National Parliaments as Multi-Arena-Players: A New Deliberative Role Within the EU Multilevel System?

  • Katrin AuelEmail author
Part of the Comparative Territorial Politics book series (COMPTPOL)


The Lisbon Treaty strengthened in the EU multilevel system in several ways, for example through the Early Warning System (EWS) and a stronger focus on inter-parliamentary cooperation. These provisions, Auel argues, provide national parliaments with the opportunity to move on from the role of strategic ‘external veto players’ (Benz in West Eur Polit 27(5): 875–900, 2004) and to adopt a more proactive, constructive and deliberative role as ‘multi-arena players’ that reflects the multilevel character of the EU. Although their impact in terms of parliamentary influence seems to have remained marginal so far, it has been argued that the new provisions can contribute to establishing a public European space by providing a structure of communication not only among parliaments, but also among national demoi. Auel discusses the potential of the new parliamentary role of ‘multi-arena player’ for the development of such a public European space and provides an assessment of its emergence in political practice.


European Union Lisbon Treaty National parliaments Multi-arena players European public space 


  1. Auel, K. (2007). Democratic Accountability and National Parliaments: Redefining the Impact of Parliamentary Scrutiny in EU Affairs. European Law Journal, 13(4), 487–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Auel, K., & Neuhold, C. (2017). Multi-Arena Players in the Making? Conceptualizing the Role of National Parliaments Since the Lisbon Treaty. Journal of European Public Policy, 24(10), 1547–1561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Auel, K., & Neuhold, C. (2018). Europeanisation of National Parliaments: Experiences and Best-Practices. Study for the European Parliament’s Greens/EFA Group. Accessed 17 July 2018.
  4. Auel, K., Eisele, O., & Kinski, L. (2016). From Constraining to Catalysing Dissensus? The Impact of Political Contestation on Parliamentary Communication in EU Affairs. Comparative European Politics, 14(2), 154–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Auel, K., Eisele, O., & Kinski, L. (2018). What Happens in Parliament Stays in Parliament? Newspaper Coverage of National Parliaments in EU Affairs. Journal of Common Market Studies, 56(3), 628–645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Auel, K., & Raunio, T. (Eds.). (2014). Connecting with the Electorate? Parliamentary Communication in EU Affairs. Journal of Legislative Studies, 20(Special Issue 1), 1–12.Google Scholar
  7. Benz, A. (2004). Path-Dependent Institutions and Strategic Veto-Players—National Parliaments in the European Union. West European Politics, 27(5), 875–900.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Benz, A. (2011). Linking Multiple Demoi—Inter-parliamentary Relations in the EU (IEV-Online 2011-Nr. 1). Accessed 17 July 2018.
  9. Benz, A. (2016). The Strength of Weak Ties or Weakening of Strong Ties? Multilevel Parliamentary Democracy in the Euro Crisis. Paper Presented at the ECPR Standing Group EU Conference, Trento.Google Scholar
  10. Cooper, I. (2012). A ‘Virtual Third Chamber’ for the European Union? National Parliaments after the Treaty of Lisbon. West European Politics, 35(3), 441–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cooper, I. (2015). A Yellow Card for the Striker: National Parliaments and the Defeat of EU Legislation on the Right to Strike. Journal of European Public Policy, 22(10), 1406–1425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cooper, I. (2016). The Interparliamentary Conference on Stability, Economic Coordination and Governance (the ‘Article 13 Conference’). In N. Lupo & C. Fasone (Eds.), Interparliamentary Cooperation in the Composite European Constitution (pp. 247–267). Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  13. Cooper, I. (2017). The Emerging Order of Interparliamentary Cooperation in the EU: Functional Specialization, the EU Speakers Conference, and the Parliamentary Dimension of the Council Presidency (EUI Working Paper RSCAS 2017/05).Google Scholar
  14. Crum, B., & Fossum, J. E. (2012). A Democratic Backbone for International Organisations: The Multilevel Parliamentary Field. In T. Evas, U. Liebert, & C. Lord (Eds.), Multilayered Representation in the European Union (pp. 91–105). Baden-Baden: Nomos.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. De Ruiter, R., & Schalk, J. (2017). Explaining Cross-National Policy Diffusion in National Parliaments: A Longitudinal Case Study of Plenary Debates in the Dutch Parliament. Acta Politica, 52(2), 133–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. De Wilde, P., & Raunio, T. (2015). Redirecting National Parliaments: Setting Priorities for Involvement in EU Affairs. Comparative European Politics, 16(2), 310–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. European Commission. (2017). Reply to the Contribution of the LVI COSAC Bratislava. Accessed 10 July 2018.
  18. European Parliament. (2017). Resolution of 16 February 2017 on Possible Evolutions of and Adjustments to the Current Institutional Set-Up of the European Union. Accessed 17 July 2018.
  19. European Parliament. (2018). Report on the Implementation of the Treaty Provisions Concerning National Parliaments. Accessed 10 July 2018.
  20. Fasone, C., & Fromage, D. (2016). From Veto Players to Agenda-Setters? National Parliaments and their ‘Green Card’ to the European Commission. Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, 23(2), 294–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fromage, D., & Kreilinger, K. (2017). National Parliaments’ Third Yellow Card and the Struggle over the Revision of the Posted Workers Directive. European Journal of Legal Studies, 10(1), 125–160.Google Scholar
  22. Hefftler, C., Neuhold, C., Rozenberg, O., & Smith, J. (Eds.). (2015). The Palgrave Handbook of National Parliaments. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  23. Jančić, D. (2012). The Barroso Initiative: Window Dressing or Democratic Boost? Utrecht Law Review, 8(1), 78–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kinski, L. (2017). Whom and How to Represent? National Parliamentarians and Their Patterns of Representation in EU Affairs: A Comparative Analysis (Unpublished PhD thesis). University of Vienna.Google Scholar
  25. Kreilinger, V. (2013). The New Inter-parliamentary Conference for Economic and Financial Governance (Notre Europe Policy Paper 100).Google Scholar
  26. Kreilinger, V. (2017). A Watchdog over Europe’s Policemen: The New Joint Parliamentary Scrutiny Group for Europol (Notre Europe Policy Paper 197).Google Scholar
  27. Lindseth, P. (2010). Power and Legitimacy: Reconciling Europe and the Nation State. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lupo, N., & Fasone, C. (Eds.). (2016). Interparliamentary Cooperation in the Composite European Constitution. Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  29. Neuhold, C., & Högenauer, A.-L. (2016). An Information Network of Officials? Dissecting the Role and Nature of the Network of Parliamentary Representatives in the European Parliament. Journal of Legislative Studies, 22(2), 237–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Pegan, A., & Högenauer, A.-L. (2016). The Role of Parliamentary Administrations in Interparliamentary Cooperation. In N. Lupo & C. Fasone (Eds.), Interparliamentary Cooperation in the Composite European Constitution (pp. 147–164). Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  31. Rauh, C., & De Wilde, P. (2017). The Opposition Deficit in EU Accountability: Evidence from over 20 Years of Plenary Debate in four Member States. European Journal of Political Research, 57(1), 194–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rozenberg, O. (2017). The Role of National Parliaments in the EU After Lisbon: Potentialities and Challenges. Study for the European Parliament. Accessed 17 July 2018.
  33. Rozenberg, O., & Hefftler, C. (2015). Introduction. In C. Hefftler, C. Neuhold, O. Rozenberg, & J. Smith (Eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of National Parliaments and the European Union (pp. 1–39). London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  34. Swedish Riksdag. (2018). EU-arbetet i riksdagen. Stockholm: Riksdagstryckeriet.Google Scholar
  35. Umit, R. (2017). Strategic Communication of EU Affairs: An Analysis of Legislative Behaviour on Twitter. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 23(1), 93–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Valentin, C. (2016). MEPs in National Parliaments: Bringing the EU Closer to Home? (PADEMIA Research Note 18). Accessed 17 July 2018.
  37. Wendler, F. (2016). Debating Europe in National Parliaments: Public Justification and Political Polarization. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Winzen, T., de Ruiter, R., & Rocabert, J. (2018). Is Parliamentary Attention to the EU Strongest When It Is Needed the Most? National Parliaments and the Selective Debate of EU Policies. European Union Politics, 19(3), 481–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wouters, J., & Raube, K. (2016). The Interparliamentary Conference on Common Foreign and Security Policy: A Quest for Democratic Accountability in EU Security Governance. In N. Lupo & C. Fasone (Eds.), Interparliamentary Cooperation in the Composite European Constitution (pp. 227–245). Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  40. Wouters, J., Beke, L., Chané, A.-L., Hachez, N., & Raube, K. (2014). Enhancing Cooperation Between the EUROPEAN Parliament and EU National Parliaments on EU Human Rights Policy. Study Requested by the European Parliament’s Subcommittee on Human Rights. Accessed 17 July 2018.

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Advanced Studies (IHS)ViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations