Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The EP, an “Unrewarding” Location for Eurosceptics?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Opposing Europe in the European Parliament

Part of the book series: Palgrave Studies in European Union Politics ((PSEUP))

  • 553 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter focuses on the institutional context to examine its effect on the strategies of Eurosceptics. It is argued here that the rules of the game have an impact on the way parliamentarians understand and execute their mandate. A first section is dedicated to the formal rules, i.e. the rules of procedure of the Chamber, and their evolution since 1979. The second section concentrates on the informal rules, and more particularly on the way the EP works (the grand coalition of the two main groups, the consensual operation of the Chamber, the value placed on expertise); membership in a political group and the existence of a cordon sanitaire around some Eurosceptics, especially from radical right parties. Both sections show that the institutional context is key to understand the roles played by Eurosceptics.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Almeida, D. (2010). Europeanized eurosceptics? Radical right parties and European integration. Perspectives on European politics and society, 11(3), 237–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bardi, L., & Ignazi, P. (2004). Il Parlamento europeo. Bologne, Il: Mulino.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benedetto, G. (2005). Rapporteurs as legislative entrepreneurs: The dynamics of the codecision procedure in Europe’s parliament. Journal of European Public Policy, 12(1), 67–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benedetto, G. (2008). Explaining the failure of euroscepticism in the European parliament. In P. Taggart & A. Szczerbiak (Eds.), Opposing Europe? The comparative party politics of euroscepticism (pp. 127–150). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowler, S., & Farrell, D. M. (1995). The organizing of the European parliament: Committees, specialization and coordination. British Journal of Political Science, 25(2), 219–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brack, N. (2008). “Are Marginal EP party Groups Cohesive? A Comparison of UEN, EUL/NGL and IND/DEM”, Summer School of the standing group de l’ECPR Political parties and European politics, European University Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brack, N., & Startin, N. (2017). To cooperate or not to cooperate? The European radical right and pan-European cooperation. In J. Fitzgibbon, B. Leruth, & N. Startin (Eds.), Euroscepticism as a transnational and pan-European phenomenon. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brack, N., Costa, O., & Dri, C. (2015). Le Parlement européen à la recherche de l’efficacité législative: une analyse des évolutions de son organisation. Bruges political research papers, 39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brack, N., & Kelbel, C. (2016). The Greens in the European Parliament. In Van Haute, E. (ed), Green Parties in Europe (pp. 217–237). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clinchamps, N. (2006). Parlement européen et droit parlementaire. Essai sur la naissance du droit parlementaire de l’Union européenne. Paris: LGDJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corbett, R. (1998). The European parliament’s role in closer EU integration. Houndmills: MacMillan Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Corbett, R., Jacobs, F., & Shackleton, M. (2007). The European parliament. London: John Harper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Costa, O. (2001). Le Parlement européen, assemblée délibérante. Brussels: Editions de l’Université de Bruxelles.

    Google Scholar 

  • Costa, O. (2010, May 28). Peut-on délibérer à l’échelle supranationale? La délibération au Parlement européen entre pratique démocratique et méthode de décision. communication présentée à la journée d’études du groupe intercentres Gouvernance et délibération, Sciences Po Bordeaux.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davison, D., Krassa, M., & Reagan, D. (2005). The behavioural consequences of institutional rules: Republicans in the US house. Journal of Legislative Studies, 11(1), 38–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fieschi, C. (2000). European institutions: The far right and illiberal politics in a liberal context. Parliamentary Affairs, 53(3), 517–531.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giddens, A. (1984). La constitution de la société. Elements de la théorie de la structuration. Paris: PUF.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halikiopoulou, D., & Vasilopoulou, S. (2014). Support for the far right in the 2014 European parliament elections: A comparative perspective. The Political Quarterly, 85(3), 285–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanley, D. (2007). Beyond the nation state. Parties in the era of European integration. Palgrave MacMillan: Basingstoke.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hausemer, P. (2006). Participation and political competition in committee report allocation under what conditions Do MEPs represent their constituents? European Union Politics, 7(4), 505–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helmke, G., & Levitsky, S. (2004). Informal institutions and comparative politics: A research agenda. Perspective on Politics, 2(4), 725–740.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hix, S. (2002a). Parliamentary behavior with two principals: Preferences, parties and voting in the European parliament. American Journal of Political Science, 46(3), 688–698.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hix, S. (2002b). Constitutional agenda setting through discretion in rule interpretation: Why the European parliament won at Amsterdam. British Journal of Political Science, 32(2), 259–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hix, S., Noury, A., & Roland, G. (2007). Democratic politics in the European parliament. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hoyland, B. (2006). Allocation of codecision reports in the fifth European parliament. European Union Politics, 7(1), 30–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hurka, S., & Kaeding, M. (2012). Report allocation in the European parliament after eastern enlargement. Journal of European Public Policy, 19(4), 512–529.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Judge, D., & Earnshaw, D. (2008). The European parliament. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kaeding, M. (2005). The world of committee reports: Rapporteurship assignment in the European parliament. Journal of Legislative Studies, 11(1), 82–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kestel, L. (2008). Le Front national au Parlement européen: Professionnalisation politique et ressources partisans. In L. Neumayer, A. Roger, & F. Zalewski (Eds.), L’Europe contestée. Espaces et enjeux des positionnements contre l’intégration européenne (pp. 210–231). Paris: Michel Houdiard Éditeur.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohler, M. (2014). European governance and the European parliament: From talking shop to legislative powerhouse. Journal of Common Market Studies, 52(3), 600–615.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kreppel, A. (2002). The European parliament and supranational party system: A study in institutional development. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kreppel, A. (2003). Necessary but not sufficient: Understanding the impact of treaty reform on the internal development of the EP. Journal of European Public Policy, 10(6), 884–911.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mair, P. (2007). Political opposition and the European union. Government and Opposition, 42(1), 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mamadouh, V., & Raunio, T. (2003). The Committee System: Powers, Appointments and Report Allocation. Journal of Common Market Studies, 41(2), 333–351.

    Google Scholar 

  • March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (2005). Elaborating the new institutionalism. Arena working paper, 11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neuhold, C., & Settembri, P. (2009). Achieving consensus through committees: Does the European parliament manage? Journal of Common Market Studies, 47(1), 127–151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neunreither, K. (1998). Governance without opposition: The case of the European union. Government and Opposition, 33(4), 435–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rasmussen, A., & Toshkov, D. (2011). The Inter-institutional division of power and time allocation in the European parliament. West European Politics, 34(1), 71–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Searing, D. (1994). Westminster’s world. Understanding political roles. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Settembri, P. (2004). When is a group not a political group? The dissolution of the TDI group in the EP. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 10(1), 150–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Settembri, P. (2006). Is the European Parliament competitive or consensual…‘and why bother’? In Conference “The European Parliament and the European Political Space”, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheingate, A. (2010). Rethinking rules: Creativity and constraint in the US house of representatives. In K. Thelen & J. Mahoney (Eds.), Explaining institutional change: Ambiguity, agency, and power (pp. 168–203). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Startin, N. (2010). Where to for the radical right in the European parliament? The rise and fall of transnational political cooperation. Perspectives on European Politics and Society, 11(4), 429–449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strøm, K. (2012). Roles as strategies: Towards a logic of legislative behavior. In M. Blomgren & O. Rozenberg (Eds.), Parliamentary roles in modern legislatures (pp. 85–100). London: Routlege/ECPR studies in European Political Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waylen, G. (2010). Researching ritual and the symbolic in parliaments: An institutionalist perspective. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 16(3), 352–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westlake, M. (1994). A modern guide to the European parliament, Pinter Publisher.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, M. (1995). The European parliament: Political groups, minority rights and the ‘rationalizations’ of parliamentary organization. A research note. In H. Döring, Parliaments and the majority rules in Western Europe (pp. 931–404). New York: St Martin’s Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yordanova, N. (2009). The Rationale behind Committee Assignment in the European Parliament: Distributive, Informational and Partisan Perspectives. European Union Politics, 10(2), 253–280.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yordanova, N. (2011). The European parliament: In need of a theory. European Union Politics, 12(4), 597–617.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yoshinaka, A., McElroy, G., & Bowler, S. (2010). The appointment of rapporteurs in the European parliament. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 35(4), 457–486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Univerté Libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, Belgium

    Nathalie Brack

Authors
  1. Nathalie Brack
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nathalie Brack .

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Brack, N. (2018). The EP, an “Unrewarding” Location for Eurosceptics?. In: Opposing Europe in the European Parliament. Palgrave Studies in European Union Politics. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-60201-5_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation