European Parliament
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 European Parliament
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
|||||
| Established | 1952, as the Common Assembly | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| President | Hans-Gert Pöttering (EPP) Since 16 January 2007 |
||||
| Vice-Presidents | |||||
| Political groups | |||||
| Committees | |||||
| Last election | June 2004 (785 MEPs) | ||||
| Meeting place | Strasbourg and Brussels | ||||
| Secretariat | Luxembourg and Brussels | ||||
| Website | europarl.europa.eu | ||||
The European Parliament (Europarl or EP) is the only directly elected parliamentary institution of the European Union (EU). Together with the Council of the European Union (the Council), it forms the bicameral legislative branch of the Union's institutions and has been described as one of the most powerful legislatures in the world.[1] The Parliament and Council form the highest legislative body within the Union. However their powers as such are limited to the competences conferred upon the European Community by member states. Hence the institution has little control over policy areas held by the states and within the other two of the three pillars of the European Union. The Parliament is composed of 785 MEPs (Member of the European Parliament), who serve the second largest democratic electorate in the world (after India) and the largest trans-national democratic electorate in the world (342 million eligible voters in 2004).[2][3][4]
It has been directly elected every five years by universal suffrage since 1979. Although the European Parliament has legislative power that such bodies as those above do not possess, it does not have legislative initiative like most national parliaments. While it is the "first institution" of the European Union (mentioned first in the treaties, having ceremonial precedence over all authority at European level[5]), the Council has greater powers over legislation than the Parliament where codecision procedure (equal rights of amendment and rejection) does not apply. It has, however, had control over the EU budget since the 1970s and has a veto over the appointment of the European Commission.[6]
The European Parliament has two meeting places, namely the Immeuble Louise Weiss in Strasbourg, France, which serves for plenary sessions and is the official seat and the Espace Léopold complex in Brussels, Belgium, the smaller of the two, which serves for preparatory meetings and complementary, non-plenary sessions. The cost of having all MEPs and their staff moving several times a year from one place to another is of concern to some. The Secretariat of the European Parliament, the Parliament's administrative body, is based in Luxembourg.[7][8]
The President of the European Parliament (its speaker) is currently Hans-Gert Pöttering (EPP), elected in January 2007. He presides over a multi-party chamber, the two largest groups being the European People's Party-European Democrats (EPP-ED) and the Party of European Socialists (PES). The last Union-wide elections were the 2004 Parliamentary Elections, however Romania and Bulgaria joined in 2007 and elected their members in 2007 (see European Parliament election, 2007); the next union-wide parliamentary elections are in 2009 (see European Parliament election, 2009).
Contents |
[edit] History
- Further information: History of the European Union
The Parliament, like the other institutions, was not designed in its current form when it first met on September 10, 1952. One of the oldest common institutions, it began as the "Common Assembly" of the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC). It was a consultative assembly of 78 parliamentarians drawn from the national parliaments of member states (see dual mandate), having no legislative powers.[9][10] This change since its foundation was highlighted by Professor David Farrell of the University of Manchester;[1]
| “ | For much of its life, the European Parliament could have been justly labelled a 'multi-lingual talking shop'. But this is no longer the case: the EP is now one of the most powerful legislatures in the world both in terms of its legislative and executive oversight powers. | ” |
Its development since its foundation is testament to the evolution of the Union's structures without one clear "master plan". Some such as Tom Reid of the Washington Post said of the Union, "nobody would have deliberately designed a government as complex and as redundant as the EU".[11] Even the Parliament's two seats, which have switched several times, is a result of various agreements or lack of agreements.[9]
[edit] Consultative assembly
The body was not mentioned in the original Schuman Declaration, it was assumed or hoped that difficulties with the British would be resolved to allow the Council of Europe's Assembly to perform the task. A separate Assembly was introduced during negotiations on the Treaty as an institution which would counterbalance and monitor the executive while providing democratic legitimacy.[9] The wording of the ECSC Treaty demonstrated the leaders desire for more than a normal consultative assembly by using the term "representatives of the people" and allowed for direct election. Its early importance was highlighted when the Assembly was given the task of drawing up the draft treaty to establish a European Political Community. In this the "Ad Hoc" Assembly was established with extra members but after the failure of the proposed European Defence Community their project was dropped.[12]
Despite this the European Economic Community and Euratom were established in 1958 by the Treaties of Rome. The Common Assembly was shared by all three communities (which had separate executives) and it renamed itself the "European Parliamentary Assembly". The three communities merged in 1967 and the body was renamed to the current "European Parliament" in 1962.[9] In 1970 the Parliament was granted power over areas the Community's budget, which were expanded to the whole budget in 1975.[13]
Under the Rome Treaties, the Parliament should have become elected. However the Council was required to agree a uniform voting system before hand, which it failed to do. The Parliament threatened to take the Council to the European Court of Justice leading to a compromise whereby the Council would agree to elections, but the issue of voting systems would be put off till a later date.[14]
[edit] Elected Parliament
In 1979, its members were directly elected for the first time. This set it apart from similar institutions such as those of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe or Pan-African Parliament which are appointed.[9][15][16] After that first election, the parliament held its first session on 11 July 1979, electing Simone Veil MEP as its President. Veil was also the first female President of the Parliament since it was formed as the Common Assembly.[17]
As an elected body, the Parliament began to draft proposals addressing the functioning of the Union. For example in 1984, inspired by its previous work on the Political Community, it drafted the "draft Treaty establishing the European Union" (also known as the 'Spinelli Plan' after its rapporteur Altiero Spinelli MEP). Although it was not adopted, many ideas were later implemented by other treaties.[18] Further more the Parliament began holding votes on proposed Commission Presidents from the 1980s, before it was given any formal right to veto.[19] Since the election the membership of the European Parliament has simply expanded whenever new nations have joined (the membership was also adjusted upwards in 1994 after German reunification). Following this the Treaty of Nice imposed a cap on the number of members to be elected, 732.[9]
Like the other institutions, the Parliament's seat was not yet fixed. The provisional arrangements placed Parliament in Strasbourg, while the Commission and Council had their seats in Brussels. In 1985 the Parliament, wishing to be closer to these institutions, built a second chamber in Brussels and moved some of its work there despite protests from some states. A final agreement was eventually reached by the European Council in 1992. It stated the Parliament would remain in Strasbourg but must also hold part sessions in Brussels. This two seat arrangement was contested by Parliament but was later enshrined in the Treaty of Amsterdam. To this day the institution's locations are a source of contention.[20]
[edit] Recent history
The Parliament had been gaining more powers from successive treaties, namely through the extension of codecision procedure,[21] and in 1999, the Parliament forced the resignation of the Santer Commission.[22] The Parliament had refused to approve the Community budget over allegations of fraud and mis-management in the Commission. The two main parties took on a government-opposition dynamic for the first time during the crisis which ended in the Commission resigning en masse, the first of any forced resignation, in the face of an impending censure from the Parliament.[23]
In 2004, following the largest trans-national election in history, despite the European Council choosing a President from the largest political group (the EPP), the Parliament again exerted pressure on the Commission. During the Parliament's hearings of the proposed Commissioners MEPs raised doubts about some nominees with the Civil liberties committee rejecting Rocco Buttiglione from the post of Commissioner for Justice, Freedom and Security over his views on homosexuality. That was the first time the Parliament had ever voted against an incoming Commissioner and despite Barroso's insistence upon Buttiglione the Parliament forced Buttiglione to be withdrawn. A number of other Commissioners also had to be withdrawn or reassigned before Parliament allowed the Barroso Commission to take office.[24][25]
In addition to the extension of codecision, the Parliament's democratic mandate has given it greater control over legislation against the other institutions. In voting on the Bolkestein directive in 2006, the Parliament voted by a large majority for over 400 amendments that changed the fundamental principle of the law. The Financial Times described it in the following terms:[26]
| “ | The European parliament has suddenly come into its own. It marks another shift in power between the three central EU institutions. Last week's vote suggests that the directly elected MEPs, in spite of their multitude of ideological, national and historical allegiances, have started to coalesce as a serious and effective EU institution, just as enlargement has greatly complicated negotiations inside both the Council and Commission. | ” |
In 2007, for the first time, Justice Commissioner Franco Frattini included Parliament in talks on the second Schengen Information System even though MEPs only needed to be consulted on parts of the package. After that experiment, Frattini indicated he would like to include Parliament in all justice and criminal matters, informally pre-empting the new powers they would gain in 2009 under the Treaty of Lisbon.[27]
[edit] Powers and functions
The Parliament and Council are essentially two chambers in the bicameral legislative branch of the European Union, with legislative power being officially distributed equally between both chambers. However there are some differences from national legislatures; for example, neither the Parliament nor Council (the Council has the power in some intergovernmental matters) have the power of legislative initiative. In Community matters, this is a power uniquely reserved for the European Commission (the executive). Meaning that while Parliament can amend and reject legislation, to make a proposal for legislation, it needs the Commission to draft a bill] before anything can become law.[28] However, the Parliament does have the right to ask the Commission to draft such legislation and as the Commission is following Parliament's proposals more and more, President Hans-Gert Pöttering has argued that Parliament does have a de facto right of legislative initiative.[29]
The Parliament also has a great deal of indirect influence, through non-binding resolutions and committee hearings, as a "pan-European soapbox" with the ear of thousands of Brussels-based journalists. There is also an indirect effect on foreign policy; the Parliament must approve all development grants, including those overseas. For example, the support for post-war Iraq reconstruction, or incentives for the cessation of Iranian nuclear development, must be supported by the Parliament. Parliamentary support was also required for the transatlantic passenger data-sharing deal with the United States.[30]
[edit] Legislative procedure
With each new treaty, the powers of the Parliament have expanded. Its powers have been primarily defined through the Union's legislative procedures. The method which has slowly become the dominant procedure (about three-quarters of policy areas) is the Codecision procedure, where powers are essentially equal between Parliament and Council.[31] Codecision provides an equal footing between the two bodies. Under the procedure, the Commission presents a proposal to Parliament and the Council. They then send amendments to the Council which can either adopt the text with those amendments or send back a "common position". That proposal may either be approved or further amendments may be tabled by the Parliament. If the Council does not approve these, then a "Conciliation Committee" is formed. The Committee is composed of the Council members plus an equal number of MEPs who seek to agree a common position. Once a position is agreed, it has to be approved by Parliament, again by an absolute majority.[32][31] In addition to codecision, the Parliament's mandate as the only directly democratic institution has given it leeway to have greater control over legislation than other institutions, for example over its changes to the Bolkestein directive in 2006.[26]
Other procedures include: Cooperation, meaning the Council can overrule the Parliament if it is unanimous; Consultation, which require just consultation of the Parliament; and Assent procedure, where the Parliament has a veto. The Commission and Council, or just Commission, can also act completely independently of the Parliament, but the use of these procedures are very limited. The procedure also depends upon which type of institutional act is being used.[31] The strongest act is a regulation, an act or law which is directly applicable in its entirety. Then there are directives which bind members to certain goals which they must achieve. They do this through their own laws and hence have room to manoeuvre in deciding upon them. A decision is an instrument which is focused at a particular person/group and is directly applicable. Institutions may also issue recommendations and opinions which are merely non-binding, declarations.[33] There is a further document which does not follow normal procedures, this is a "written declaration" which is similar to an early day motion used in the Westminster system. It is a document proposed by up to five MEPs on a matter within the EU's activities used to launch a debate on that subject. Having been posted outside the entrance to the hemicycle, members can sign the declaration and if a majority do so it is forwarded to the President and announced to the plenary before being forwarded to the other institutions and formally noted in the minutes.[34]
[edit] Budget
The legislative branch officially holds the Union's budgetary authority, powers gained through the Budgetary Treaties of the 1970s. The EU's budget is divided into compulsory and non-compulsory spending. Compulsory spending is that resulting from EU treaties (including agriculture) and international agreements; the rest is non-compulsory. While the Council has the last word on compulsory spending, the Parliament has the last word on non-compulsory spending.[35][36]
The institutions draw up budget estimates and the Commission consolidates them into a draft budget. Both the Council and the Parliament can amend the budget with the Parliament adopting or rejecting the budget at its second reading. The signature of the Parliament's president is required before the budget becomes law.[35][36]
The Parliament is also responsible for discharging the implementation of previous budgets, on the basis of the annual report of the European Court of Auditors. It has refused to approve the budget only twice, in 1984 and in 1998. On the latter occasion it led to the resignation of the Santer Commission.[37][14]
[edit] Control of the executive
The President of the European Commission is proposed by the Council (in practice by the European Council) and that proposal has to be approved by the Parliament (by a simple majority), essentially giving the Parliament a veto, but not a right to propose, the head of the executive. Following the approval of the Commission President, the members of the Commission are proposed by the President in accord with the member-states. Each Commissioner comes before a relevant parliamentary committee hearing covering the proposed portfolio. They are then, as a body, approved or rejected by the Parliament.[38][19] In practice, the Parliament has never voted against a President or his Commission, but it did seem likely when the Barroso Commission was put forward. The resulting pressure forced the proposal to be withdrawn and changed to be more acceptable to parliament.[24] That pressure was seen as an important sign by some of the evolving nature of the Parliament and its ability to make the Commission accountable, rather than being a rubber stamp for candidates. Furthermore, in voting on the Commission, MEPs also voted along party lines, rather than national lines, despite frequent pressure from national governments on their MEPs. This cohesion and willingness to use the Parliament's power ensured greater attention from national leaders, other institutions and the public—who previously gave the lowest ever turnout for the Parliament's elections.[39]
The Parliament also has the power to censure the Commission if they have a two-thirds majority which will force the resignation of the entire Commission from office. As with approval, this power has never been used but it was threatened to the Santer Commission, who subsequently resigned of their own accord. There are a few other controls, such as: the requirement of Commission to submit reports to the Parliament and answer questions from MEPs; the requirement of the President-in-office of the European Council to present their programme at the start of their presidency; the right of MEPs to make proposals for legislation and policy to the Commission and Council; and the right to question members of those institutions (e.g. "Commission Question Time" every Tuesday).[38][19] At present, MEPs may ask a question on any topic whatsoever, but in July 2008 MEPs voted to limit questions to those within the EU's mandate and ban offensive or personal questions.[40]
[edit] Supervisory powers
The Parliament also has other powers of general supervision, mainly granted by the Maastricht Treaty.[41] The Parliament has the power to set up a Committee of Inquiry, for example over mad cow disease or CIA detention flights—the former led to the creation of the European veterinary agency. The Parliament can call other institutions to answer questions and if necessary to take them to court if they break EU law or treaties.[42] Further more it has powers over the appointment of the members of the Court of Auditors[43] and the president and executive board of the European Central Bank. The ECB president is also obliged to present an annual report to the parliament.[42]
The European Ombudsman is elected by the Parliament, who deals with public complaints against all institutions.[42] Petitions can also be brought forward by any EU citizen on a matter within the EU's sphere of activities. The Committee on Petitions hears cases, some 1500 each year, sometimes presented by the citizen themselves at the Parliament. While the Parliament attempts to resolve the issue as a mediator they do resort to legal proceedings if it is necessary to resolve the citizens dispute.[44]
[edit] Members
|
The parliamentarians are known in English as Members of the European Parliament (MEPs). They are elected every 5 years by universal adult suffrage and sit according to political allegiance, about a third are women. Prior to 1979 they were appointed by their national parliaments.[45][46]
As states are allocated seats according to population, the total number of MEPs should be 732; however, since 1 January 2007 there are 785 MEPs. This is due to the accession of Romania and Bulgaria, as the allocation of seats does not take into account members that join mid-term. Under the existing rules the number of members would be reduced again to 732 following the 2009 election[45][47] however the rules are due to be changed under the Treaty of Lisbon. Instead, there would be 751 members (however, as the President cannot vote while in the chair there would only be 750 voting members at any one time).[48] In addition, the maximum number of seats allocated to a state would be lowered to ninety-six, from the current ninety-nine, and the minimum number of seats would be raised to six, from the current five. These seats are distributed according to "degressive proportionality", meaning that the larger the state, the more citizens that are represented per MEP. It is intended that the new system, including revising the seating well in advance of elections, can avoid political horse trading when the numbers have to be revised.[49]
At present, members receive the same salary as members of their national parliament. However as of 2009 a new members statute will come into force which gives all members an equal pay of 7000 euro each, subject to a community tax and can also be taxed nationally. MEPs would retire at 63 and receive the whole of their pension from the Parliament. Travelling expenses would also be given based on actual cost rather than a flat rate as is the case now.[50] In addition to their pay, members are granted a number of privileges and immunities. To ensure their free movement to and from the Parliament they are accorded by their own states, the facilities accorded to senior officials travelling abroad and by other state governments the facilities of visiting foreign representatives. When in their own state they have all the immunities accorded to national parliamentarians, and in other states they have immunity from detention and legal proceedings. However immunity cannot be claimed when a member is found committing a criminal offence and the Parliament also has the right to strip a member of their immunity.[51]
[edit] Political groups
| Group | Leader(s) | MEPs | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EPP-ED | Joseph Daul | 284 |  |
|
| PES | Martin Schulz | 215 | ||
| ALDE | Graham Watson | 103 | ||
| UEN | Brian Crowley Cristiana Muscardini |
44 | ||
| G-EFA | Monica Frassoni Daniel Cohn-Bendit |
42 | ||
| GUE-NGL | Francis Wurtz | 41 | ||
| ID | Nigel Farage Kathy Sinnott |
24 | ||
| Non-Inscrits | MEPs without group | 32 | Source: European Parliament | |
MEPs in Parliament are organised into seven different parliamentary groups, including over thirty non-attached members known as non-inscrits. The two largest groups are the European People's Party-European Democrats (EPP-ED) and the Party of European Socialists (PES). These two groups have dominated the Parliament for much of its life, continuously holding between 50 and 70 percent of the seats together. No single group has ever held a majority in Parliament.[52]
Groups are often based around a single European political party such as the socialist group. However they can, like the liberal group, include more than one European party as well as national parties and independents.[53] For a group to be recognised, it needs 20 MEPs from six different countries (this will rise to 25 MEPs from seven different countries from June 2009[54]). Once recognised groups receive financial subsidies from the parliament and guaranteed seats on Committees, creating an incentive for the formation of groups. However some controversy occurred with the establishment of the Identity, Tradition, Sovereignty (ITS) due to its ideology; the members of the group are far-right, so there were concerns about public funds going towards such a group.[55] There were attempts to change the rules to block the formation of ITS, however that never came to fruition. They were, however, blocked from gaining leading positions on committees—a right that is meant to be afforded to all parties.[56] When this group engaged in infighting, causing the withdrawal of some members, its size fell below the recognisable limit causing its collapse.[57]
[edit] Grand coalition
Given that the Parliament does not form the government in the traditional sense of a Parliamentary system, its politics have developed along more consensual lines rather than majority rule of competing parties and coalitions. Indeed for much of its life it has been dominated by a grand coalition of the People's Party and Socialist Party. The two major parties tend to co-operate to find a compromise between their two groups leading to proposals endorsed by huge majorities.[58] However there have been some occasions where real party politics have emerged, for example over the resignation of the Santer Commission;[23]
When the initial allegations against the Commission emerged, they were directed primarily against Édith Cresson and Manuel Marín, both socialist members. When the parliament was considering refusing to discharge the Community budget, President Jacques Santer stated that a no vote would be tantamount to a vote of no confidence. PES supported the Commission and saw the issue as an attempt by the EPP to discredit their party ahead of the 1999 elections. PES leader, Pauline Green MEP, attempted a vote of confidence and the EPP put forward counter motions. During this period the two parties took on similar roles to a government-opposition dynamic, with PES supporting the executive and EPP renouncing its previous coalition support and voting it down.[23] Politicisation such as this has been increasing, in 2007 Simon Hix of the London School of Economics noted that;[1]
| “ | Our work also shows that politics in the European Parliament is becoming increasingly based around party and ideology. Voting is increasingly split along left-right lines, and the cohesion of the party groups has risen dramatically, particularly in the fourth and fifth parliaments. So there are likely to be policy implications here too. | ” |
During the fifth term, 1999 to 2004, there was a break in the grand coalition resulting in a centre-right coalition between the Liberal and People's parties.[59] This was reflected in the Presidency of the Parliament with the terms being shared between the EPP and the ELDR, rather than the EPP and PES.[60] In the following term the liberal group grew to hold 88 seats, the largest number of seats held by any third party in Parliament.[61]
[edit] Elections
| Far Left Socialist Group Regionalists (inc. Greens) Greens CDI or TGI Non-Inscrits Liberal Democrats | Radical Alliance (Liberals) CD / EPP Forza Europa Conservatives Eurosceptics National Conservatives Far Right |
Elections have taken place, directly in every member-state, every five years since 1979. As of 2004 there have been six. Occasionally, when a member joins mid-term, a by-election will be held to elect their members. This has happened four times, the last time was when Romania and Bulgaria joined in 2007 (see below). Elections take place across several days according to local custom and, aside from having to be proportional, the electoral system is chosen by the member-state. This includes allocation of sub-national constituencies; while most members have a national list, some, like the UK and France, divide their allocation between regions. Seats are allocated to member-states according to their population, with no state having more than 99, but no fewer than 5, in order to maintain proportionality.[62]
The most recent Union-wide elections to the European Parliament were the European elections of 2004, held in June of that year. They were the largest simultaneous transnational elections ever held anywhere in the world, since nearly 400 million citizens were eligible to vote. The proportion of MEPs elected in 2004 who were female was 30.2%; in 1979 it was just 16.5%. The next Union-wide elections will be in 2009. There are a number of proposals to "dress up" the next elections to attract greater public attention to them. These include most notably the idea of linking them more closely to the Commission presidency. This would be by having political parties running with candidates for the job, so the largest party would essentially be forming the government, as in the parliamentary system of government.[63][64][65] This was attempted in 2004, however only the European Green Party, which was the first true pan-European party to be established with a common campaign,[66] proposed a candidate for the post of President: Daniel Cohn-Bendit.[67] Meanwhile, the closest any other party had come was when the People's Party mentioned four or five people they'd like to be President.[68] It is hoped such changes would add legitimacy and counter the falling turnout[65] which has dropped consistently every year since the first election, and from 1999 it has been below 50%.[69] In 2007 both Bulgaria and Romania are electing their MEPs in by-elections, having joined at the beginning of 2007. The Bulgarian and Romanian elections saw one of the lowest turnout for a European election, just 28.6%[70] and 28.3%. respectively.[71]
[edit] Proceedings
Each year the activities of the Parliament cycle between committee weeks where reports are discussed in committees and interparliamentary delegations meet, political group weeks for members to discuss work within their political groups and session weeks where members spend 3½ days in Strasbourg for part-sessions. In addition six 2-day part-sessions are organised in Brussels throughout the year. Four weeks are allocated as constituency week to allow members to do exclusively constituency work. Finally there are no meetings planned during the summer weeks.[72] The Parliament has the power to meet without being convened by another authority. Its meetings are partly controlled by the treaties but are otherwise up to Parliament according to its own "Rules of Procedure" (the regulations governing the parliament).[73]
During sessions, members may speak after being called on by the President, with a time limit of one minute. Members of the Council or Commission may also attend and speak in debates.[74][75] Partly due to the need for translation, and the politics of consensus in the chamber, debates tend to be calmer and more polite than, say, the Westminster system.[76] Voting is conducted primarily by a show of hands, that may be checked on request by electronic voting.[77] Votes of MEPs are not recorded in either case however, that only occurs when there is a roll-call ballot. That is when each MEP in turn is called by name, in alphabetical order, to state their support or opposition. This is a historical system used when the Parliament was much smaller in membership and is rarely used now. Votes can also be a completely secret ballot (for example when the President is elected).[78] All recorded votes, along with minutes and legislation, are recorded in the Official Journal of the European Union and can be accessed online.[79]
Members are arranged in a hemicycle according to their political groups who are ordered mainly by left to right, but some smaller groups are placed towards the outer ring of the Parliament. All desks are equipped with microphones, headphones for translation and electronic voting equipment. The leaders of the groups sit on the front benches at the centre, and in the very centre is a podium for guest speakers. The remaining half of the circular chamber is primarily composed of the raised area where the President and staff sit. Further benches are provided between the sides of this area and the MEPs, these are taken up by the Council on the far left and the Commission on the far right. Both the Brussels and Strasbourg hemicycle roughly follow this layout with only minor differences.[80] With access to the chamber limited, entrance is controlled by ushers who aid MEPs in the chamber (for example in delivering documents). The ushers also act as a form of police in enforcing the President, for example in ejecting an MEP who is disrupting the session (although this is rare). The first head of protocol in the Parliament was French, so many of the duties in the Parliament are based on the French model first developed following the French Revolution. The 180 ushers are highly visible in the Parliament, dressed in black tails and wearing a silver chain, and are recruited in the same manner as the European civil service. The President is allocated a personal usher.[81]
[edit] President and organisation
The President, currently Hans-Gert Pöttering MEP of the EPP, is essentially the speaker of the Parliament. He or she presides over the plenary when it is in session and the President's signature is required for all acts adopted by co-decision, including the EU budget. The President is also responsible for representing the Parliament externally, including in legal matters, and for the application of the rules of procedure. He or she is elected for two-and-a-half-year terms, meaning two elections per parliamentary term.[82][83]
In most countries, the protocol of the head of state comes before all others, however in the EU the Parliament is listed as the first institution, and hence the protocol of its President comes before any other European, or national, protocol. The gifts given to numerous visiting dignitaries depends upon the President. President Josep Borrell MEP of Spain gave his counterparts a crystal cup created by an artist from Barcelona which had engraved upon it parts of the Charter of Fundamental Rights among other things.[5]
A number of notable figures have been President of the Parliament and its predecessors. The first President was Paul-Henri Spaak MEP, one of the founding fathers of the Union. Other founding fathers include Alcide de Gasperi MEP and Robert Schuman MEP. The two female Presidents were