BETA


2010/2021(INI) Power of legislative delegation

Progress: Procedure completed

RoleCommitteeRapporteurShadows
Lead JURI SZÁJER József (icon: PPE PPE)
Committee Opinion ECON BOWLES Sharon (icon: ALDE ALDE)
Committee Opinion ENVI LEINEN Jo (icon: S&D S&D)
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 54

Events

2011/03/18
   DE_BUNDESRAT - Contribution
Documents
2010/09/06
   EC - Commission response to text adopted in plenary
Documents
2010/06/03
   CZ_SENATE - Contribution
Documents
2010/05/05
   EP - Results of vote in Parliament
2010/05/05
   EP - Decision by Parliament
Details

The European Parliament adopted a resolution on the power of legislative delegation.

The resolution underlines that the Lisbon Treaty consecrates legislative power and introduces a new concept of the legislative act, with wide-ranging consequences. One of the elements of legislative power is the possibility, provided for in Article 290 TFEU, for the Legislator to delegate part of its own power to the Commission in a legislative act (hereinafter ‘the basic act’), This delegated power can only consist in supplementing or amending parts of a legislative act which the Legislator does not consider to be essential. The resulting delegated acts which are adopted by the Commission will be non-legislative acts of general scope.

Parliament should be on an equal footing with the Council with respect to all aspects of the power of legislative delegation.

With respect to aspects to be defined in the basic act , the Parliament puts forward the following recommendations:

the objectives, content, scope and duration of a delegation pursuant to Article 290 TFEU must be expressly and meticulously defined in each basic act; the two examples of possible conditions mentioned in Article 290(2) TFEU, objection and revocation, may be regarded as the most usual ways to control the Commission's use of delegated powers and should both be included in every basic act. One could, however, envisage subjecting a delegation of power to other means of control, such as an express approval by Parliament and the Council of each delegated act or a possibility of repealing individual delegated acts already in force; the control mechanisms set out by the Legislator must respect certain general principles of Union law and that, in particular, they must be simple and easily understandable, safeguard legal certainty, enable the Commission to exercise the delegated power effectively, and enable the Legislator to monitor properly the use made of delegated power; a fixed period for objection applicable to all legal acts is not warranted. The period should be fixed on a case-by-case basis in each basic act taking into account the complexity of the issues and must be sufficient to enable effective control of the delegation, without unduly delaying the entry into force of uncontroversial delegated acts; an urgency procedure with a shorter period for objection provided for in the basic act itself should be reserved for particularly exceptional cases, for example relating to security matters, health or humanitarian crises; the vast majority of situations requiring the speedy adoption of delegated acts could be dealt with by a flexible procedure for early non-objection by Parliament and the Council, following a request by the Commission in duly justified cases; the duration of a delegation cannot be indefinite. However, Members consider that a delegation of a limited duration could provide for the possibility of periodic renewal. the duration of a delegation can be indefinite, taking into account the fact that the delegation can be revoked at any time; is of the opinion, however, that a delegation of a limited duration could provide for the possibility of periodic renewal following an express request by the Commission. The delegation can only be renewed if neither Parliament nor the Council expresses any objections within a specified deadline.

The Parliament is of the opinion that certain practical arrangements could be better coordinated in a Common Understanding between the institutions, which may take the form of an inter-institutional agreement , covering inter alia:

consultations in the preparation and drawing-up of delegated acts : when preparing and drawing-up delegated acts, the Commission must give Parliament access to related preparatory meetings, exchanges of views and consultations in regard to delegated acts; mutual exchanges of information, in particular in the event of a revocation: it must be ensured that all institutions are fully aware of the possibility of revocation in good time; arrangements for the transmission of documents : the Commission must ensure an early and continuous transmission of information and relevant documents to Parliament's relevant committees, minimum periods for objection by Parliament and the Council : the minimum period for objection should be two months, with a possibility of its being extended by a further two months at the initiative of Parliament or the Council. It stresses that the period for objection should depend on the nature of the delegated act; computation of time periods: the various periods for scrutiny of delegated acts must only start on transmission by the Commission of all language versions, and must properly take account of Parliament’s recess and electoral periods; the publication of acts in the Official Journal at different stages in the procedure: delegated acts subject to a right of objection can only be published in the Official Journal and thus enter into force after the expiry of the period for objection, except where an early non-objection is granted. Parliament considers that an express obligation requiring Parliament and the Council in each basic act to publish decisions taken in controlling the Commission’s exercise of delegated power is superfluous.

The resolution calls on each of its committees to exchange and regularly update best practice and establish a mechanism to ensure that Parliament’s practices under Article 290 TFEU are as coherent as possible.

Parliament urges the Commission to present, as a matter of priority, the legislative proposals needed to adapt the acquis communautaire to the provisions of Articles 290 and 291 TFEU. It considers, in respect of Article 290 TFEU, that this alignment should not be limited to those measures previously dealt with under the regulatory procedure with scrutiny but should cover all appropriate measures of general scope independently of the decision-making procedure or comitology procedure applicable to them prior to the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon.

Documents
2010/05/05
   EP - End of procedure in Parliament
2010/04/19
   EP - Debate in Parliament
2010/03/29
   EP - Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
Documents
2010/03/29
   EP - Committee report tabled for plenary
Documents
2010/03/23
   EP - Vote in committee
Details

The Committee on Legal Affairs adopted an own-initiative report by József SZÁJER (EPP, HU) on the power of legislative delegation.

The report underlines that the Lisbon Treaty consecrates legislative power and introduces a new concept of the legislative act, with wide-ranging consequences. One of the elements of legislative power is the possibility, provided for in Article 290 TFEU, for the Legislator to delegate part of its own power to the Commission in a legislative act (hereinafter ‘the basic act’), This delegated power can only consist in supplementing or amending parts of a legislative act which the Legislator does not consider to be essential. The resulting delegated acts which are adopted by the Commission will be non-legislative acts of general scope.

With respect to aspects to be defined in the basic act , the report puts forward the following recommendations:

the objectives, content, scope and duration of a delegation pursuant to Article 290 TFEU must be expressly and meticulously defined in each basic act; the two examples of possible conditions mentioned in Article 290(2) TFEU, objection and revocation, may be regarded as the most usual ways to control the Commission's use of delegated powers and should both be included in every basic act. One could, however, envisage subjecting a delegation of power to other means of control, such as an express approval by Parliament and the Council of each delegated act or a possibility of repealing individual delegated acts already in force; the control mechanisms set out by the Legislator must respect certain general principles of Union law and that, in particular, they must be simple and easily understandable, safeguard legal certainty, enable the Commission to exercise the delegated power effectively, and enable the Legislator to monitor properly the use made of delegated power; a fixed period for objection applicable to all legal acts is not warranted. The period should be fixed on a case-by-case basis in each basic act taking into account the complexity of the issues and must be sufficient to enable effective control of the delegation, without unduly delaying the entry into force of uncontroversial delegated acts; an urgency procedure with a shorter period for objection provided for in the basic act itself should be reserved for particularly exceptional cases, for example relating to security matters or humanitarian crises; the vast majority of situations requiring the speedy adoption of delegated acts could be dealt with by a flexible procedure for early non-objection by Parliament and the Council, following a request by the Commission in duly justified cases; the duration of a delegation cannot be indefinite. However, Members consider that a delegation of a limited duration could provide for the possibility of periodic renewal.

The committee is of the opinion that certain practical arrangements could be better coordinated in a Common Understanding between the institutions, which may take the form of an inter-institutional agreement , covering inter alia:

consultations in the preparation and drawing-up of delegated acts : when preparing and drawing-up delegated acts, the Commission must give Parliament access to related preparatory meetings, exchanges of views and consultations in regard to delegated acts; mutual exchanges of information, in particular in the event of a revocation: it must be ensured that all institutions are fully aware of the possibility of revocation in good time; arrangements for the transmission of documents : the Commission must ensure an early and continuous transmission of information and relevant documents to Parliament's relevant committees, minimum periods for objection by Parliament and the Council : the minimum period for objection should be two months, with a possibility of its being extended by a further two months at the initiative of Parliament or the Council. It recalls that a longer period for objection can be set depending on the nature of the delegated act; computation of time periods: the various periods for scrutiny of delegated acts must only start on transmission by the Commission of all language versions, and must properly take account of Parliament’s recess and electoral periods; the publication of acts in the Official Journal at different stages in the procedure: delegated acts subject to a right of objection can only be published in the Official Journal and thus enter into force after the expiry of the period for objection, except where an early non-objection is granted.

The report calls on each of its committees to exchange and regularly update best practice and establish a mechanism to ensure that Parliament’s practices under Article 290 TFEU are as coherent as possible.

Members urge the Commission to present, as a matter of priority, the legislative proposals needed to adapt the acquis communautaire to the provisions of Articles 290 and 291 TFEU. They consider, in respect of Article 290 TFEU, that this alignment should not be limited to those measures previously dealt with under the regulatory procedure with scrutiny but should cover all appropriate measures of general scope independently of the decision-making procedure or comitology procedure applicable to them prior to the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon.

2010/03/18
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2010/03/16
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2010/03/11
   EP - Amendments tabled in committee
Documents
2010/03/03
   EP - BOWLES Sharon (ALDE) appointed as rapporteur in ECON
2010/03/02
   EP - Committee draft report
Documents
2010/02/17
   DE_BUNDESRAT - Contribution
Documents
2010/02/11
   EP - LEINEN Jo (S&D) appointed as rapporteur in ENVI
2010/02/08
   EP - Committee referral announced in Parliament
2010/01/27
   EP - SZÁJER József (PPE) appointed as rapporteur in JURI
2009/12/10
   EC - Non-legislative basic document published
Details

PURPOSE: Communication on delegated acts following entry into force of Article 290 of the Lisbon Treaty.

CONTENT: Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, as laid down in the Treaty of Lisbon allows the legislator to delegate to the Commission the power to adopt non-legislative acts of general application to supplement or amend certain non-essential elements of a legislative act. Legal acts adopted by the Commission in this way are referred to in the terminology used by the new Treaty as "delegated acts" (Article 290(3)).

This provision does not require the adoption of any binding instrument of secondary legislation to ensure its implementation. It is sufficient in itself and contains all the elements required by the legislator for defining, case by case, the scope, content and practical arrangements for delegating power. However, the Commission believes it is useful and necessary to define the general framework within which such delegations of power should operate. The European Parliament, although stressing that this measure should preserve the freedom of the legislator, has reached a similar conclusion and has suggested that the institutions agree on a standard formula for delegations that would be regularly inserted by the Commission in the draft legislative act itself (see INI/2008/2063 ).

Without challenging the freedom of the European Parliament and the Council to set the limits and conditions of a delegation of powers at the point when a legislative act is adopted, the principles of better regulation and the smooth running of the interinstitutional process plead for a coordinated and coherent approach. Both the Commission, which is responsible for preparing and adopting delegated acts, and the European Parliament and Council, which are responsible for scrutinising them, should promote the introduction of a system that is as homogeneous and predictable as possible.

The purpose of this communication is to set out the Commission's views on the scope of the delegated acts, the framework for delegations of power, the working methods the Commission intends to use for preparing the adoption of delegated acts and, lastly, the conditions under which the legislator might exercise control over the way the powers conferred on the Commission are implemented.

In line with the ideas set out in the Communication, the Commission sets out several models for articles in future legislative acts conferring on it the power to adopt delegated acts in the Annex.

Documents

AmendmentsDossier
61 2010/2021(INI)
2010/02/24 ENVI 14 amendments...
source: PE-439.269
2010/03/11 JURI 34 amendments...
source: PE-439.855
2010/03/12 ECON 13 amendments...
source: PE-439.840

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)

docs/0/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE439.171
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/JURI-PR-439171_EN.html
docs/1/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE439.855
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/JURI-AM-439855_EN.html
docs/2/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE439.162&secondRef=02
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/ENVI-AD-439162_EN.html
docs/3/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE439.425&secondRef=02
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/ECON-AD-439425_EN.html
docs/4/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2010-0110_EN.html
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2010-0110_EN.html
events/0/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/registre/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2009/0673/COM_COM(2009)0673_EN.pdf
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2009/0673/COM_COM(2009)0673_EN.pdf
events/1/type
Old
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
New
Committee referral announced in Parliament
events/2/type
Old
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
New
Vote in committee
events/3
date
2010-03-29T00:00:00
type
Committee report tabled for plenary
body
EP
docs
url: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2010-0110_EN.html title: A7-0110/2010
events/3
date
2010-03-29T00:00:00
type
Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
body
EP
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2010-0110_EN.html title: A7-0110/2010
events/4/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20100419&type=CRE
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/CRE-7-2010-04-19-TOC_EN.html
events/6
date
2010-05-05T00:00:00
type
Decision by Parliament
body
EP
docs
url: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-7-2010-0127_EN.html title: T7-0127/2010
summary
events/6
date
2010-05-05T00:00:00
type
Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
body
EP
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-7-2010-0127_EN.html title: T7-0127/2010
summary
procedure/Modified legal basis
Rules of Procedure EP 150
procedure/Other legal basis
Rules of Procedure EP 159
procedure/legal_basis/0
Rules of Procedure EP 54
procedure/legal_basis/0
Rules of Procedure EP 052
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Legal Affairs
committee
JURI
rapporteur
name: SZÁJER József date: 2010-01-27T00:00:00 group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) abbr: PPE
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Legal Affairs
committee
JURI
date
2010-01-27T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: SZÁJER József group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) abbr: PPE
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Economic and Monetary Affairs
committee
ECON
rapporteur
name: BOWLES Sharon date: 2010-03-03T00:00:00 group: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe abbr: ALDE
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Economic and Monetary Affairs
committee
ECON
date
2010-03-03T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: BOWLES Sharon group: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe abbr: ALDE
committees/2
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Environment, Public Health and Food Safety
committee
ENVI
rapporteur
name: LEINEN Jo date: 2010-02-11T00:00:00 group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
committees/2
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Environment, Public Health and Food Safety
committee
ENVI
date
2010-02-11T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: LEINEN Jo group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
docs/4/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-110&language=EN
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2010-0110_EN.html
docs/5/body
EC
events/3/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-110&language=EN
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2010-0110_EN.html
events/6/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2010-127
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-7-2010-0127_EN.html
activities
  • date: 2009-12-10T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/registre/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2009/0673/COM_COM(2009)0673_EN.pdf title: COM(2009)0673 type: Non-legislative basic document published celexid: CELEX:52009DC0673:EN body: EC commission: DG: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/secretariat_general/index_en.htm title: Secretariat-General url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/legal_service/ title: Legal Service type: Non-legislative basic document published
  • date: 2010-02-08T00:00:00 body: EP type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: False committee: ECON date: 2010-03-03T00:00:00 committee_full: Economic and Monetary Affairs rapporteur: group: ALDE name: BOWLES Sharon body: EP responsible: False committee: ENVI date: 2010-02-11T00:00:00 committee_full: Environment, Public Health and Food Safety rapporteur: group: S&D name: LEINEN Jo body: EP responsible: True committee: JURI date: 2010-01-27T00:00:00 committee_full: Legal Affairs rapporteur: group: PPE name: SZÁJER József
  • date: 2010-03-23T00:00:00 body: EP committees: body: EP responsible: False committee: ECON date: 2010-03-03T00:00:00 committee_full: Economic and Monetary Affairs rapporteur: group: ALDE name: BOWLES Sharon body: EP responsible: False committee: ENVI date: 2010-02-11T00:00:00 committee_full: Environment, Public Health and Food Safety rapporteur: group: S&D name: LEINEN Jo body: EP responsible: True committee: JURI date: 2010-01-27T00:00:00 committee_full: Legal Affairs rapporteur: group: PPE name: SZÁJER József type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
  • date: 2010-03-29T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-110&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading title: A7-0110/2010 body: EP type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
  • date: 2010-04-19T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20100419&type=CRE type: Debate in Parliament title: Debate in Parliament body: EP type: Debate in Parliament
  • date: 2010-05-05T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=18251&l=en type: Results of vote in Parliament title: Results of vote in Parliament url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2010-127 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T7-0127/2010 body: EP type: Results of vote in Parliament
commission
  • body: EC dg: Legal Service Secretariat-General commissioner: -- --
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Legal Affairs
committee
JURI
date
2010-01-27T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: SZÁJER József group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) abbr: PPE
committees/0
body
EP
responsible
False
committee
ECON
date
2010-03-03T00:00:00
committee_full
Economic and Monetary Affairs
rapporteur
group: ALDE name: BOWLES Sharon
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Economic and Monetary Affairs
committee
ECON
date
2010-03-03T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: BOWLES Sharon group: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe abbr: ALDE
committees/1
body
EP
responsible
False
committee
ENVI
date
2010-02-11T00:00:00
committee_full
Environment, Public Health and Food Safety
rapporteur
group: S&D name: LEINEN Jo
committees/2
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Environment, Public Health and Food Safety
committee
ENVI
date
2010-02-11T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: LEINEN Jo group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
committees/2
body
EP
responsible
True
committee
JURI
date
2010-01-27T00:00:00
committee_full
Legal Affairs
rapporteur
group: PPE name: SZÁJER József
docs
  • date: 2010-03-02T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE439.171 title: PE439.171 type: Committee draft report body: EP
  • date: 2010-03-11T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE439.855 title: PE439.855 type: Amendments tabled in committee body: EP
  • date: 2010-03-16T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE439.162&secondRef=02 title: PE439.162 committee: ENVI type: Committee opinion body: EP
  • date: 2010-03-18T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE439.425&secondRef=02 title: PE439.425 committee: ECON type: Committee opinion body: EP
  • date: 2010-03-29T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-110&language=EN title: A7-0110/2010 type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading body: EP
  • date: 2010-09-06T00:00:00 docs: url: /oeil/spdoc.do?i=18251&j=0&l=en title: SP(2010)4415 type: Commission response to text adopted in plenary
  • date: 2010-06-03T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.connefof.europarl.europa.eu/connefof/app/exp/COM(2009)0673 title: COM(2009)0673 type: Contribution body: CZ_SENATE
  • date: 2011-03-18T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.connefof.europarl.europa.eu/connefof/app/exp/COM(2009)0673 title: COM(2009)0673 type: Contribution body: DE_BUNDESRAT
  • date: 2010-02-17T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.connefof.europarl.europa.eu/connefof/app/exp/COM(2009)0673 title: COM(2009)0673 type: Contribution body: DE_BUNDESRAT
events
  • date: 2009-12-10T00:00:00 type: Non-legislative basic document published body: EC docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/registre/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2009/0673/COM_COM(2009)0673_EN.pdf title: COM(2009)0673 url: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2009&nu_doc=673 title: EUR-Lex summary: PURPOSE: Communication on delegated acts following entry into force of Article 290 of the Lisbon Treaty. CONTENT: Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, as laid down in the Treaty of Lisbon allows the legislator to delegate to the Commission the power to adopt non-legislative acts of general application to supplement or amend certain non-essential elements of a legislative act. Legal acts adopted by the Commission in this way are referred to in the terminology used by the new Treaty as "delegated acts" (Article 290(3)). This provision does not require the adoption of any binding instrument of secondary legislation to ensure its implementation. It is sufficient in itself and contains all the elements required by the legislator for defining, case by case, the scope, content and practical arrangements for delegating power. However, the Commission believes it is useful and necessary to define the general framework within which such delegations of power should operate. The European Parliament, although stressing that this measure should preserve the freedom of the legislator, has reached a similar conclusion and has suggested that the institutions agree on a standard formula for delegations that would be regularly inserted by the Commission in the draft legislative act itself (see INI/2008/2063 ). Without challenging the freedom of the European Parliament and the Council to set the limits and conditions of a delegation of powers at the point when a legislative act is adopted, the principles of better regulation and the smooth running of the interinstitutional process plead for a coordinated and coherent approach. Both the Commission, which is responsible for preparing and adopting delegated acts, and the European Parliament and Council, which are responsible for scrutinising them, should promote the introduction of a system that is as homogeneous and predictable as possible. The purpose of this communication is to set out the Commission's views on the scope of the delegated acts, the framework for delegations of power, the working methods the Commission intends to use for preparing the adoption of delegated acts and, lastly, the conditions under which the legislator might exercise control over the way the powers conferred on the Commission are implemented. In line with the ideas set out in the Communication, the Commission sets out several models for articles in future legislative acts conferring on it the power to adopt delegated acts in the Annex.
  • date: 2010-02-08T00:00:00 type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body: EP
  • date: 2010-03-23T00:00:00 type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading body: EP summary: The Committee on Legal Affairs adopted an own-initiative report by József SZÁJER (EPP, HU) on the power of legislative delegation. The report underlines that the Lisbon Treaty consecrates legislative power and introduces a new concept of the legislative act, with wide-ranging consequences. One of the elements of legislative power is the possibility, provided for in Article 290 TFEU, for the Legislator to delegate part of its own power to the Commission in a legislative act (hereinafter ‘the basic act’), This delegated power can only consist in supplementing or amending parts of a legislative act which the Legislator does not consider to be essential. The resulting delegated acts which are adopted by the Commission will be non-legislative acts of general scope. With respect to aspects to be defined in the basic act , the report puts forward the following recommendations: the objectives, content, scope and duration of a delegation pursuant to Article 290 TFEU must be expressly and meticulously defined in each basic act; the two examples of possible conditions mentioned in Article 290(2) TFEU, objection and revocation, may be regarded as the most usual ways to control the Commission's use of delegated powers and should both be included in every basic act. One could, however, envisage subjecting a delegation of power to other means of control, such as an express approval by Parliament and the Council of each delegated act or a possibility of repealing individual delegated acts already in force; the control mechanisms set out by the Legislator must respect certain general principles of Union law and that, in particular, they must be simple and easily understandable, safeguard legal certainty, enable the Commission to exercise the delegated power effectively, and enable the Legislator to monitor properly the use made of delegated power; a fixed period for objection applicable to all legal acts is not warranted. The period should be fixed on a case-by-case basis in each basic act taking into account the complexity of the issues and must be sufficient to enable effective control of the delegation, without unduly delaying the entry into force of uncontroversial delegated acts; an urgency procedure with a shorter period for objection provided for in the basic act itself should be reserved for particularly exceptional cases, for example relating to security matters or humanitarian crises; the vast majority of situations requiring the speedy adoption of delegated acts could be dealt with by a flexible procedure for early non-objection by Parliament and the Council, following a request by the Commission in duly justified cases; the duration of a delegation cannot be indefinite. However, Members consider that a delegation of a limited duration could provide for the possibility of periodic renewal. The committee is of the opinion that certain practical arrangements could be better coordinated in a Common Understanding between the institutions, which may take the form of an inter-institutional agreement , covering inter alia: consultations in the preparation and drawing-up of delegated acts : when preparing and drawing-up delegated acts, the Commission must give Parliament access to related preparatory meetings, exchanges of views and consultations in regard to delegated acts; mutual exchanges of information, in particular in the event of a revocation: it must be ensured that all institutions are fully aware of the possibility of revocation in good time; arrangements for the transmission of documents : the Commission must ensure an early and continuous transmission of information and relevant documents to Parliament's relevant committees, minimum periods for objection by Parliament and the Council : the minimum period for objection should be two months, with a possibility of its being extended by a further two months at the initiative of Parliament or the Council. It recalls that a longer period for objection can be set depending on the nature of the delegated act; computation of time periods: the various periods for scrutiny of delegated acts must only start on transmission by the Commission of all language versions, and must properly take account of Parliament’s recess and electoral periods; the publication of acts in the Official Journal at different stages in the procedure: delegated acts subject to a right of objection can only be published in the Official Journal and thus enter into force after the expiry of the period for objection, except where an early non-objection is granted. The report calls on each of its committees to exchange and regularly update best practice and establish a mechanism to ensure that Parliament’s practices under Article 290 TFEU are as coherent as possible. Members urge the Commission to present, as a matter of priority, the legislative proposals needed to adapt the acquis communautaire to the provisions of Articles 290 and 291 TFEU. They consider, in respect of Article 290 TFEU, that this alignment should not be limited to those measures previously dealt with under the regulatory procedure with scrutiny but should cover all appropriate measures of general scope independently of the decision-making procedure or comitology procedure applicable to them prior to the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon.
  • date: 2010-03-29T00:00:00 type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-110&language=EN title: A7-0110/2010
  • date: 2010-04-19T00:00:00 type: Debate in Parliament body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20100419&type=CRE title: Debate in Parliament
  • date: 2010-05-05T00:00:00 type: Results of vote in Parliament body: EP docs: url: https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=18251&l=en title: Results of vote in Parliament
  • date: 2010-05-05T00:00:00 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2010-127 title: T7-0127/2010 summary: The European Parliament adopted a resolution on the power of legislative delegation. The resolution underlines that the Lisbon Treaty consecrates legislative power and introduces a new concept of the legislative act, with wide-ranging consequences. One of the elements of legislative power is the possibility, provided for in Article 290 TFEU, for the Legislator to delegate part of its own power to the Commission in a legislative act (hereinafter ‘the basic act’), This delegated power can only consist in supplementing or amending parts of a legislative act which the Legislator does not consider to be essential. The resulting delegated acts which are adopted by the Commission will be non-legislative acts of general scope. Parliament should be on an equal footing with the Council with respect to all aspects of the power of legislative delegation. With respect to aspects to be defined in the basic act , the Parliament puts forward the following recommendations: the objectives, content, scope and duration of a delegation pursuant to Article 290 TFEU must be expressly and meticulously defined in each basic act; the two examples of possible conditions mentioned in Article 290(2) TFEU, objection and revocation, may be regarded as the most usual ways to control the Commission's use of delegated powers and should both be included in every basic act. One could, however, envisage subjecting a delegation of power to other means of control, such as an express approval by Parliament and the Council of each delegated act or a possibility of repealing individual delegated acts already in force; the control mechanisms set out by the Legislator must respect certain general principles of Union law and that, in particular, they must be simple and easily understandable, safeguard legal certainty, enable the Commission to exercise the delegated power effectively, and enable the Legislator to monitor properly the use made of delegated power; a fixed period for objection applicable to all legal acts is not warranted. The period should be fixed on a case-by-case basis in each basic act taking into account the complexity of the issues and must be sufficient to enable effective control of the delegation, without unduly delaying the entry into force of uncontroversial delegated acts; an urgency procedure with a shorter period for objection provided for in the basic act itself should be reserved for particularly exceptional cases, for example relating to security matters, health or humanitarian crises; the vast majority of situations requiring the speedy adoption of delegated acts could be dealt with by a flexible procedure for early non-objection by Parliament and the Council, following a request by the Commission in duly justified cases; the duration of a delegation cannot be indefinite. However, Members consider that a delegation of a limited duration could provide for the possibility of periodic renewal. the duration of a delegation can be indefinite, taking into account the fact that the delegation can be revoked at any time; is of the opinion, however, that a delegation of a limited duration could provide for the possibility of periodic renewal following an express request by the Commission. The delegation can only be renewed if neither Parliament nor the Council expresses any objections within a specified deadline. The Parliament is of the opinion that certain practical arrangements could be better coordinated in a Common Understanding between the institutions, which may take the form of an inter-institutional agreement , covering inter alia: consultations in the preparation and drawing-up of delegated acts : when preparing and drawing-up delegated acts, the Commission must give Parliament access to related preparatory meetings, exchanges of views and consultations in regard to delegated acts; mutual exchanges of information, in particular in the event of a revocation: it must be ensured that all institutions are fully aware of the possibility of revocation in good time; arrangements for the transmission of documents : the Commission must ensure an early and continuous transmission of information and relevant documents to Parliament's relevant committees, minimum periods for objection by Parliament and the Council : the minimum period for objection should be two months, with a possibility of its being extended by a further two months at the initiative of Parliament or the Council. It stresses that the period for objection should depend on the nature of the delegated act; computation of time periods: the various periods for scrutiny of delegated acts must only start on transmission by the Commission of all language versions, and must properly take account of Parliament’s recess and electoral periods; the publication of acts in the Official Journal at different stages in the procedure: delegated acts subject to a right of objection can only be published in the Official Journal and thus enter into force after the expiry of the period for objection, except where an early non-objection is granted. Parliament considers that an express obligation requiring Parliament and the Council in each basic act to publish decisions taken in controlling the Commission’s exercise of delegated power is superfluous. The resolution calls on each of its committees to exchange and regularly update best practice and establish a mechanism to ensure that Parliament’s practices under Article 290 TFEU are as coherent as possible. Parliament urges the Commission to present, as a matter of priority, the legislative proposals needed to adapt the acquis communautaire to the provisions of Articles 290 and 291 TFEU. It considers, in respect of Article 290 TFEU, that this alignment should not be limited to those measures previously dealt with under the regulatory procedure with scrutiny but should cover all appropriate measures of general scope independently of the decision-making procedure or comitology procedure applicable to them prior to the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon.
  • date: 2010-05-05T00:00:00 type: End of procedure in Parliament body: EP
links
other
  • body: EC dg: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/secretariat_general/index_en.htm title: Secretariat-General url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/legal_service/ title: Legal Service
procedure/Modified legal basis
Old
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150
New
Rules of Procedure EP 150
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee
Old
JURI/7/02156
New
  • JURI/7/02156
procedure/legal_basis/0
Rules of Procedure EP 052
procedure/legal_basis/0
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052
procedure/subject
Old
  • 8.40.10 Interinstitutional relations, democratic deficit, subsidiarity, comitology
New
8.40.10
Interinstitutional relations, subsidiarity, proportionality, comitology
activities/0/commission/0/DG/0/title
Old
Secretariat General
New
Secretariat-General
other/0/dg/0/title
Old
Secretariat General
New
Secretariat-General
activities
  • date: 2009-12-10T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/registre/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2009/0673/COM_COM(2009)0673_EN.pdf celexid: CELEX:52009DC0673:EN type: Non-legislative basic document published title: COM(2009)0673 type: Non-legislative basic document published body: EC commission: DG: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/secretariat_general/index_en.htm title: Secretariat General url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/legal_service/ title: Legal Service
  • date: 2010-02-08T00:00:00 body: EP type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: False committee: ECON date: 2010-03-03T00:00:00 committee_full: Economic and Monetary Affairs rapporteur: group: ALDE name: BOWLES Sharon body: EP responsible: False committee: ENVI date: 2010-02-11T00:00:00 committee_full: Environment, Public Health and Food Safety rapporteur: group: S&D name: LEINEN Jo body: EP responsible: True committee: JURI date: 2010-01-27T00:00:00 committee_full: Legal Affairs rapporteur: group: PPE name: SZÁJER József
  • date: 2010-03-23T00:00:00 body: EP committees: body: EP responsible: False committee: ECON date: 2010-03-03T00:00:00 committee_full: Economic and Monetary Affairs rapporteur: group: ALDE name: BOWLES Sharon body: EP responsible: False committee: ENVI date: 2010-02-11T00:00:00 committee_full: Environment, Public Health and Food Safety rapporteur: group: S&D name: LEINEN Jo body: EP responsible: True committee: JURI date: 2010-01-27T00:00:00 committee_full: Legal Affairs rapporteur: group: PPE name: SZÁJER József type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
  • date: 2010-03-29T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-110&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading title: A7-0110/2010 body: EP type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
  • date: 2010-04-19T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20100419&type=CRE type: Debate in Parliament title: Debate in Parliament body: EP type: Debate in Parliament
  • date: 2010-05-05T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=18251&l=en type: Results of vote in Parliament title: Results of vote in Parliament url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2010-127 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T7-0127/2010 body: EP type: Results of vote in Parliament
committees
  • body: EP responsible: False committee: ECON date: 2010-03-03T00:00:00 committee_full: Economic and Monetary Affairs rapporteur: group: ALDE name: BOWLES Sharon
  • body: EP responsible: False committee: ENVI date: 2010-02-11T00:00:00 committee_full: Environment, Public Health and Food Safety rapporteur: group: S&D name: LEINEN Jo
  • body: EP responsible: True committee: JURI date: 2010-01-27T00:00:00 committee_full: Legal Affairs rapporteur: group: PPE name: SZÁJER József
links
other
  • body: EC dg: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/secretariat_general/index_en.htm title: Secretariat General url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/legal_service/ title: Legal Service
procedure
dossier_of_the_committee
JURI/7/02156
reference
2010/2021(INI)
title
Power of legislative delegation
legal_basis
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052
stage_reached
Procedure completed
subtype
Initiative
Modified legal basis
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150
type
INI - Own-initiative procedure
subject
8.40.10 Interinstitutional relations, democratic deficit, subsidiarity, comitology