What determines how much an MP spends on communicating with their constituents?

Why do some MPs invest more in constituency communication than others? Using data from the Communications Allowance between 2007 and 2010, Katrin Auel and Resul Umit identify key incentives that explain this puzzle

Lost in Transaction? Parliamentary. Reserves in EU bargains

Parliamentary scrutiny reserves have become a popular parliamentary instrument for the scrutiny of EU documents over the last two decades. While the exact provisions for them vary between the member states and according to their parliaments’ overall scrutiny system, parliamentary reserves generally mean that government representatives do not, or cannot, officially agree to a proposal in the Council (or COREPER or the working groups) while the parliamentary scrutiny process is ongoing. Yet despite the proliferation of reserve provisions, we actually know very little about them. The paper will therefore provide an overview over the specific features of scrutiny reserves in different member states. In addition, it investigates whether scrutiny reserves actually are an effective instrument to safeguard parliamentary influence in EU affairs by looking at how they are being dealt with at different levels of the Council negotiations

National parliaments are not the losers of EU integration – at least not anymore

Eurosceptics like to argue that Parliament has become in part redundant following transfers of power from the national to the European level. Katrin Auel, Olivier Rozenberg, and Angela Tacea argue that contrary to this, national parliaments in Europe have not become inconsequential in making policy at the European Union level in the wake of the Lisbon Treaty, and that they remain key decision makers

Eurosceptics into the Limelight? Eurosceptic Parliamentary Actors and Media Bias in EU Affairs

In the spotlight for some time now, the potential of national parliaments to legitimise EU politics has become even more salient given the growing politicisation and public contestation of EU issues. Their ability to realise this potential depends, however, vitally on citizens being actually aware of parliamentary involvement in EU affairs. Academic as well as political attention has therefore more recently turned to the communication function of parliaments, and here the media play a crucial role. Important is not only whether EU parliamentary affairs are covered in the media, but also who within parliament gets the opportunity to raise European issues in the media. In the context of this thematic issue, the question of media visibility is of particular interest with regard to Eurosceptic parliamentary party groups and their members. Do Eurosceptics in parliament get to dominate parliamentary EU news in the media and thus to take ownership of EU issues—or do the media freeze parliamentary Eurosceptics out of the coverage? Both would seriously undermine the legitimising potential of national parliaments. The article therefore analyses to what extent we can find a visibility bias in the print media coverage of Eurosceptic parliamentary actors and explores the factors that contribute to such bias. For the analysis, it draws on a quantitative dataset of all newspaper articles covering parliamentary EU affairs in six member states (Austria, Finland, France, Germany, Poland and the UK) over a period of four years (2010 to 2013)

Debating the State of the Union? Comparing Parliamentary Debates on EU Issues in Finland, France, Germany and the United Kingdom

Over the last 20 years, the role of national parliaments in European Union (EU) affairs has gained considerable academic attention. Much of the literature has focused on the parliamentary control function and shown that national parliaments are no longer docile lambs willing to be led to the European slaughtering block, but exercise tighter scrutiny of their governments in EU affairs. What tends to be overlooked, however, is that the parliamentary communication function is at least as important in EU politics. Yet while the literature has discussed reasons why members of parliament or political parties may prefer to ‘depoliticise’ European issues by conducting their EU business away from the prying eye of the public, so far we have little empirical data on how parliaments communicate EU politics. This study will therefore provide a comparative analysis of parliamentary debates on EU issues in the UK, Finland, Germany and France. (author's abstract

Scrutiny in Challenging Times – National Parliaments in the Eurozone Crisis

National parliaments are often thought of as having lost substantial powers due to European integration. In what way has the rapid decision-making of the EU during the Eurozone crisis affected national parliaments within the Union? In this publication, political scientists Katrin Auel and Oliver Höing present their analysis of activity within the national parliaments of the EU during the Eurozone crisis. Among other things, their survey shows how the varying degrees of parliamentary activity have become even more pronounced during the last years. (author's abstract

Introduction: Connecting with the Electorate? Parliamentary Communication in EU Affairs

ational parliaments have often been described as latecomers to European integration, but there is little doubt that they have developed the institutional means to become more involved over the last few years – and especially since the Lisbon Treaty. Accordingly, the main focus of the literature has been on this institutional adaptation and thus on the relationship between the parliament and the government in European Union (EU) affairs. Other parliamentary functions, and in particular those that relate to their citizens such as the communication function, by contrast, have been largely neglected. Yet democracy depends on a viable public debate on policy choices and political alternatives to allow citizens to make informed political (electoral) choices and to exercise democratic control. This collection therefore investigates whether, and how, individual members of parliament, political parties, or legislatures as institutions ‘link’ with their electorates in EU politics. This introduction discusses why engaging with the public in EU affairs is – or at least should be – an important aspect of parliamentary work, introduces parliamentary means of communication and assesses parliamentary incentives and disincentives ‘to go public’ in EU politics. (author's abstract