now have to lodge a copy of the contract with the Parliamentary authorities and present an invoice, or fee statement, from the Service Provider to the Parliament at least once a year. Any assistant having a Parliament pass must lodge a copy of their employment contract with Parliament’s authorities and their name(s) is/are published on a public register. There is no requirement to present full accounts.

Parliament’s Vice-President from the Green Group, Gerard Onesta, has been at the forefront of the moves to improve transparency and accountability since taking responsibility for the issues concerning assistants. There is also more information on the Group’s position in the report for Parliament’s Budget Control Committee drawn up by Flemish Green Member Bart Staes.

Via her service provider, Caroline has three full-time members of staff (2 in London, 1 in Brussels) and 3 additional part-time staff in the constituency who between them work the equivalent of one full-time person.  None of them are relatives. She also usually has one stagiaire in Brussels.

 Daily Attendance Allowance

For any day that MEPs attend an official Parliament meeting or are present at an EU institution (Luxembourg, Brussels or Strasbourg) during an official working day for work purposes, they are paid an attendance allowance of £180 (€235).  This should cover all expenses such as hotel rooms and/or flat rental, meals, taxi fares etc. No receipts are required as this is a lump-sum payment, made if they sign the official register or the attendance list at the official meeting. During official plenaries of the Parliament, the amount is halved if a Member is not present for 50% of the roll-call votes.

Travel Allowance

This is a lump-sum payment for journeys to and from (usually) home to Parliament which is made up of:  the cost of an economy-class flexible ticket for air travel or a flat rate allowance for train travel, plus a distance allowance. MEPs must present evidence of travel (the boarding pass or train ticket) or sign a declaration for car travel. Sometimes there is a difference between the payment and the real cost, which the Member is currently free to keep.  The Green Group has been in the forefront of efforts to change this, so that tickets are reimbursed simply on the basis of real cost, and new rules will apply from mid 2009.  However, until these changes have been brought into place, Caroline currently uses any surplus to pay for additional travel to meetings and events within the UK.  She tries to travel by train wherever possible and, while recognising that off-setting is not a solution in itself, she does think that, when combined with serious effort to choose the most sustainable form of transport for any given journey, it can have a role to play.   Caroline, therefore, both offsets the carbon emissions from her travel, and also increasingly tries to replace journeys with video-conferencing when appropriate. 

 Personal Travel Allowance

Each Member has a personal travel allowance of £3,049 (€4000) a year to enable them to accept invitations or make their own fact-finding journeys outside their own Member State. They can claim the real-costs by presenting the appropriate proofs and invitation if relevant.  Caroline has used this money in the past to fund a fact-finding trip with other Parliamentarians to Israel and Gaza.

Additional Pension Scheme

British MEPs are members of the same pension scheme as our national MPs at present. There is also an additional pension scheme set up in the EP which Members may opt to join, but Caroline has chosen not to join this on principle, as she regards it as a misuse of EU taxpayers’ money.  When the new Members’ Statute becomes operational in 2009, this will include a pension entitlement and it is likely that the existing additional pension scheme will close to new Members.