IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/eeupol/v19y2018i3p481-501.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is parliamentary attention to the EU strongest when it is needed the most? National parliaments and the selective debate of EU policies

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas Winzen
  • Rik de Ruiter
  • Jofre Rocabert

Abstract

When do parliaments debate European Union policies? Normative arguments suggest that debates enhance government accountability. Others warn of government bias, declining debate near elections, and parties avoiding Eurosceptic publics. Our conclusions are more differentiated. We argue that rank-and-file parliamentarians rather than leaders initiate debates. Political incentives guide their debate selection towards salient policies in the countries in which voters care most. However, where the motivation Eurosceptic publics provide and institutions facilitating rank-and-file agenda-setting are lacking, EU law-making and European Council priorities will raise little parliamentary attention. Analysis of original data, using a Bayesian and multilevel framework, lends credibility to our views. Claims of a government bias, election effects, or trends towards more debate are unlikely to hold in all countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Winzen & Rik de Ruiter & Jofre Rocabert, 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, , vol. 19(3), pages 481-501, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:eeupol:v:19:y:2018:i:3:p:481-501
    DOI: 10.1177/1465116518763281
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1465116518763281
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1465116518763281?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hooghe, Liesbet & Marks, Gary, 2009. "A Postfunctionalist Theory of European Integration: From Permissive Consensus to Constraining Dissensus," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 39(1), pages 1-23, January.
    2. Tapio Raunio, 2009. "National parliaments and European integration," ARENA Working Papers 9, ARENA.
    3. Pieter De Wilde & Michael Zürn, 2012. "Can the Politicization of European Integration be Reversed?," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(S1), pages 137-153, March.
    4. Grimmer, Justin & Stewart, Brandon M., 2013. "Text as Data: The Promise and Pitfalls of Automatic Content Analysis Methods for Political Texts," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 21(3), pages 267-297, July.
    5. Christopher J. Bickerton & Dermot Hodson & Uwe Puetter, 2015. "The New Intergovernmentalism: European Integration in the Post-Maastricht Era," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(4), pages 703-722, July.
    6. Sven‐Oliver Proksch & Jonathan B. Slapin, 2012. "Institutional Foundations of Legislative Speech," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 56(3), pages 520-537, July.
    7. Franchino, Fabio & Hã˜Yland, Bjã˜Rn, 2009. "Legislative Involvement in Parliamentary Systems: Opportunities, Conflict, and Institutional Constraints," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 103(4), pages 607-621, November.
    8. Swen Hutter & Edgar Grande, 2014. "Politicizing Europe in the National Electoral Arena: A Comparative Analysis of Five West European Countries, 1970–2010," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(5), pages 1002-1018, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rauh, Christian, 2015. "Communicating supranational governance? The salience of EU affairs in the German Bundestag, 1991–2013," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 16(1), pages 116-138.
    2. Christian Rauh, 2015. "Communicating supranational governance? The salience of EU affairs in the German Bundestag, 1991–2013," European Union Politics, , vol. 16(1), pages 116-138, March.
    3. Brigitte Pircher & Mike Farjam, 2021. "Oppositional voting in the Council of the EU between 2010 and 2019: Evidence for differentiated politicisation," European Union Politics, , vol. 22(3), pages 472-494, September.
    4. Brigitte Pircher & Karl Loxbo, 2020. "Compliance with EU Law in Times of Disintegration: Exploring Changes in Transposition and Enforcement in the EU Member States between 1997 and 2016," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(5), pages 1270-1287, September.
    5. Braun, Daniela & Grande, Edgar, 2021. "Politicizing Europe in Elections to the European Parliament (1994–2019): The Crucial Role of Mainstream Parties," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 59(5), pages 1124-1141.
    6. Rauh, Christian, 2022. "Clear messages to the European public? The language of European Commission press releases 1985–2020," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, issue Latest Ar, pages 1-19.
    7. Hutter, Swen & Kriesi, Hanspeter, 2019. "Politicizing Europe in times of crisis," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 26(7), pages 996-1017.
    8. Hanspeter Kriesi, 2016. "The Politicization of European Integration," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54, pages 32-47, September.
    9. Christine Neuhold & Guri Rosén, 2019. "Introduction to “Out of the Shadows, Into the Limelight: Parliaments and Politicisation”," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(3), pages 220-226.
    10. Maurits Meijers & Christian Rauh, 2016. "Has Eurosceptic Mobilization Become More Contagious? Comparing the 2009 and 2014 EP Election Campaigns in The Netherlands and France," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 4(1), pages 83-103.
    11. Roman Senninger, 2017. "Issue expansion and selective scrutiny – how opposition parties used parliamentary questions about the European Union in the national arena from 1973 to 2013," European Union Politics, , vol. 18(2), pages 283-306, June.
    12. Roman Senninger & Markus Wagner, 2015. "Political parties and the EU in national election campaigns: who talks about Europe, and how?," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(6), pages 1336-1351, November.
    13. Daniela Braun & Swen Hutter & Alena Kerscher, 2016. "What type of Europe? The salience of polity and policy issues in European Parliament elections," European Union Politics, , vol. 17(4), pages 570-592, December.
    14. Meijers, Maurits & Rauh, Christian, 2016. "Has eurosceptic mobilization become more contagious? Comparing the 2009 and 2014 EP election campaigns in the Netherlands and France," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 4(1), pages 83-103.
    15. C. Nicolai L. Gellwitzki & Anne‐Marie Houde, 2022. "Feeling the Heat: Emotions, Politicization, and the European Union," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(5), pages 1470-1487, September.
    16. Luuk Middelaar, 2016. "The Return of Politics – The European Union after the crises in the eurozone and Ukraine," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(3), pages 495-507, May.
    17. Esther Ademmer & Anna Leupold & Tobias Stöhr, 2019. "Much ado about nothing? The (non-) politicisation of the European Union in social media debates on migration," European Union Politics, , vol. 20(2), pages 305-327, June.
    18. Anna-Lena Högenauer, 2021. "Scrutiny or Complacency? Banking Union in the Bundestag and the Assemblée Nationale," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(2), pages 219-229.
    19. Anna-Lena Högenauer, 2019. "The Politicisation of the European Central Bank and the Bundestag," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(3), pages 291-302.
    20. Beetz, Jan Pieter & Rossi, Enzo, 2015. "EU legitimacy in a realist key," Discussion Papers, Center for Global Constitutionalism SP IV 2015-802, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:eeupol:v:19:y:2018:i:3:p:481-501. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.